The Paradox of Paternalism: Why US Sanctions Always 'Help' the People
Sheinbaum's criticism of the US oil blockade on Cuba highlights a classic double standard. On one hand, US officials frequently articulate a humanitarian concern for the Cuban populace, justifying punitive measures as a means to foster democratic change or alleviate suffering. Yet, the very tools employed—economic blockades, sanctions, and restrictions on vital resources like
oil—disproportionately affect ordinary citizens, not the political elite. CASE A: The Cuban Narrative (as presented by US policymakers): The narrative asserts that tough economic measures are necessary to pressure the Cuban government, and that any suffering experienced by the Cuban people is a direct consequence of their authoritarian regime. The US State Department, for instance, has long argued
that its policies target the Cuban government's ability to 'repress its people' and fund its 'malign activities' (State Dept., 2023). CASE B: The Consistent Outcome: Decades of sanctions have not led to regime change but have instead crippled Cuba's economy, leading to shortages of food, medicine, and fuel. According to a 2021 UN report, the US embargo has cost Cuba over $147 billion since its
inception. This economic strangulation, particularly affecting fuel imports, directly impacts daily life, from transportation to food production and healthcare, thus harming the very people Washington claims to want to help. THE FRAMING: The US frames its sanctions as 'targeted pressure' to 'promote democracy.' Mexican presidential candidate Sheinbaum, however, directly challenges this by stating,