The New York Times presents the arguments of several experts on regime change.

14ymedio, Madrid, February 27, 2026 – Major U.S. media outlets, beyond those based in Florida, have focused on Cuba since Washington increased pressure on the Island. Among the numerous articles published this Friday, an analysis in The New York Times by Michael Crowley stands out; he is a reporter who often accompanies Secretary of State Marco Rubio on his trips. The journalist also spoke with several experts and observers of the situation who laid out the doubts and options the White House is considering to change things in Havana.
Most analysts believe that Trump and Rubio favor a gradual opening of the regime toward economic and political freedoms, more in line with the Venezuelan option after the capture of Nicolás Maduro, although one dissenting voice stands out. That is Jason Marczak, a Latin America expert at the Atlantic Council in Washington, who believes both men may be more willing to assume the risk of a chaotic transition on the Island than in Venezuela.
The key, he argues, lies in oil and the Island’s limited relevance. Compared to the need for stability required to revive Venezuela’s oil industry, Cuba has nothing beyond an isolated economy with barely any goods to export. “Unrest there would have little economic impact beyond its shores,” he maintains. As for Washington’s other major concern—a wave of migration—it could be mitigated with the same humanitarian aid already being sent in cooperation with the Catholic Church through Caritas, Marczak adds. In his view, the “Delcy option” shows no signs of succeeding. “Most Cubans have never lived under any regime other than the communist one,” he said.
In his view, the Delcy option shows no signs of succeeding. “Most Cubans have never lived under any regime other than the communist one.”
Ryan Berg, director of the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, holds a different opinion. He believes Rubio’s statements in recent weeks suggest there will be no sudden intervention on the Island and that, on the contrary, “a slow transition” toward democracy is preferred. “They are not seeking regime change overnight,” he considers.
Crowley reviews how events have unfolded in recent weeks and makes it clear that it is unpredictable whether Wednesday’s failed incursion—in which four of the ten participating Cubans died—will influence Washington’s decisions.
The reporter notes statements from Florida politicians, more belligerent in tone and substance, and believes this is not the tone Rubio has adopted, as after years of heated rhetoric against the regime he now appears more measured.
“Cuba has to change. It does not have to change all continue reading
“Trump does not want a sudden power vacuum in Havana,” declared a senior government official and Rubio collaborator. The article cites additional public statements by the Republican. “As for collateral effects, they are no more concerned than we are,” he said, referring to Caribbean countries. “We are 90 miles away, and the United States has experienced massive migration from Cuba in the past.”
Moreover, Rubio insisted that the priority of reforms is economic in nature: “If they want to carry out drastic reforms that open space for the economic—and, over time, political—freedom of the Cuban people, obviously the United States would love to see that,” he concluded.
El Cangrejo’s role as a suitable interlocutor remains to be seen, although he is most likely simply a messenger for Raúl Castro. The U.S. chargé d’affaires in Cuba, Mike Hammer, said in an interview with the Spanish newspaper ABC that “within the Cuban system there are individuals who realize that the project is coming to an end and who may be interested in making a change they see as necessary.”
However, other analysts believe it is impossible to find someone within the regime who would break party discipline. “The search for a Cuban Delcy Rodríguez is foolish,” William LeoGrande, a professor at American University specializing in Latin America, told the NYT. “If there is going to be an agreement, it will have to be between the United States and the current Cuban government, not with a branch of the current government.”
“If there is going to be an agreement, it will have to be between the United States and the current Cuban government, not with a branch of the current government.”
María José Espinosa, of Cuban origin and a member of the Center for International Policy, also does not see the opposition as a solution. “Everyone is either in prison or in exile,” she believes. Even so, the article says, “some Trump officials believe that Cuban leaders will be forced to make concessions to Trump,” because the alternative—“economic collapse and a possible violent uprising”—would be worse for them.
A declassified document warned that “U.S. interests would be threatened in complex and possibly unprecedented ways,” as it could lead to “substantial and possibly prolonged instability,” including violent reprisals, “large-scale emigration to the United States,” and “demands for U.S. involvement.”
The cited report also stated that there was “a greater likelihood that Fidel Castro’s government would fall in the coming years.” The bitter part is that the document was drafted 33 years ago, in 1993. The strongman has long since died, and nearly three million Cubans have left the Island since then.
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.

















