·
·
World
The Pentagon has assembled forces for a possible military strike on Cuba, awaiting a final decision from President Donald Trump amid heightened US naval presence in the Caribbean.
The Pentagon has spent several months gathering troops and weaponry in preparation for a potential American military attack on Cuba. Recent US military maneuvers in the Caribbean suggest that any such operation depends on a definitive directive from President Donald Trump.
According to a report by Politico, Trump has previously hinted at the possibility of invading the island after economic and political pressures failed to topple the communist government. Meanwhile, the US Navy has maintained a substantial military presence in the region, described as the largest outside the Middle East.
The report details that these deployed forces provide Washington with multiple military options, ranging from targeting the leadership in Havana—similar to the operation that ousted former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro—to conducting precise strikes. This could mark the United States’ involvement in a third international conflict during Trump’s administration.
During a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Cuba "is in big trouble," adding that "the presence of a failed state just 90 miles off the US coast poses a threat to America’s national security."
In May, the US aircraft carrier USS Nimitz entered the Caribbean Sea accompanied by guided-missile destroyers and cruisers capable of executing precise strikes against land targets. Additionally, advanced American drones and reconnaissance aircraft have been flying over Cuba for several months, as tracked by flight monitoring websites.
The amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge and its escort vessels, carrying approximately 2,500 US Marines, are preparing for redeployment off the coast of Virginia, potentially replacing some ships scheduled to return.
Although this military buildup offers various operational options, reports indicate that the Pentagon would require additional forces if a large-scale ground invasion were to be launched.
The USS Nimitz’s arrival coincided with the US formally charging former Cuban President Raúl Castro, a move described in the report as a public show of force.
Mark Cancian, a former Pentagon official and analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the report that the Nimitz’s deployment primarily serves as a deterrent but could be employed in military action if necessary. He noted that the carrier and fighter jets based in Florida and Puerto Rico could play a central role in any military operation against Cuba, with air strikes potentially targeting Cuban air defenses or political leadership.
However, the US administration faces timing pressures as many warships deployed since last summer approach ten months at sea, exceeding typical deployment durations. This has raised concerns within the Department of Defense about crew fatigue, especially as operations continue to enforce sanctions against Iranian vessels in the Arabian Gulf.
The White House referred questions about military movements to the Pentagon. The US Navy declined to comment on current deployments, and the Southern Naval Command did not respond to requests for statements.
An American defense official warned that "extending consecutive deployments for long periods will create additional issues related to ship maintenance and re-equipping after their return."
These extended operations followed an 11-month mission by the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, which operated between Europe, the Caribbean, and the Middle East during the conflict with Iran.
The USS Nimitz’s mission was also extended beyond its planned final deployment after 50 years of service, with the US Navy deciding to prolong its operational life until 2027 instead of retiring it.
The amphibious ships USS Iwo Jima and USS Fort Lauderdale have remained in service since last summer, despite the Marine Corps announcing their return to Norfolk next week.
Prolonged deployments directly affect soldiers and Marines who had expected to return according to original schedules but now face mission extensions lasting several additional months.
Former Marine officer Joe Blinzler commented that "military deployments are always marked by uncertainty, but open-ended extensions impact service members’ willingness to continue serving and challenge their families’ ability to endure additional deployment cycles."
