President Donald Trump has again raised the prospect of the United States “taking” Cuba, this time as the island reels from a total collapse of its electrical system. His remarks come as Cuba struggles to restore power and as Washington’s pressure campaign on Havana hardens into formal emergency measures and talk of regime change.
The collision of a nationwide blackout, open calls for new Cuban leaders and talk of a “friendly takeover” has pushed a long‑simmering standoff into a far more volatile phase, with both Cuban authorities and U.S. lawmakers warning of the risks.
Blackout plunges Cuba into crisis
Cuba experienced a 100 percent collapse of its electrical system on March 16 after a “desconexión total” announced by state utility Unión Eléctrica, according to reporting that cites the company’s statement on the failure of the national grid. The utility described a complete shutdown that left the island in darkness and disrupted basic services.
One day later, Cuba was only slowly recovering electricity, with power returning unevenly across the country as repair crews tried to restart generation and transmission, according to accounts of the restoration effort that describe a fragile and overloaded system. Those reports say the blackout compounded an already deep energy crisis.
A separate institutional account described the event as an islandwide blackout that hit Cuba as it struggled with a worsening energy crunch, citing the Ministry of Energy and Mines saying there had been a “complete disconnection” of the electrical system. The ministry’s description matches the “desconexión total” language from Unión Eléctrica.
The United States Embassy in Havana told Americans there had been a disconnection of the national grid at 1:54 p.m. local time on March 16 that resulted in a complete loss of power, according to a security alert that urged people in Cuba to prepare for significant disruption. That alert from the Embassy in Cuba framed the outage as a nationwide security and safety concern.
Trump’s takeover talk moves from theory to crisis
Trump’s language about “taking” Cuba did not begin with the blackout. Weeks earlier he publicly floated the idea of a “friendly takeover of Cuba” after what he described as talks with Havana, according to an institutional account that says he raised that phrase in February and framed it as part of a diplomatic opening. That same reporting says Trump claimed Senator Marco Rubio was in discussions with Cuban leaders about the island’s future.
On March 16, as the blackout unfolded, Trump said he thought he would have the “honor” of “taking Cuba,” according to a news account that quotes him directly and notes that he had launched a war in Iran in February. The report presents his Cuba comments as part of a pattern of aggressive foreign policy moves.
A separate institutional summary states that Trump floated the idea of “taking Cuba in some form” a day before Cuban authorities publicly warned against any aggression, and that he had already spoken of a “friendly takeover of Cuba” the previous month. Those two moments show a steady escalation from a loosely defined “friendly” scenario to the more blunt language of taking the island.
On March 17, Trump again weighed “taking over” Cuba as the blackout deepened, saying he was considering action as a potential humanitarian response to electric failure and calling for “new people in charge,” according to a report that describes his comments as an answer to questions about a brewing humanitarian crisis.
Pressure campaign set before the lights went out
The blackout hit an island already under intensified U.S. pressure. On January 29, Trump declared a National Emergency to address “threats to the United States by the Government of Cuba,” according to Section 1 of a presidential action that formally invoked emergency powers. In that document the president wrote, “As President of the United States, I have an imperative duty to protect the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”
The next day, an Executive Order titled “Addressing Threats to the United States by the Government of Cuba” took effect at 12:01 a.m. EST on January 30, according to the official order. That directive laid out measures against the Government of Cuba and set the legal frame for further economic and political steps.
The Executive Order is one of the first Cuba moves listed in administration materials that also reference related initiatives on sites such as trumpcard.gov and trumprx.gov, which are cited in the presidential action as part of the broader Addressing Threats effort by the United States toward the Government of Cuba. These references show how the Cuba policy has been folded into a wider sanctions and emergency toolkit.
On the diplomatic front, the Trump Administration told Cuban officials on March 16 that President Miguel Díaz‑Canel “has to go” for meaningful progress in negotiations, according to a detailed account that says United States officials delivered that message during talks about easing tensions. That report describes the demand as reflecting “the general desire” of Trump and his team to see a change at the top of the Cuban government.
Grid failure, oil squeeze and disputed causes
Cuban authorities have given differing explanations for the blackout’s roots. One institutional report says Cuba stated that a massive outage was caused by a large power plant failure combined with generation shortfalls, and that crews later repaired that plant as part of a broader effort to reconnect the grid. That account focuses on technical breakdowns and aging infrastructure.
Another source argues that Cuba’s energy grid collapsed in response to a U.S. oil blockade, saying the system failed on March 17 amid tightening restrictions on fuel flows. That report cites prior deliveries of an estimated 35,000 barrels of oil a day from Venezuela to Cuba before the blockade, according to a summary that attributes the figure to the BBC and says those supplies have been sharply curtailed.
Yet a separate institutional report says Cuba restored power after a 29‑hour blackout on March 17, describing the outage as lasting 29 hours and linking it to the same grid failure. The timing in that account appears to conflict with the claim that the grid collapsed on March 17 because it presents that date as the moment of reconnection after the crisis.
There are also conflicting references to earlier failures. One report says two‑thirds of Cuba were left without power on March 4 because of a massive system failure, while the Embassy in Cuba alert and other institutional reporting describe an islandwide blackout on March 16 and a complete disconnection at 1:54 p.m. local time. Taken together, the sources suggest a pattern of repeated large‑scale outages rather than a single isolated event, but the exact sequencing and primary cause remain disputed based on available evidence.
Cuban and international backlash
Cuba’s president responded sharply to Trump’s latest remarks. On March 17 he warned that any aggression against the island would be met with “impregnable resistance,” according to a report that places his statement in direct response to Trump’s talk of taking Cuba. That source also notes that protests had been reported in Cuba the previous week, adding domestic unrest to the external pressure.
Trump, for his part, called Cuba a “very weakened nation right now” amid the grid collapse, according to a news account that quotes him using that phrase while discussing the blackout. In that same context he again presented the idea of taking Cuba as a way to help a struggling neighbor.
Russia has also weighed in. One report says Russian officials responded after Trump said he plans to “take” Cuba, describing his comments about having the “honor of taking Cuba” as the trigger for Moscow’s reaction. That account does not provide full details of the response but signals that any move on Cuba would draw scrutiny from other major powers.
Congress pushes back with war powers move
Inside the United States, Trump’s takeover talk has already prompted an institutional challenge. Democratic senators filed a war powers resolution in response to his stated goal of a Cuba takeover, according to an institutional account that describes the measure as an effort to limit unilateral military action. The report says the resolution is intended to force congressional approval before any use of force tied to regime change in Cuba.
Those same institutional sources describe the filing as a direct answer to Trump’s repeated comments about taking Cuba and to the broader Addressing Threats framework that has framed the Government of Cuba as a national security risk. The resolution signals that even as the Executive Branch expands emergency powers, Congress is asserting its own authority over decisions that could lead to war.
The war powers move comes alongside heightened rhetorical pressure. Another institutional report connects Trump and Rubio calling for new Cuban leaders with the latest nationwide blackout, tying the political push for leadership change to the humanitarian strain caused by the grid collapse. That linkage suggests that regime change arguments are being framed around the hardship inside Cuba.
Why Trump’s Cuba talk matters now
Trump’s comments about taking Cuba are unfolding against a backdrop of formal emergency powers, a collapsing grid and competing narratives over whether technical failures or a U.S. oil squeeze bear more responsibility for the blackout. His earlier suggestion of a “friendly takeover of Cuba” after talks involving Rubio and Cuban leaders, described in institutional reporting, has now hardened into repeated references to having the “honor” of taking the island.
At the same time, a separate institutional account that directly recounts Trump raising the possibility of a “friendly takeover of Cuba” shows how the idea has moved from a speculative talking point to a central feature of his response to the blackout. That direct account of his remarks illustrates how he has woven Cuba into a broader foreign policy narrative that already includes a war in Iran.
For Cubans, the immediate concern is more basic. Reports of food spoiling without refrigeration, hospitals stretched by power cuts and protests in the streets point to a population bearing the brunt of both internal system failures and external pressure. For the United States, the combination of emergency declarations, Executive Orders and war powers disputes raises questions about how far Washington is prepared to go in trying to force political change in Havana, and how much risk it is willing to accept in the process.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
