Categoría: Hemisferio

By Pastor Herrera Macurán
Horizonte Cubano News
August 23, 2026

Canada has apparently committed a terrible offense.

It said no to Washington.

According to reports published Sunday, President Donald Trump accused Canada of imposing enormous tariffs on American farmers after bilateral trade negotiations failed.

The United States has imposed new tariffs of 50 percent on approximately $20 billion in Canadian products, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney says Canada will retaliate “dollar for dollar” beginning September 8.

Trump responded angrily.

So there is only one question left.

When do we bomb Canada?

Ottawa first?

Toronto?

Perhaps an aircraft carrier should be dispatched toward Montreal.

Relax.

Nobody is seriously proposing that.

And that is precisely the point.

Canada Said No

Washington presented its conditions.

Canada rejected them.

The Canadian government says Washington introduced unacceptable conditions during the final hours of negotiations.

The United States says Canada refused terms that had previously been discussed.

Canada has now announced retaliation.

Steel.

Dairy products.

Appliances.

Agricultural machinery.

Pulp and paper.

Electronics.

This is becoming a serious commercial confrontation between two neighboring countries.

Yet despite the disagreement, nobody needs to prepare an invasion map.

Why?

Because countries disagree.

Governments negotiate.

Governments impose tariffs.

Other governments retaliate.

Diplomats argue.

Businesses complain.

Markets react.

Politicians make speeches.

Then, eventually, somebody returns to the negotiating table.

That is international politics.

Imagine Applying the Cuba Standard to Canada

Now imagine applying some of the rhetoric routinely heard about Cuba to our northern neighbor.

Canada refuses American demands?

Regime change!

Canada retaliates against American sanctions?

Maximum pressure!

Canada refuses to surrender?

The Canadian government must fall!

Mark Carney criticizes Washington?

Send in the Marines!

Of course, this sounds ridiculous.

It is supposed to.

Canada is a sovereign country.

The United States does not possess the right to overthrow another country’s government simply because Washington dislikes its economic policies.

So why does the language of military intervention become so casual when certain politicians discuss Cuba?

No, Canada and Cuba Are Not the Same

Before someone deliberately misunderstands the argument, let us make this absolutely clear.

Canada and Cuba are profoundly different countries.

Canada is a longstanding American ally and a constitutional democracy.

Cuba has a one-party political system and a completely different historical relationship with Washington.

The economic relationships are different.

The security relationships are different.

The political systems are different.

This article is not claiming equivalence between Canada and Cuba.

The comparison concerns something much simpler:

How should governments resolve disputes?

The answer cannot automatically become military force whenever Washington encounters a government it dislikes.

We Negotiated With Communist China

There is an even more inconvenient historical example.

China.

After the Chinese Communist Revolution, American citizens and companies had substantial property claims against the People’s Republic of China.

The United States Foreign Claims Settlement Commission certified approximately $196.9 million in principal in the relevant China claims programs.

Did Washington invade Beijing to collect the money?

No.

Washington negotiated.

In 1979, the United States and the People’s Republic of China reached a settlement under which China agreed to pay $80.5 million.

There was an initial $30 million payment, followed by five annual installments of $10.1 million.

Communist government.

Confiscated American property.

Major ideological disagreements.

And what did Washington use?

Diplomacy.

Now Look at Cuba

The United States currently has 5,913 certified awards involving Cuba representing approximately $1.902 billion in principal.

Those claims remain unresolved.

So what is the strategy?

Wait another sixty years?

Impose another hundred sanctions?

Hope the Cuban government collapses?

Talk about military intervention?

Or perhaps try something America has successfully used before:

Negotiate.

If Washington could negotiate property claims with Communist China, Washington can at least explore negotiations with Cuba.

Negotiation does not mean surrender.

Negotiation means attempting to obtain something.

American Creditors Cannot Deposit a Missile in the Bank

This is where the discussion becomes almost absurd.

Suppose tomorrow the United States invaded Cuba.

What happens to the claims?

Does a missile pay Exxon?

Does a bomb compensate a family whose property was confiscated?

Does destroying an electrical plant produce dollars for creditors?

Does damaging a railroad generate money?

Does destroying a port increase Cuba’s capacity to pay?

Of course not.

If American creditors want compensation, they ultimately need a Cuban economy capable of generating revenue.

American creditors cannot deposit a missile in the bank.

They can deposit a payment.

That distinction should matter.

War Is Extremely Expensive

There is another accounting problem.

Military operations cost money.

Enormous amounts of money.

Ships.

Aircraft.

Personnel.

Logistics.

Intelligence.

Reconstruction.

Humanitarian assistance.

Veterans’ benefits.

And, most importantly, human lives.

Before anyone casually demands military intervention in Cuba, perhaps Congress should ask a basic question:

How much would it cost?

And then another:

What exactly would America gain?

If the objective is recovering approximately $1.9 billion in certified principal claims, spending potentially enormous sums destroying the debtor country’s productive capacity would be a rather peculiar collection strategy.

The Cuban People Would Pay First

And there is something much more important than accounting.

Cubans would die.

American service members could die.

Families would be destroyed.

Infrastructure would be damaged.

Migration toward the United States could increase dramatically.

The Florida Straits would not magically become peaceful because someone in Washington announced that military action would produce freedom.

War has consequences.

People who demand it should be required to explain those consequences.

Canada Reminds Us What Normal Diplomacy Looks Like

Washington and Ottawa are currently angry with each other.

Trump says Canada has treated American farmers unfairly.

Canada says Washington’s new conditions are unacceptable.

Tariffs are increasing.

Retaliation is coming.

The rhetoric is getting hotter.

And eventually?

Someone will probably have to negotiate.

Because that is what countries do.

They defend their interests.

They use leverage.

They impose costs.

They negotiate.

They compromise.

They sign agreements.

Sometimes agreements fail and negotiations begin again.

Nobody interprets the existence of negotiations as surrendering American sovereignty.

Why Should Negotiation With Cuba Be Taboo?

This is the question Washington should confront.

Negotiating with Cuba does not require becoming communist.

It does not require approving the Cuban government.

It does not require abandoning concerns about human rights.

It does not require forgiving property claims.

In fact, negotiation may be precisely how those claims finally get paid.

Washington can place difficult issues on the table:

Certified American claims.

Cuban counterclaims.

Migration.

Political prisoners.

Human rights.

Private enterprise.

Banking.

Energy.

Trade.

Investment protections.

Agriculture.

Transportation.

And sanctions.

Cuba will place its own demands on the table.

Then both sides negotiate.

That is diplomacy.

And If Cuba Says No?

Then Washington retains options.

Maintain specific sanctions.

Modify others.

Apply diplomatic pressure.

Work with allies.

Offer incentives for measurable reforms.

Withdraw incentives when commitments are violated.

Negotiate again.

Foreign policy contains an enormous space between doing nothing and dropping bombs.

America should learn to operate inside it.

So, Are We Invading Canada?

No.

Obviously.

Canada is our neighbor, our ally and one of our most important economic partners.

Our governments are having a serious dispute.

They will fight politically.

They will fight economically.

They may exchange increasingly unpleasant statements.

But nobody should expect American tanks rolling toward Ottawa.

And perhaps the absurdity of that image should teach us something.

When Canada rejects Washington’s demands, we understand instinctively that eventually governments must negotiate.

When China confiscated American property, Washington ultimately negotiated.

When governments around the world disagree with us, Washington routinely negotiates.

So perhaps diplomacy should not suddenly become a dirty word when the conversation reaches an island ninety miles from Florida.

The United States is powerful enough to defend its interests.

It should also be confident enough to negotiate.

Because sometimes the strongest sentence an American president can deliver is not:

“Prepare the missiles.”

It is:

“Take a seat. We have some things to settle.”

And fortunately for our Canadian friends, nobody needs to invade Ottawa to discover that.

Pastor Herrera Macurán is the founder of Horizonte Cubano News. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.