标签： Cuba

Cuba has confirmed the deaths of 32 military personnel in what it describes as a “criminal act of aggression and state terrorism” by the United States government against Venezuelan territory. The incident occurred during early hours of January 3, 2026, when Cuban combatants were reportedly conducting security operations at the request of Venezuelan authorities.

According to official statements from the Cuban government, the deceased personnel were serving with the Revolutionary Armed Forces and Ministry of the Interior on cooperative defense missions in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The casualties resulted from both direct combat engagements with American forces and aerial bombardment of military facilities where Cuban troops were stationed.

The Cuban government emphasized that its personnel demonstrated “dignity and heroism” during what it characterized as fierce resistance against the attackers. Following verification procedures, all affected families have been notified and have received personal condolences from Cuban leadership, including Army General Raúl Castro Ruz and President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez.

The Revolutionary Government has announced plans to organize appropriate memorial actions to honor the fallen combatants, whom they describe as having embodied the solidarity principles valued by millions of Cubans. This incident represents a significant escalation in the ongoing geopolitical tensions between Cuba, Venezuela, and the United States.

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez has issued Presidential Decree 1147, establishing a period of national mourning following the deaths of 32 Cuban military personnel in Venezuela. The solemn observance will commence at 6:00 a.m. on January 5 and continue through midnight on January 6, 2026.

The decree, published in Cuba’s Official Gazette, comes in response to what the Cuban government describes as a criminal attack against Venezuela by the United States government on January 3, 2026. According to the presidential statement, the deceased Cubans were fulfilling missions at the request of Venezuelan counterpart agencies when they perished during combat operations or facility bombings.

President Díaz-Canel characterized the fallen personnel as having fulfilled their duties with dignity and heroic resistance, noting that they embodied the solidarity principles valued by millions of Cubans. The declaration was made under constitutional authority granted by Article 125 of the Cuban Constitution and relevant provisions of Law 136 from October 28, 2020.

During the mourning period, the Lone Star Flag will be flown at half-mast on all public buildings and military institutions nationwide. Additionally, all public entertainment and festive activities have been suspended throughout the two-day observance.

The implementation and enforcement of these measures fall under the responsibility of ministers from the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Interior Ministry, and Foreign Affairs Ministry. The decree was formally issued from the Palace of the Revolution on January 4, 2026, designated as the ‘Year of the Centennial of Commander-in-Chief Fidel Castro Ruz.’

Havana witnessed massive demonstrations over the weekend as Cuban leadership and citizens united in vehement condemnation of what they termed “fascist” military aggression against Venezuela. The attack, which reportedly resulted in civilian casualties, has sparked international concern and drawn parallels to historical imperial interventions.

President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez joined citizens at the Anti-Imperialist Tribune to protest both the assault on Venezuelan sovereignty and the alleged kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Combatant Cilia Flores. The gathering represented a significant show of solidarity between the two nations, with participants echoing the historic slogan “Cuba and Venezuela, one flag.”

Gerardo Hernández Nordelo, national coordinator of Cuba’s Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, delivered a stark warning about the consequences of imperial aggression. “Humanity must raise its voice and tell the empire that we are in the 21st century,” he declared, criticizing unilateral actions that violate international norms. He emphasized that the bombs striking Venezuelan cities “did not ask who was a Chavista and who was not when they exploded,” highlighting the indiscriminate nature of the attacks.

Cultural and political leaders framed the conflict as a fundamental struggle between opposing forces. Abel Prieto Jiménez, president of Casa de las Américas, characterized it as a battle between “the forces of hatred, war, and death and the forces of sovereignty, dignity, and life.” He invoked Fidel Castro’s famous statement on Vietnam—”We are willing to give even our own blood”—applying it to the current Venezuelan crisis.

Fernando González Llort of the Cuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples described the operation as a “cowardly and vile attack” that constitutes “a heinous assault on the aspiration to build a zone of peace.” He warned that the aggression transcends Venezuela’s borders and represents a direct challenge to international law.

The scientific community joined the condemnation, with prominent researcher Belinda Sánchez Ramírez contrasting Cuba’s medical missions with what she called “specialists who cause death and pain.” She warned that today’s target might be Venezuela, but tomorrow it could be “Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, or any country with natural resources or independence.”

Medical worker Agnerys Cruz Rodríguez, who spent a decade serving in Venezuela, questioned the international community’s silence: “Where is the United Nations? Where are those who define themselves as defenders of peace?”

Young activists highlighted patterns of imperial strategy, with Adriana Amore Moreno noting a “familiar sequence” of economic sanctions, media warfare, financial blockade, and finally direct aggression. She affirmed that “Venezuela is not alone, because its cause is our cause,” emphasizing that Venezuelan sovereignty remains inseparable from broader Latin American struggles.

A coalition of nations has issued a formal condemnation of recent actions authorized by former U.S. President Donald Trump, declaring them in direct violation of fundamental principles of international law. The collective statement emphasizes that these operations contravene core tenets of the United Nations Charter, specifically the prohibition against the use and threat of force and the imperative to respect state sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The nations further characterized these actions as establishing an ‘extremely dangerous precedent’ that severely undermines regional peace and security while placing civilian populations at significant risk. The statement articulates a firm position that the resolution of the Venezuelan situation must be achieved exclusively through peaceful means, including dialogue and negotiation that respects the expressed will of the Venezuelan people, free from any form of external interference and in strict compliance with international legal standards.

Reaffirming the foundational status of Latin America and the Caribbean as a ‘Zone of Peace,’ the document underscores principles of mutual respect, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and absolute non-intervention. It issues a powerful call for regional unity, transcending political differences, to confront any measures that threaten to destabilize the area.

The coalition has formally urged United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, along with member states of pertinent multilateral mechanisms, to employ their diplomatic offices to actively contribute to de-escalating tensions and safeguarding regional peace.

Concluding the declaration, the nations expressed profound concern regarding any external attempts to seize governmental control, administration, or ownership of Venezuela’s natural and strategic resources. They emphasized that such appropriation is fundamentally incompatible with international law and poses a direct threat to the political, economic, and social stability of the entire region.

In a nationally televised statement, Uruguay’s President Luis Lacalle Pou articulated his nation’s firm commitment to foundational principles of international relations, emphasizing non-intervention and the peaceful settlement of disputes. The address outlined Uruguay’s diplomatic stance regarding external military involvement in Venezuela’s political affairs.

The president underscored that Uruguay maintains a long-established foreign policy tradition that rejects interference in the internal matters of sovereign states, particularly through coercive measures or military force. He reiterated his government’s dedication to resolving international conflicts through dialogue and negotiation rather than confrontation.

Central to Uruguay’s position are the core tenets of international law, including the sovereign equality of all nations and the imperative of defending multilateralism. President Lacalle Pou emphasized that these principles form the bedrock of his administration’s approach to global affairs.

Significantly, the Uruguayan leader revealed that his country coordinates with a coalition of nations including Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, and Spain regarding the Venezuela situation. This collaborative approach aims to present a unified perspective in international forums while seeking diplomatic solutions.

President Lacalle Pou confirmed that Uruguay will pursue this consensus position through multiple diplomatic channels, including active engagement within the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the Organization of American States (OAS). The ultimate objective remains facilitating a peaceful resolution to the ongoing political crisis in Venezuela through institutional frameworks and dialogue.

A prominent international association has issued a forceful condemnation of recent actions targeting Venezuelan leadership, characterizing them as unlawful under established global governance principles. The Association of Caribbean Unity and Regional Entities (ACURE) has formally denounced what it describes as the effective abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, asserting these actions constitute a blatant violation of diplomatic immunities granted to sitting heads of state.

In an official communiqué disseminated through the Cuban Consulate in Ecuador, ACURE posed a challenging question to United States authorities: “Under which specific tenets of International Law does the United States presume the authority to act as global adjudicator while simultaneously disregarding fundamental international legal standards?”

The organization additionally expressed strong opposition to President Donald Trump’s assertion of American jurisdiction over Venezuelan affairs during a recent press briefing. ACURE specifically condemned the invocation of the nineteenth-century Monroe Doctrine as justification, labeling this approach “entirely illicit and contrary to contemporary international legal frameworks.”

Further analysis from the association suggests that potential military engagement would be principally motivated by Washington’s strategic interests in controlling Venezuela’s substantial natural resources, including petroleum reserves, gold deposits, and critical rare earth elements essential for modern technology.

The statement provided historical context referencing previous military interventions throughout the region, cautioning against the repetition of such patterns driven primarily by economic ambitions rather than humanitarian or democratic concerns. ACURE emphasized the imperative of immediately restoring President Maduro and his wife to their rightful positions while advocating for strengthened respect for national sovereignty and international law as cornerstones of peaceful global coexistence.

A substantial crowd of demonstrators convened peacefully outside the United States diplomatic mission in Madrid on Sunday, responding to a mobilization call from the Committee Against NATO and Military Bases alongside the Antifascist International. The assembly, which drew thousands, was met with a significant security presence comprising Spanish Civil Guard and national police forces.

Protesters vocalized strong opposition to U.S. foreign policy through resonant chants including “Yankees hands off Venezuela” and demands to cease American interference while respecting Latin American sovereignty. The visual symbolism of the gathering extended beyond Venezuelan flags to include Palestinian banners, merging condemnation of Israel’s military actions in Gaza with criticisms of NATO’s escalating militarism and European Union complicity.

Araceli Escudero, representing the Bolivarian Solidarity Platform and Cuban friendship associations, characterized the event as exceptionally successful. She noted the unprecedented turnout for such a demonstration in recent memory, warning that current developments in Venezuela represent a comprehensive violation of rights with potential to destabilize the entire Latin American and Caribbean region. Escudero’s statements to Prensa Latina emphasized the interconnected nature of global geopolitical struggles against Western interventionism.

A coalition of international voices has sharply criticized what they characterize as an unprecedented interventionist escalation by the United States government against Venezuela’s leadership. The coordinated response follows reports of operations targeting Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, which multiple organizations have denounced as an illegal kidnapping attempt designed to destabilize the legitimately constituted government of the Bolivarian Republic.

Central to the condemnation is the assertion that these actions represent an extrajudicial application of force that undermines international norms. The movement argues that Washington’s operations seek to effectively decapitate Venezuela’s democratic institutions through means that circumvent established legal frameworks.

Amid the widespread criticism, Salvadoran legislator Claudia Ortiz of the center-right Vamos party offered a more nuanced perspective. While not defending the Maduro government, Ortiz questioned the methodological implications of such operations, emphasizing that “the challenge for the region is not only to combat organized crime, but to do so without making the exception the rule or weakening the rule of law.” The parliamentarian, quoted extensively in El Mundo, further expressed concerns about the United States exercising power without democratic constraints, warning that “without active institutions, no democracy can withstand the pressure” of such approaches.

The political condemnation has been amplified by social and popular movements across El Salvador. Multiple labor unions have aligned with statements from the World Federation of Trade Unions, which contends that Washington’s true objective centers on gaining control over Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves. This economic interpretation of geopolitical motives has gained traction among critical voices.

Adding to the chorus of disapproval, three significant organizations—the Antifascist International El Salvador Chapter, the Operation Solidarity Network, and Mission Miracle—have jointly reaffirmed their rejection of the operations against Venezuela’s leadership. These groups have characterized the actions as violations of national sovereignty that establish dangerous precedents for international relations in the Western Hemisphere.

A prominent Chinese Latin America specialist has condemned recent United States actions against Venezuela’s leadership as a violation of international legal standards that establishes a concerning historical precedent. Dr. Sun Yanfeng, Director of the Institute of Latin American Studies at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, characterized Washington’s operation as another instance of the U.S. elevating its domestic legislation above established international law.

In an exclusive interview with The Paper, Dr. Sun criticized the American justification for the action, noting that the U.S. relied solely on its own judicial orders and narcotics trafficking allegations under domestic statutes without presenting internationally verifiable evidence. The analyst emphasized that fundamental principles of international relations—specifically the sovereign equality of nations and the prohibition against interference in internal affairs—explicitly forbid the extraterritorial application of national laws against sitting heads of state.

The expert drew parallels to a historically significant event from 1989, when United States military forces invaded Panama and apprehended its leader on similar drug-related charges. Dr. Sun described this earlier intervention as establishing a ‘dangerous precedent’ that now appears to be repeating itself in the Venezuelan context.

Beyond the surface-level narcotics enforcement narrative, Dr. Sun identified broader geopolitical motivations behind Washington’s actions. He asserted that the operation serves strategic American objectives aimed at diminishing Venezuela’s influence as a regional actor that frequently opposes U.S. policies while maintaining close diplomatic and economic ties with both China and Russia.

This development represents what the analyst considers the first direct U.S. intervention in Latin America during the 21st century, occurring shortly after the implementation of Washington’s newly updated national security strategy. The timing suggests a potential shift in American foreign policy approach toward the region that could have significant implications for international relations and regional stability.