Trump has hit a wall in the Middle East, and he may try to win back lost public support by targeting Cuba. However, Washington may not have enough confidence to provoke another new war.

In recent times, as the Trump administration's short-sighted military adventures have slowly plunged into a quagmire in the Middle East, discussions on how the US can break the deadlock have become increasingly popular in the United States.

Some opinions suggest that with the situation in the Middle East becoming more chaotic, Trump might reallocate military resources to Latin America and prepare for an attack on Cuba.

This speculation is not baseless. Since Trump sent troops for a lightning raid on Venezuela in January this year, many people believed that Trump would eventually turn his attention to Cuba after tasting the "sweetness" of military adventure.

Previously, one important reason why the US did not act against Cuba was that Venezuela provided cheap oil to Cuba, which could meet the energy needs of Cuba's domestic social production and ensure stability.

Now that the president of Venezuela has been arrested, relations between the two countries have suddenly become unstable, and Cuba, cut off from its energy supply, has become very vulnerable and easier to manipulate by the US.

However, to everyone's surprise, although Trump has tasted the "sweetness" of military adventure, his decision-making habits have become more inclined to strike with military force.

But instead of targeting Latin America, Trump has directed his heavy-handed approach toward the Middle East, far away, and launched a larger-scale military adventure in cooperation with Israel.

At the beginning of the war, including Trump himself, all believed it would be another quick and easy victory. However, the reality is that after two weeks of fighting, the Middle East has once again become a US "quagmire."

The poor performance of the US military has somewhat shaken Trump's authority at home, and the Democrats are seizing this opportunity to launch political attacks.

Trump urgently needs a new victory to save his image, counter the Democrats, and consolidate his position within the party, otherwise he and the Republicans will definitely lose the midterm elections.

In this context, Cuba has once again become the optimal choice for Trump to seek a "victory" at present.

Cuba has weak military strength and is located just next to the US doorstep. Fighting in the Middle East is a long-distance campaign, while fighting in the Caribbean Sea is like going out for a walk.

Moreover, Cuba's military strength is weak, lacking the ability to effectively retaliate against the US, making it a soft target among soft targets, just like Venezuela.

However, according to Bloomberg, although the Trump administration is considering taking action against Cuba, military options no longer seem to be the top priority.

This indication first surfaced on March 7, during the "Shield of the Americas" summit held in Miami, Florida. At that time, Trump said that Cuba had reached the "end of its life," while hinting that a deal with Cuba might be possible.

Afterward, Bloomberg reported that US officials had already negotiated with Rodriguez Castro, the grandson of former Cuban leader Raul Castro. The US intends to use economic pressure to force Cuba to make concessions, replacing Cuban leader Diaz-Canel.

The idea of replacing the leader is intriguing. It seems that the US is not seeking to overthrow the Cuban government, but rather to replace the leader. Just like the Venezuelan government wasn't overthrown, only the president was taken by the US.

According to Bloomberg experts, after suffering major losses in the Middle East, Trump's tolerance for failure has significantly declined. He fears that the US might also get stuck in a quagmire in Cuba and is desperately trying to avoid all risks.

Trump's concerns are not unfounded.

Cuba indeed lacks the effective capacity to retaliate against the US, just like Venezuela. However, due to decades of US sanctions and blockades, society in Cuba has reached a consensus on anti-American sentiment.

Additionally, the quality of Cuban military personnel is not bad, and their combat will is strong. If Trump wants to repeat the adventurous operation of raiding Venezuela, the US military's repeated tactics may lead to a similar disaster like the Bay of Pigs invasion.

For the current Trump, any form of failure on the Cuba issue could be portrayed by the Democrats as a political stain on Trump himself.

This is a result Trump cannot accept, so the option of attacking Cuba will almost never be chosen unless it is absolutely necessary.

What about a full-scale military conflict?

The US has a overwhelming military advantage on the battlefield, and compared to special forces raids, even if there are losses in direct combat, they can be accepted, with a higher margin of error.

However, this raises another question: What cost is the US willing to pay to achieve victory?

The military adventure in the Middle East has proven that even with an overwhelming military advantage, once it turns into a full-scale military conflict, the war is difficult to end in a short period, and the costs the US pays may even exceed those of the opponent.

Cuba is such an opponent. The US certainly has the strength to defeat it. But if it escalates into a full-scale conflict, the resistance will of Cuba is an unpredictable variable.

Moreover, the US's ammunition and military budget are not infinite. Even if it is a war right at its doorstep, the US military cannot keep fighting indefinitely.

To put it simply, Trump's wrong decision in the Middle East has left him without enough leverage to handle Cuba firmly.

This also explains why the US has started to apply economic pressure on Cuba.

It is not because this method is more effective, capable of forcing Cuba to agree to the US conditions of replacing its leaders. Rather, it is because this is currently the lowest-cost pressure method available to the US, requiring no violence, just some verbal pressure.

As to whether Cuba listens or not, that is another matter.



By Lian Xin, Editor-in-Chief of Phoenix Military Channel

Original article: toutiao.com/article/7616978776353817139/

Disclaimer: This article represents the views of the author.