Instead of dialogue, Havana bets on the rhetoric of confrontation and updates its “plans and measures for the transition to a State of War”
14ymedio, Havana, January 18, 2026 — The approval of the “plans and measures for the transition to a State of War,” announced tersely by the Cuban state press, marks a new turn in the regime’s confrontational rhetoric at one of the most fragile moments in the island’s recent history. With no details, no dates, and no public explanations, the National Defense Council once again resorted to one of the most extreme notions of Cuba’s political-military apparatus, historically associated with scenarios of external threat and, above all, with the suspension of any margin of civilian normalcy.
The note published by Cubadebate merely reports that the decision was taken “in compliance with the activities planned for Defense Day” and as part of the “War of the Entire People.” There is no reference whatsoever to the practical implications of this step, nor is it indicated whether this is a theoretical exercise, a partial drill, or a scenario the government considers plausible in the short term. It is also unclear whether it is being formally instituted or whether it is simply a review of protocols to be applied if and when a decision is made.
Cuban law formally reserves the declaration of a State of War to the National Assembly or, failing that, to the Council of State, while the president and the National Defense Council concentrate the real and operational direction of the process. This legal architecture allows the regime to activate states of exception with scant parliamentary oversight and no public transparency, reinforcing the centralized and militarized nature of power in times of crisis. It implies the highest degree of militarization of the country, the subordination of civilian structures to defense bodies, and the possibility of restricting rights and freedoms that are already quite limited.
The so-called War of the Entire People, according to the definition found in EcuRed and in official Cuban military doctrine, is a strategic conception formulated by Fidel Castro that deliberately blurs the boundary between combatants and civilians. Under this approach, in the face of a large-scale military aggression, not only would the Revolutionary Armed Forces and the Militias act, but the entire society would be incorporated into the war effort, with functions assigned by territory and no clear distinction between military defense and civilian life.
The forced militarization of the civilian population contravenes the principle of distinction set out in the Geneva Conventions
From the perspective of international humanitarian law, this conception is problematic. The forced militarization of the civilian population contravenes the principle of distinction enshrined in the Geneva Conventions and reiterated by bodies such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, which establishes the obligation to protect the civilian population and separate it from military objectives.
By turning neighborhoods, communities, and citizens into an active part of the defensive apparatus, the doctrine not only exposes civilians to direct combat risks, but transforms them into legitimate targets under the rules of war, effectively nullifying their civilian status and shifting onto society the human cost of a strategy designed by the political-military power.
The term State of War has appeared since the early years of the revolutionary regime and is linked to moments of greatest international tension. During the October Crisis of 1962 [called in the United States “The Cuban Missile Crisis”], although it was never formally proclaimed, the country was de facto placed in an equivalent situation: general mobilization, absolute control of information, and the total suspension of ordinary civilian life.
Later, the notion reappeared explicitly in Cuban military doctrine and in legislation associated with national defense. The National Defense Law and the regulations of the Defense Council establish that, in the face of a scenario of external aggression or imminent threat, the country may transition to a State of War, which activates a strictly military chain of command and grants extraordinary powers to the Executive.
In practice, this figure serves to justify exceptional controls over the population, the economy, and internal mobility. It is not merely about preparing for an armed conflict, but about reinforcing political control in contexts of crisis.
The announcement by the Defense Council comes amid a regional escalation following the capture of Nicolás Maduro by U.S. troops in Caracas, a strategic blow that has left Havana without its main political and financial ally. The official confirmation that dozens of Cuban military personnel and agents were operating in Venezuela, even within the security ring of the deposed leader, revealed an involvement the regime had repeatedly denied.
Cuba’s population faces a daily emergency that already resembles a state of war, with prolonged blackouts, crumbling infrastructure, extreme shortages of food and medicine, and outbreaks of preventable diseases
Since then, Cuba’s top leadership has reappeared in public wearing military uniforms, intensified its anti-imperialist discourse, and revived a besieged-fortress narrative that seemed worn out even to its own propagandists. The Defense Council itself, chaired by Miguel Díaz-Canel, has remained in permanent session since the onset of the Venezuelan crisis.
The tutelary presence of Raúl Castro, who “was kept informed” of the meeting and described it as “good and efficient,” reinforces the idea that key strategic decisions continue to pass through the historic military apparatus, beyond formal titles.
While the regime speaks of war, the population faces a daily emergency that already resembles a state of war, with prolonged blackouts, infrastructure in ruins, extreme shortages of food and medicine, outbreaks of preventable diseases, and inflation that devours wages and pensions. The repatriation of the remains of 32 Cuban military personnel killed in Venezuela during the capture of Nicolás Maduro was used as an emotional catalyst to reactivate an epic discourse that contrasts brutally with the precariousness of daily life.
The State of War, in this context, functions more as a political instrument than as a response to a concrete threat. It serves to rally the elite, justify closing ranks, divert attention from economic collapse, and warn citizens that any protest can be interpreted as an affront to national defense.
It is unknown which sectors would be mobilized, what economic measures would be activated, or what impact it would have on civilian life. That lack of information is part of the design, because keeping the population in uncertainty is also a form of control.
At the same time, the regime insists that it is willing to engage in “dialogue” with the United States, as long as it does not entail political concessions. However, the recourse to a State of War suggests the opposite: a bet on confrontation and on the survival of power at any cost.
Translated by Regina Anavy
____________
COLLABORATE WITH OUR WORK: The 14ymedio team is committed to practicing serious journalism that reflects Cuba’s reality in all its depth. Thank you for joining us on this long journey. We invite you to continue supporting us by becoming a member of 14ymedio now. Together we can continue transforming journalism in Cuba.