Cuba’s revolutionary era appears to be nearing its end
By Gwynne Dyer
After more than six decades in power, the revolutionary system built by Fidel Castro and carried forward by his allies appears to be running out of momentum.
The 1959 revolution that brought Castro to power ushered in sweeping political and economic change. Much of Cuba’s relatively small middle class fled to the United States in its aftermath. For at least a quarter-century, however, the new government retained broad popular support, rooted in promises of equality, sovereignty and social reform.
That backing eroded slowly over time.
Cuba’s leadership has long faced economic strain under the U.S. trade embargo, imposed in the early 1960s. Conditions worsened dramatically after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, which eliminated roughly 85 per cent of Cuba’s foreign trade.
The resulting “Special Period in Time of Peace” defined the 1990s. Rationing intensified. Blackouts became routine. Food shortages were severe. By 2000, the economy had stabilized, but at a significantly lower level of prosperity. Even then, a substantial minority of Cubans likely remained willing to defend the government, particularly against perceived external threats. Cuban nationalism has historically been a powerful force.
But the stagnation continued.
After another quarter-century of economic hardship, many Cubans appear to have lost hope. Since 2020, approximately 2.75 million people — out of a population of 11 million — have left the country, according to migration estimates. The exodus represents one of the largest waves of emigration in the island’s history.
Tensions have risen further amid increasingly sharp rhetoric from Washington. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently said he would be “concerned” if he were part of the Cuban government, while President Donald Trump has suggested the Cuban system could soon collapse.
The United States has also tightened economic pressure. Cuba previously imported roughly half its oil from Venezuela and another quarter from Mexico. Both countries have curtailed sales amid U.S. demands, and Washington has threatened tariffs against other nations supplying oil to Havana. U.S. naval enforcement efforts have reportedly targeted tankers bound for Cuban ports.
The impact has been significant. Rolling power outages have disrupted industry, transportation and schools. The country appears to be sliding toward conditions reminiscent of the Special Period.
Despite mounting strain, a full-scale U.S. military intervention would carry substantial risks. Millions of Cubans remain loyal to the state, and the armed forces continue to hold decisive power.
Some analysts suggest a negotiated outcome is more likely — one in which elements of Cuba’s existing leadership strike an accommodation that preserves portions of their authority while conceding broader control. Such an arrangement would mark a dramatic shift from the revolutionary ideals that defined the island’s political identity for generations.
The revolution began with sweeping ambitions and a promise of social transformation. Over time, critics argue, prolonged one-party rule fostered institutional decay and repression, undermining its legitimacy.
The contradictions have long been visible. In the early 1990s, during the depths of the Special Period, visitors could witness both strong communal solidarity and signs of economic desperation. Acts of public cooperation existed alongside rising petty crime and corruption.
Today, many observers question whether the solidarity that once sustained the system still endures.
What seems clear is that Cuba stands at a crossroads. Whether change comes through internal reform, negotiated transition or intensified confrontation, the era that began in 1959 appears closer to its end than at any time in the past six decades.