In brief
The General Assembly’s decision to lift the U.S. embargo on Cuba was met with both celebration and criticism. While 130 countries backed the resolution, several Latin American and European states switched to opposition or abstention, reducing Cuba’s support by 35 votes. The change has triggered statements from U.S. officials, Cuban leaders, and advocates in Africa and Europe, all underscoring the debate’s stakes for sovereignty, human rights, and public accountability.
The United Nations General Assembly in New York voted on Oct. 28 to accept a resolution calling for the end of the United States’ embargo on Cuba, resulting in 130 votes in favor, 17 against and 25 abstentions—a 35‑vote loss for Cuban allies compared with the 165‑to‑7‑12 record of 2025.
The shift was marked by a number of countries changing positions: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Paraguay moved from supporting the resolution to voting against it; Chile, Peru, Honduras and the Dominican Republic switched from support to abstention. In Europe, Germany, Italy and Latvia—previously in favor—abstained this time, while Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay, Nicaragua and Panama maintained their backing for Cuba.
Regional Voices and Civil Society
African analysts urged a united front. “Africa is familiar with this theatrical scenario—this pain. Apartheid did the exact same thing,” warned Pan‑Africanist Fortune Madondo, citing Washington’s use of threats and “blackmail” to influence votes. He warned that if Cuba is targeted next, other African states could follow.
In Europe, Italian scholar Luciano Vasapollo called on European governments to reject U.S. pressure. He highlighted how the blockade had driven up costs for families, citing that more than 883,000 Cubans were living in vulnerable conditions as of September 2026. The National Italy‑Cuba Friendship Association (ANAIC) added that Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani should vote in favor of the resolution to maintain Italy’s historic opposition to U.S. sanctions.
The United States blamed internal Cuban policy for the vote’s outcome, with officials criticising Cuban delegate conduct in UN debates, according to United Press International.
Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla condemned the embargo as a “war of the economic blockade” and accused Washington of launching a “blackmail” campaign. He posted a statement on X that read,
“The consequences fall on people, limit their fundamental human rights, affect third countries and turn the population's essential needs into instruments of political coercion.”
President Miguel Diaz‑Canel celebrated the resolution, describing it as a “victory for the heroic Cuban people” and a “triumph of the truth over those who rely on lies and blackmail.”
“It is a triumph of the truth over those who rely on lies and blackmail to subject an entire nation to collective punishment.”
Cuban Ambassador Leyde Rodriguez to the Holy See described the blockade as “genocidal,” noting $8.083 billion in damages from March 2025 to February 2026 and a cumulative $178.7 billion over the blockade’s history. He warned that the energy siege was a form of collective punishment that hindered Cuba’s economy and basic services.
The resolution’s approval brings the U.S. embargo to its fourth decade of support by the UN, with the embargo accounting for nearly 179 billion U.S. dollars in economic losses to Cuba. Latin American leaders, such as former Peruvian Ambassador Hugo Otero, defended Cuban sovereignty, warning that U.S. actions threaten the independence of the entire region.
Across the globe, the vote underscores the continuing tug‑of‑war between U.S. unilateral pressure and international calls for respect of sovereign rights, human rights and public accountability. The shift in support signals a tightening coalition in favor of ending the decades‑long blockade, even as some states fear future pressure from Washington in other arenas.
