Coin Press - Cuban regime nears collapse

NYSE - LSE
RBGPF -19.57% 69 $
BCC -2.28% 68.3 $
CMSD -1.07% 22.658 $
BCE 0.23% 25.79 $
VOD -0.63% 14.33 $
RIO -3.01% 83.15 $
RYCEF -8.21% 15.34 $
RELX -1.38% 33.36 $
NGG -4.32% 81.99 $
CMSC -0.88% 22.65 $
JRI -3.31% 11.77 $
GSK -1.02% 51.84 $
AZN -2.9% 183.6 $
BTI -2.35% 57.37 $
BP -2.41% 44.78 $

Cuban regime nears collapse




The communist regime founded by Fidel Castro and later inherited by his brother Raúl Castro is facing its worst legitimacy crisis in decades. The government of President Miguel Díaz‑Canel, who succeeded the Castro brothers, is under intense pressure from economic collapse, widening black‑outs and international isolation. For the first time since the 1959 revolution, senior Cuban officials have been drawn into secret talks that many interpret as negotiations for a managed surrender.

Fuel shortages and humanitarian collapse
In recent months, the United States has tightened its embargo on Cuba by interdicting shipments of Venezuelan crude oil, the island’s main fuel source. The action has crippled Cuba’s ageing power grid. In mid‑March, the national electrical system collapsed, leaving more than ten million people without power and forcing rationing and rolling blackouts. Without diesel for generators or petrol for transport, food prices have spiked and buses have stopped running. Even Cuba’s allies have sounded the alarm. UN Secretary‑General António Guterres warned that continued disruption of oil supplies could lead to a humanitarian “collapse” on the island. Mexico promised emergency shipments, but fears of U.S. tariffs have limited how much oil can actually be delivered. The United Nations reports that fuel shortages have forced hospitals to prioritise surgeries and that chronic medication shortages are reaching crisis levels.

Secret talks and political manoeuvring
Against this backdrop of scarcity, multiple sources report that the Díaz‑Canel government has quietly opened channels to Washington. In a press conference on 13 March 2026, Díaz‑Canel acknowledged for the first time that “processes of this nature require discretion” and said dialogue was taking place, though he refused to provide details. According to investigative reports, advisers to the U.S. Secretary of State have held informal meetings with Raúl Castro’s grandson, Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro (“Raulito”). The United States is reportedly pressing for Díaz‑Canel’s removal but wants to avoid a chaotic collapse. Cuba has responded with gestures meant to curry favour: it recently freed 51 political prisoners, announced it will allow Cuban‑Americans to invest in businesses on the island and has lifted restrictions preventing foreign residents from owning private enterprises.

Yet Cuban authorities publicly deny that leadership succession is part of the negotiations. Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossio told reporters that Cuba’s political system is not up for negotiation. He characterised the U.S. pressure campaign as a “take Cuba” strategy and insisted that the country’s sovereignty will not be traded away. Such statements have not quelled speculation. Analysts believe that if Díaz‑Canel resigns in exchange for relief from sanctions and guarantees for the Castro family’s safety, power could pass to younger technocrats or a transitional council.

Public anger and calls for change
On the streets, patience is running out. Long queues for bread and sporadic electricity have eroded whatever legitimacy the revolutionary government still possesses. Many Cubans complain that after more than sixty years, the revolutionary rhetoric has produced little beyond a hereditary elite—a common criticism voiced by citizens and diaspora commentators. They argue that the Castro family, despite claiming to have built an egalitarian society, has effectively become a dynastic monarchy. Commenters on social media observe that while the government blames external enemies, ordinary people bear the brunt of shortages and crumbling infrastructure. Some express hope that the island could soon open to the world and that Cubans abroad will be able to return and rebuild a free country.

These sentiments find echo in protests. Over the past year, small but persistent demonstrations have erupted in Havana, Santiago and smaller towns, with slogans calling for “Libertad” and demanding an end to power cuts. Security forces have arrested dozens, but cracks are showing. Reports suggest that even within the ruling party there is discontent over the handling of the crisis. Younger officials complain that the leadership is out of touch and that the revolution has degenerated into bureaucratic stagnation. Rumours that a negotiated transition could avert a violent upheaval have gained currency.

A fragile transition
Whether the Castro regime will agree to surrender power peacefully remains uncertain. The humanitarian situation is dire, and regional actors such as Mexico and the United Nations are pushing for a resolution to prevent mass migration or state collapse. The United States insists that any easing of sanctions will be contingent on political liberalisation and free elections. Sources close to the talks claim that the parties are discussing a timetable for constitutional reforms, the integration of opposition figures and guarantees for members of the security services, but no agreement has been finalised. For now, Cuba teeters on the precipice between reform and breakdown. The coming months will test whether the revolutionary regime founded by Fidel Castro can orchestrate a controlled handover or whether the island’s deepening crises will force a more chaotic denouement.



Featured


Long live Ukraine - Хай живе Україна - Да здравствует Украина

Es lebe die Ukraine - Да здравствует Украина - Long live Ukraine - Хай живе Україна - Nech žije Ukrajina - Länge leve Ukraina - תחי אוקראינה - Lang leve Oekraïne - Да живее Украйна - Elagu Ukraina - Kauan eläköön Ukraina - Vive l'Ukraine - Ζήτω η Ουκρανία - 乌克兰万岁 - Viva Ucrania - Ať žije Ukrajina - Çok yaşa Ukrayna - Viva a Ucrânia - Trăiască Ucraina - ウクライナ万歳 - Tegyvuoja Ukraina - Lai dzīvo Ukraina - Viva l'Ucraina - Hidup Ukraina - تحيا أوكرانيا - Vivat Ucraina - ขอให้ยูเครนจงเจริญ - Ucraina muôn năm - ژوندی دی وی اوکراین - Yashasin Ukraina - Озак яшә Украина - Živjela Ukrajina - 우크라이나 만세 - Mabuhay ang Ukraine - Lenge leve Ukraina - Nyob ntev Ukraine - Да живее Украина - გაუმარჯოს უკრაინას - Hidup Ukraine - Vivu Ukrainio - Længe leve Ukraine - Živjela Ukrajina - Жыве Украіна - Yaşasın Ukrayna - Lengi lifi Úkraína - Lank lewe die Oekraïne

Stargate project, Trump and the AI war...

In a dramatic return to the global political stage, former President Donald J. Trump, as the current 47th President of the United States of America, has unveiled his latest initiative, the so-called ‘Stargate Project,’ in a bid to cement the United States’ dominance in artificial intelligence and outpace China’s meteoric rise in the field. The newly announced programme, cloaked in patriotic rhetoric and ambitious targets, is already stirring intense debate over the future of technological competition between the world’s two largest economies.According to preliminary statements from Trump’s team, the Stargate Project will consolidate the efforts of leading American tech conglomerates, defence contractors, and research universities under a centralised framework. The former president, who has long championed American exceptionalism, claims this approach will provide the United States with a decisive advantage, enabling rapid breakthroughs in cutting-edge AI applications ranging from military strategy to commercial innovation.“America must remain the global leader in technology—no ifs, no buts,” Trump declared at a recent press conference. “China has been trying to surpass us in AI, but with this new project, we will make sure the future remains ours.”Details regarding funding and governance remain scarce, but early indications suggest the initiative will rely heavily on public-private partnerships, tax incentives for research and development, and collaboration with high-profile venture capital firms. Skeptics, however, warn that the endeavour could fan the flames of an increasingly militarised AI race, raising ethical concerns about surveillance, automation of warfare, and data privacy. Critics also question whether the initiative can deliver on its lofty promises, especially in the face of existing economic and geopolitical pressures.Yet for its supporters, the Stargate Project serves as a rallying cry for renewed American leadership and an antidote to worries over China’s technological ascendancy. Proponents argue that accelerating AI research is paramount if the United States wishes to preserve not just military supremacy, but also the economic and cultural influence that has typified its global role for decades.Whether this bold project will succeed—or if it will devolve into a symbolic gesture—remains to be seen. What is certain, however, is that the Stargate Project has already reignited debate about how best to safeguard America’s strategic future and maintain the balance of power in the fast-evolving arena of artificial intelligence.

Iran-War and dangerous Lines

In late February 2026, the United States and Israel launched a joint military campaign against Iran. What began as a focused attempt to neutralise the Islamic Republic’s nuclear programme quickly evolved into a broad offensive designed to cripple Iran’s government, degrade its missile forces and remove its top leadership. Within days the campaign had destroyed key command centres, decimated large portions of Iran’s air defences, and eliminated dozens of senior figures, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, former parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani and Basij commander Gholamreza Soleimani. The scale and ferocity of the attack stunned the world. Iranian air and naval bases, intelligence headquarters and state media facilities were struck in rapid succession. Israel claimed near-complete air superiority after thousands of sorties and the use of more than ten thousand munitions.Leadership decapitation and military degradationIsrael’s strategy, codenamed Operation Roaring Lion, has focused on removing the leaders who give Iran’s military and political apparatus cohesion. Within the first week, dozens of commanders and ministers were killed in so‑called “decapitation strikes”, including Esmail Khatib, the intelligence minister. These killings were accompanied by a sustained bombardment of Iran’s ballistic‑missile infrastructure and industrial base. Missile factories in Tabriz and Khorramabad were destroyed along with the Shahid Hemmat complex in Khojir. Analysts estimate that Iran’s missile output has fallen from roughly one hundred missiles per month to virtually zero, and more than eighty per cent of the country’s air‑defence systems have been neutralised.This systematic dismantling extends to Iran’s nuclear programme. Though major enrichment facilities at Natanz and Isfahan were badly damaged in 2025, recent raids have reinforced those blows and targeted underground bunkers believed to house nuclear weapons components. There have even been reports of special‑operations teams attempting to seize fissile material. While Iran has continued firing salvos of missiles and drones at Israel and its allies, the scale of its launches has visibly declined. The rapid degradation of Iran’s military capacity reveals the depth of planning behind the U.S.–Israeli campaign and the advantage provided by air superiority and precision‑strike capabilities.Expansion into economic infrastructureBy early March, the conflict had entered a new phase as strikes expanded to Iran’s energy infrastructure. Oil storage depots in Tehran, gas installations near Bushehr and facilities linked to the South Pars field were hit. This expansion followed the killing of additional Iranian officials and is widely seen as an attempt to impose economic pressure on Tehran. Israeli ministers openly stated that any senior Iranian figure would be targeted without further approval. Iran responded by launching missiles at Qatar’s Ras Laffan gas complex and drones at refineries in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. An oil refinery in Haifa was also struck, and Iran began restricting maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. These attacks rattled global markets; gas prices surged, and major energy exporters called for an immediate end to the conflict.Qatar’s prime minister warned that the attacks threatened global energy security and demanded a ceasefire. Diplomatic appeals were echoed by Turkey and other regional states fearful of being dragged into the conflict. The United Nations’ human‑rights chief, Volker Türk, decried the mounting civilian toll, noting that tens of thousands of schools, hospitals and homes had been hit across Iran. The war’s spillover into populated areas and energy infrastructure, he warned, marked a dangerous phase that risked humanitarian catastrophe and economic destabilisation.Political dynamics and resilience of Iran’s systemThe death of Ali Khamenei unsettled Iran’s political system, but it did not lead to immediate collapse. Within days the Assembly of Experts selected Khamenei’s son Mujtaba as his successor. Power brokers such as Ali Larijani and parliamentary speaker Mohammed Bagher Qalibaf continued to wield influence until their elimination. Iran’s government had long invested in redundant institutions to ensure continuity in the event of leadership losses. As a result, decision‑making has shifted among senior Revolutionary Guard commanders and clerical councils rather than disappearing altogether. Experts caution that Iranian strategy emphasises endurance and attrition rather than head‑to‑head confrontation. The regime appears determined to survive a protracted war, even if many of its leaders have been slain.Nevertheless, there are signs of strain. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, claims the war could end more quickly than expected, insisting that Iran can no longer enrich uranium or manufacture ballistic missiles. At the same time Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, warns that the assassination of Iranian leaders sets a “dangerous precedent” that undermines international norms. He argues that unchecked aggression will embolden future violations of sovereignty. Tehran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has vowed “zero restraint” if Iran’s infrastructure is targeted again, and military commanders threaten the destruction of Gulf energy facilities. The opposing narratives highlight the uncertainty surrounding the conflict’s trajectory.Regional escalation and global impactThe war has spilled across the Middle East. Iran’s retaliatory strikes have hit energy hubs in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, while Israel has launched attacks against Iranian‑backed militias in Lebanon and Syria. Britain, France, Germany, Japan and other nations have joined efforts to secure shipping lanes through the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict has destabilised global energy supply chains at a time when economies are already strained. Some commentators warn that prolonged fighting could trigger a recession; others note that markets remain resilient for now. Among citizens following the war online, sentiment is polarized. Some describe the conflict as a wildfire that will inevitably spread; others mock media portrayals of “lines” being crossed and call for decisive action to remove Iran’s regime. There is also confusion about the health of Mujtaba Khamenei and speculation that internal divisions could further destabilise Tehran’s leadership.Humanitarian and geopolitical implicationsBeyond military and economic calculations, the war’s human cost is staggering. Reports suggest that more than sixty‑seven thousand civilian sites have been struck in Iran, and casualties across Iran, Lebanon and Israel number in the thousands. Schools, medical facilities and residential buildings have been destroyed, displacing millions and overwhelming humanitarian agencies. Human‑rights organisations argue that indiscriminate bombing and the targeting of energy facilities may constitute war crimes. The conflict’s expansion also risks drawing in Gulf states, NATO forces and other international actors, potentially igniting a broader regional war.As Operation Roaring Lion enters its second month, questions loom over its ultimate goals. While decapitation strikes and military degradation have weakened Iran’s capacity, the regime’s resilience and the war’s widening scope raise doubts about a quick conclusion. If the aim is regime change, history warns that removing a leadership does not guarantee stability; Iraq and Libya offer cautionary precedents. Without a clear political strategy for the post‑war order, the Middle East could face prolonged chaos. For now the conflict has crossed lines that many thought would never be crossed: the assassination of a supreme leader, large‑scale attacks on energy infrastructure and the open involvement of multiple regional powers. The danger is that these red lines become the new normal, ushering in an era of perpetual confrontation.