Seth Ferris, New Eastern Outlook
Escalation of the conflict around Iran could have consequences far beyond the Middle East, and some events in the Caribbean region make one think about possible attempts by Washington to shift attention to a new geopolitical front.
The cat is out of the bag!
All the questions and debate about whether the U.S. acted preemptively in response to Israel’s initial assault, or whether the two powers operated in deliberate tandem to initiate an unlawful conflict have been overtaken by events. Both Israel and the United States now find themselves deeply mired in a quagmire far more protracted and costly than anticipated. The path to de-escalation or withdrawal remains obscured by a fog of recriminations, finger-pointing, and outright denials from key decision-makers. Yet other, less visible agendas appear to be unfolding in parallel.
Observers should resist being distracted while President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu grapple with the consequences of their high-stakes gamble—let them stew in their own juices!
But the world goes on, and it is worth recalling a story that was soon forgotten from the week before. It was about an incident just off Cuba’s coast, where a Florida-registered speedboat carrying about 10 armed Cuban exiles was intercepted by the Cuban Coast Guard. The result was a deadly shootout, started by the crew of the American boat, that left several Cuban-Americans dead and the others wounded.
Cut to the chase!
To cut to the chase, looking at more than just the face value of the simple story—this may have been much more than a failed raid by Cuban exiles looking for revenge or trying to smuggle out some family members. The deadly shootout off Cuba’s coast could be much more than a rogue exile action.
A YouTube analysis titled “Cuba Speedboat Shootout Is Worse Than You Think” questions if it could be a Cuban false flag for distraction but also raises the probability of US orchestration, tying it to Rubio’s hardline stance and Cuba’s energy crisis amid US-Iran tensions. It also suggests possible covert US involvement (e.g., by intelligence agencies) and ties it to broader geopolitical maneuvering amid the US-Israel quagmire in Iran—to keep the pot simmering.
Writers and reporters who have historically opposed U.S. intervention in Latin America often frame incidents like this within a longer history of covert operations, sanctions, and regime-change policies.
One lone voice that takes a stance closer to my own is Alan McPherson, Professor of International Relations at Temple University; his article in The Conversation describes the incident as reminiscent of 1960s CIA-trained Cuban exile infiltrations for sabotage and assassination, with “tacit U.S. support” for groups like Alpha 66.
He notes the timing amid heightened US-Cuba tensions could ratchet up hostility, echoing my own stance on trying to use Cuba as a “quick win” diversion from Iran blowback. But he mostly ties it to ongoing regime-change efforts, similar to what happened at the time of the failed US inspired Bay of Pigs invasion.
“Did this incident, although quickly dismissed as an isolated event, signal a new US push against Havana—and conveniently timed to distract from Iran fallout and revive Cold War-style regime-change dreams?”
With Marco Rubio at the US State driving hardline rhetoric, contradicting the US president and secretary of war in their own disjointed rhetoric, does this largely now overlooked incident raise hard questions about whether Washington sees Cuba as the next ‘quick victory’ amid what now can be best described as a Middle Eastern quagmire.
“The response appears politically charged!”
U.S. officials are calling for strong action against the Cuban government following the killing of American citizens. It should be noted that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long taken a hardline stance on Cuba. But many observers contend that proposals such as tightening sanctions or further restricting energy supplies could escalate tensions rather than resolve the situation.
All this is a bit too convenient, in light of the timing, and considering that Marco Rubio is the US Secretary of State, has presidential ambitions, wants to be the favorite son of Donald Trump, and, not to mention, has Cuban roots. His statements and campaign funding sources, Zionist and special interests linked over the years, all drive US policy towards overthrowing the Cuban and Iranian governments.
Invasion with American Piglets
The US government is already working to sanction Cuba to death by cutting off much of its energy supplies, and all with the ultimate goal of toppling the Cuban government. This mindset is reflective of another time, as if we are returning to the time of the Bay of Pigs Invasion with American Piglets.
We know how that ended, but for most that is but a historic footnote. Generally, the event is overshadowed by BIGGER Cold War milestones like the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962), Vietnam War escalation, the Pentagon Papers, and even détente.
Little if any media or academic space is devoted to it in American textbooks, pop culture, or everyday conversation the way it used to be. For many (especially outside Cuban-American communities or foreign policy circles), it is now trivia: a failed CIA op from over 60 years ago, emblematic of U.S. hubris but not a living trauma.
“We know the ending was bad (failure, embarrassment, a strengthened Castro), yet it’s largely forgotten or downplayed now.”
Cuba is not an “Easy Win!”
However, the idea of pursuing an “easy win” in Cuba as a diversion from Iran is speculative, highly optimistic, and not supported by open-source robust policy statements. It is for this very reason that actions speak louder than words. One needs to consider the recent pressure on Guatemala by the US Administration to end its Cuban doctor’s program, which negatively impacts the poor of a rural country already suffering an acute shortage of doctors and public health workers.
Naturally there is no connection between this Cuban incident and such a pressure policy, tongue in cheek. Rubio recently said, as reported by AP, that there was no evidence this was a U.S. government operation and declined to speculate further, noting, “Suffice it to say, it is highly unusual to see shootouts in open sea like that.”
According to statements released by the Cuban Ministry of the Interior and widely reported by outlets such as ABC News, Associated Press, and The New York Times, a Florida-registered speedboat carrying ten armed Cuban nationals living in the U.S. entered Cuban territorial waters. What followed was a gun battle that left four people on the boat dead and six others wounded with too many unanswered questions.
A bit of reflection!
Back when cable began to challenge, and before it became synonymous with, legacy media, somebody decided being first to report was more important than the accuracy of what actually got reported. If memory serves, that’s about when “journalistic integrity” began its long decline. And, as time has shown, there’s a direct link between the explosion of news “sources” and the implosion of their credibility, especially in recent years.
What’s a little fuzzier is when editorial/opinion writers became indistinguishable from reporters. Now, way beyond expressing one’s feelings and politics in every news story, the fourth estate increasingly editorializes by what it doesn’t cover.
Take, for instance, that Donald Trump has faced three assassination attempts in less than two years. Two of the assassins were killed during their attempts (one also killing and wounding civilians), and one was sentenced to life imprisonment. There was also a recent killing of an intruder who had entered his Florida property while he was not there and was killed by Secret Service agents.
Today we know little more about the Butler, PA, shooter than we did in 2024, besides the press briefing by a sheriff and the FBI (it seems they’re all special agents in charge of something). Yet the powers that be can’t stop wetting their pants over the prospect that Iran’s Islamic Republic’s days may be numbered. That tells me all I need to know about the industry, the profession, and the stature of American journalism and the sheeple that defend it.
Merely a rogue expedition?
All in all, the Cuban shootout incident can be useful in critiquing modern journalism’s rush to sensationalize its partisan/selective coverage (and compare in the commentary to sparse reporting on assassination attempts on Trump), and it should be a warning about how a possible U.S. response would echo Cold War-era interventionism, with even less than successful outcomes.
Yet all the more reasons why much of what is reported as news, including this latest breaking story, is likely staged, perhaps a false flag! Nonetheless, it is to be expected that some observers, including the author, suspect possible backing or manipulation by U.S. intelligence, aligned media outlets, and exile networks, and NOT merely a rogue expedition.
No comments:
Post a Comment