Cuba and the Trump deportations
Many of the more than 900,000 Cubans who have arrived in the United States since October 2021 could be deported under the new provisions of the Donald Trump administration.
The current government has ordered an “indefinite administrative pause” to investigate possible fraud or illegalities in the programs implemented by the Biden administration. This measure leaves immigrants in legal limbo and prevents them from continuing with the immigration adjustment processes and eventually obtaining residency in that country through the Cuban Adjustment Act (LAC), which has been approved for them since 1966.
According to the Customs and Border Protection Department (CBP), since October 2021, approximately 85,000 Cubans have arrived in the United States through the “family reunification parole,” which was reestablished by the Biden administration that year after being interrupted by Trump in 2017. Another 110,000 arrived under the so-called “humanitarian parole,” a program intended for Cubans, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians that has existed since January 2023. The majority, around 740,000, entered irregularly through the country’s southern border but were accepted via a form of safe conduct, the I-220A form, while awaiting their applications for political asylum, following traditional practices.
Although deporting all these Cubans is logistically complicated, the importance of this measure lies not only in its viability but also in its impact on the principles that have governed, for decades, the immigration policy of the United States toward Cuba.
In all cases, these individuals traveled to the United States, encouraged by the premise of an “exceptional” treatment for migrants from Cuba. In particular, they were assured that they would receive political asylum simply by claiming “credible fear,” which supposedly indicated that they were coming from the Island. The second premise was the extraordinary benefit of being able to take advantage of the Cuban Adjustment Act after residing in that country for a year.
This decision radically alters the scenario for Cuban immigrants who, with very few exceptions, have been indiscriminately admitted by the United States since the triumph of the Revolution in 1959 and now face the possibility of deportation due to the supposed “illegality” of their immigration status.
Impact on Cuba
This would also represent an unprecedented scenario for Cuba. For decades, the Cuban government has pursued policies to encourage emigration from the U.S. Now, it could face a drastic reduction in the migratory flow and the return of thousands of people in challenging conditions, given that many invested their assets in the attempt to emigrate.
On one hand, the country’s economic situation could increase internal tensions in Cuba. This was the strategy of the previous Trump administration, and it would not be surprising if it were their intention again, especially since the architects of this policy now hold positions of greater responsibility in the U.S. government. In contrast, reducing the migratory balance and the expectations of emigration could create a stabilizing effect for Cuba, if appropriate policies are implemented for the reintegration of these migrants.
The Cuban government must decide how to handle these deportations. Although it constitutionally cannot prevent the return of its citizens, it could refuse to accept forced deportations without a bilateral agreement. These negotiations would involve more than 40,000 Cubans who are legal residents in the U.S. and have been ordered deported for committing crimes in that territory.
Donald Trump has stated that all migrants deemed extraditable must be accepted by their countries of origin, under the threat of U.S. sanctions, which consistently loom over Cuba, irrespective of its policy. Additionally, he has authorized the Guantanamo Naval Base for what he describes as the “most dangerous” cases and has engaged in negotiations with various Central American governments to act as third host countries when necessary. Unfortunately, these are potential destinations for some Cuban migrants if an agreement is not reached between the parties.
Position of the Cuban government
Up until now, Cuba has stood out as the exception in the regional landscape. Most of the countries involved have already agreed to accept the deportees and have engaged in negotiations on the matter, whether out of respect for the international norm that dictates this, due to their national policy toward migrants, or out of fear of reprisals from the United States.
Meeting with the other ALBA-TCP leaders in February of this year, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel stated: “For Cuba, the violent and indiscriminate deportation of migrants in the United States, arbitrary detentions, and other human rights violations, which are also employed as tools of political pressure and blackmail against the peoples of Our America, are unacceptable.” He further asserted: “The deportations of migrants must occur within the framework of bilateral or multilateral agreements that uphold the sovereignty of each nation and the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs.”
Possible scenarios
The U.S. government has not specified how it intends to address the conflict with Cuba, despite existing agreements between the two countries that could form a foundation for a negotiated solution to the issue. In response to the press, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the case of the Cubans was governed by a specific law, the Cuban Adjustment Act, which distinguished them from others. However, this does not account for the possibility that this law may not apply to the majority of those who entered in recent years.
Relations between the two countries regarding this matter are governed by the 1994 migration agreements, in which the United States committed to returning undocumented migrants intercepted at sea, as well as to ending the practice of indiscriminately accepting those who arrived on U.S. territory, while Cuba committed to accepting these individuals back.
Since then, the return of most of those captured at sea has continued, significantly reducing the number of people who usually opted for this route to reach the United States.
However, in 1995, in clear violation of the previously established agreements, the U.S. government unilaterally implemented the dry foot/wet foot policy, which permitted Cubans who successfully reached U.S. territory to remain in the country, whether by land or by sea.
Until its suspension at the end of Barack Obama’s term in January 2017, the dry foot/wet foot policy significantly increased the dangers of the sea crossing. People had to avoid being rescued by any boat, which also encouraged the use of the land route to penetrate the southern border— a route that had been scarcely used by Cuban migrants until then.
At the end of that same year, the Donald Trump government decided to close the U.S. consulate in Havana under the pretext of alleged “sonic attacks” on its officials—dismissed by the international scientific community and later by the U.S. special services themselves—and violate everything established in the migration agreements. The “volcano route,” as the land crossing to the United States has been called, became the most feasible way to emigrate to that country.
The pandemic’s restrictions on movement limited the flow momentarily, but as soon as the borders were opened, the difficulties generated by the pandemic itself, together with the intensification of the economic blockade applied by both Donald Trump and Joe Biden, and the failures of the Cuban government’s economic policies to face the crisis, unleashed the largest “migratory explosion” in the nation’s history.
Cubans then joined the large caravans of migrants traveling through Central America to reach the southern borders of the United States, where they were accepted almost without exception through various programs. In any case, this compelled the Biden administration to reestablish the previously mentioned legal mechanisms to alleviate an increasingly uncontrolled situation.
Likewise, it partially reestablished consular services and complied with the quota for family reunification contained in the migration agreements, effectively reducing migratory pressure at the border. However, the future of these measures is uncertain, considering Donald Trump’s previous actions regarding Cuba and his attitude regarding the immigration issue.
Possible paths
The history of non-compliance with immigration agreements by the United States, particularly under Donald Trump, justifies the Cuban side’s lack of commitment to accepting deportees, especially if the U.S. government is unwilling to renegotiate the terms of these deportations.
Negotiating represents a fundamental step, as it is essential to adjust the logistics required for these operations, consider the conditions under which the individuals must be transferred to Cuba, and ensure that the receiving country verifies the identity and background of the deportees beforehand.
This is not, moreover, something that has been impossible in the past. In 1984, Cuba agreed to accept more than 2,000 “excludables,” who had been detained without trial in U.S. prisons since the Mariel incident in 1980. It also accepted some of those held at Guantanamo Naval Base in 1996 and, even today, it continues to receive deportations negotiated case by case with the United States. In fact, the “migration talks,” held with some regularity since 1995 – although suspended by George W. Bush in 2004 and Donald Trump in 2017 – were designed to discuss these types of issues and have also served to negotiate other matters of interest to both governments.
However, the initial signs do not suggest that pursuing negotiations is the intention of the U.S. government. Additionally, the influence of Florida politicians in the current administration should be taken into account, as it would be beneficial for them to have a potential Cuban refusal to accept the deportees. This refusal would serve as a pretext to escalate aggressions against the Island, attempt its international isolation, and reaffirm the “exceptionality” of Cuban migrants, excluding them from the deportation policy and presenting them as their saviors.
In this context, the future of thousands of Cubans in the U.S. remains uncertain. The possibility of mass deportations could signify a historic shift in immigration policy between the two countries, potentially leading to economic and social repercussions both in Cuba and within the Cuban diaspora.
In any case, nothing seems impossible in Donald Trump’s world, and it may occur that a topic as thorny and contentious as deportations becomes a gateway to dialogue, which today feels like a pipe dream.
