FM Wang rejects interference in Havana’s affairs as Cuba signals openness to renewed cooperation with Washington. On Wednesday, Chinese Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi expressed Beijing’s unwavering support for Havana in defending its sovereignty and national security.

During a meeting with Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez held in Beijing, Wang voiced his country’s firm rejection of unjustified interference by external forces in the internal affairs of the Caribbean nation. He noted that Latin American situation is undergoing complex and profound changes and underscored China’s opposition to attempts to deprive the Cuban people of their right to existence and development. China’s top diplomat emphasized that defending justice is a longstanding tradition of Beijing’s foreign policy. He said China is willing to work with Cuba to implement the agreements reached by the leaders of both states, provide assistance within its means and strengthen friendly bilateral relations.

Wang also expressed China’s readiness to work with like-minded nations to reinforce solidarity among Global South countries and safeguard regional and global peace.

For his part, Rodriguez expressed gratitude for the involvement and sensitivity shown by China on issues related to Cuba, highlighting its decisive contribution to strengthening bilateral relations.

Both diplomats acknowledged the special and strategic nature of the historical ties linking the two socialist nations. The dialogue underscored their mutual commitment to cooperation and joint development, which are core elements of both countries’ foreign policies.

Earlier, on Jan. 29, U.S. President Donald Trump declared a national emergency over an alleged threat to U.S. national security originating from Cuba. He signed an executive order allowing Washington to impose additional tariffs on countries that supply oil to the Caribbean nation.

Trump later said Cuba was “very close to collapse” after losing access to money and oil from Venezuela following the U.S. military attack on Jan. 3 in Caracas, which culminated in the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

In response to these measures, Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel described the new U.S. tariff action targeting Cuba’s oil supply as “fascist, criminal and genocidal.”

On Sunday, Trump said the United States was negotiating with Cuban leaders to reach an agreement, though he provided no further details. The following day, Rodriguez said the Cuban government is willing to “reactivate” and “expand” bilateral cooperation with the United States to address transnational threats such as terrorism.

Since Dec. 3, when the U.S. began a naval blockade against Venezuela, Cuba has not received a single drop of fuel- This situation has had a broad impact on public health, the economy, transportation, and electricity generation.

Diaz-Canel denounced an intensification of U.S. pressure as part of an “economic suffocation” strategy, which is aimed at sowing fear among oil shipping companies and international suppliers. Nevertheless, his administration is working to ensure that this new form of external aggression has the least possible impact on the Cuban people and economy.

“Cuba will not renounce receiving fuel. It is a sovereign right,” Diaz-Canel stressed, adding that surrender is not an option and making clear that the U.S. has no right to impose its economic warfare on the Caribbean island or on third countries.

The Ministers Council approved guidelines for a contingency plan designed to confront attempts at economic strangulation. Diaz-Canel acknowledged that while temporary restrictions on consumption and increased energy savings will be necessary, those measures will not be permanent.

The Cuban government’s response is based on a comprehensive strategy to transform the energy matrix, including the recovery of electricity generation capacity — more than 900 megawatts have been restored — the use of domestic energy sources, increased storage capacity affected by the accident at the Matanzas supertanker base, higher national crude oil production, electricity generation from associated petroleum gas and the development of a national shipping fleet.

In 2025, Cuban authorities completed the construction of 49 photovoltaic solar parks, adding about 1,000 megawatts to the country’s energy supply. Currently, those parks are generating 38% of the national energy, at a time when Cuba has been unable for several weeks to rely on distributed generation due to fuel shortages.

Diaz-Canel said 5,000 photovoltaic systems of 2 kilowatts each are being installed in an equal number of homes that previously lacked electricity, which will allow Cuba to reach 100% electrification.

Another 5,000 photovoltaic systems are also being installed at prioritized service centers, including maternity homes, nursing homes, senior centers, polyclinics, residences for vulnerable children and bank branches, among others.

Authorities are also distributing another 10,000 photovoltaic systems to workers in the education and health sectors, while new investments in wind power generation capacity are underway. The Cuban government also expects to increase production of associated petroleum gas and supply manufactured gas to 20,000 new customers in Havana.

The Cuban president recalled that successful tests were conducted in December for refining crude oil and producing derivatives, as well as for acquiring engines capable of using that fuel.

While none of these actions alone solves the problem immediately, they allow for changes in the energy matrix and help prevent the situation from becoming more severe. “The will to resist, recover and create will include expanding local production of goods and services,” Diaz-Canel said.

His remarks come amid a growing diplomatic offensive in international forums, where Cuba has systematically denounced the economic, social and humanitarian impacts of the U.S. blockade, which has been in place for 64 years as a policy of “collective punishment”.

“What does it mean to prevent fuel from reaching a country?” Diaz-Canel asked, before pointing out that it is a measure that directly affects the lives of millions of people. He reiterated, however, that surrender is not an option and that Cuba will not renounce its sovereign right to receive fuel.

In his most recent report to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez denounced that between March 2024 and February 2025, damages caused by the U.S. blockade totaled US$7.5 billion, representing a 49% increase over the previous period. Cumulative losses now exceed US$171 billion.

They were accused of financing terrorism, murder, torture, and illegal seizure of power. On Thursday, the Baku Military Court announced that Azerbaijan’s judiciary sentenced several former leaders of the dissolved Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh to life imprisonment, following the 2023 military operation in the enclave.

Among those convicted are former Karabakh President Araik Harutyunyan, former Defense Minister Levon Mnatsakanyan, former Foreign Minister David Babayan, former Parliament President David Ishkhanyan, and Army Commander David Manukyan.

Arkady Gukasyan and Bako Sahakyan, former Presidents of the self-proclaimed republic, received 20-year prison sentences because they are over 65, the age that prevents life imprisonment.

Former Karabakh Prime Minister Ruben Vardanyan also faces a life sentence, although his case was separate, and none of the defendants have pleaded guilty. The convicted officials were accused of financing “terrorism, murder, torture, and illegal seizure of power.”

Under Azerbaijani law, all can appeal the rulings issued by the military court. Meanwhile, Vardanyan stated that the trial aimed to punish those who aided Nagorno-Karabakh and its Armenian population.

Nagorno-Karabakh was created in 1991 following a referendum supported by 99.98% of the Armenian population. The republic was dissolved on January 1, 2024, by decree of former Karabakh President Samvel Shakhramyan.

On Wednesday, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev thanked U.S. President Donald Trump for his “contribution to peace” between Azerbaijan and Armenia during the presentation of the Zayed Human Fraternity Prize.

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated that peace with Azerbaijan is the most “reliable guarantee” of security and acknowledged the weakening of relations with the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

Pashinyan emphasized that the 2025 peace agreement is an “incredible achievement,” and that the awarding of the Zayed Prize confirms that Armenia and Azerbaijan have put the conflict behind them.

The rationale behind Golden Dome’s mandate for space-based boost-phase defense made some sense. If orbiting interceptors could hit an enemy missile very early in flight—before it could deploy countermeasures—they would avoid the Achilles’ heel of defense systems that target missiles in midcourse. But now the Pentagon and contractors are proposing to also use space-based interceptors for midcourse defense, which would jack up the cost while defeating the purpose of going to space in the first place. Today’s Ground-based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, system and its 44 ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California are designed to intercept warheads during their 30-minute travel through space. But in outer space, lightweight decoys follow the same trajectory as the heavier warheads—preventing the defense from identifying and destroying the true warhead. Any country that can build a long-range missile and nuclear warhead can also build decoys and other countermeasures, creating a defensive problem that remains unsolved despite decades of work. As a result, the GMD system would almost certainly be ineffective against an actual attack. One response to this problem is to focus on a different portion of a missile’s flight: its boost phase, when its rocket motors are burning and before it deploys countermeasures. But the boost phase lasts only about three minutes. The only way to station interceptors close enough to every possible launch point in “peer, near-peer, and rogue” countries is to put them in space.

And “to station” is a misnomer that conceals the true difficulty and massive resource consumption of creating an effective boost-phase defense. Each interceptor satellite has a very brief time to accelerate to reach a boosting missile, requiring the satellites to be closely spaced to provide a defense without gaps. And because satellites move in orbit, those in position for an intercept will quickly move away and must be replaced by others moving in. (This simulation helps show why.) To ensure that at least two interceptors are in position to reach a single attacking missile during its short boost time, the system would need several thousand interceptors in orbit. Defending against a salvo of 10 missiles would require a constellation 10 times that size—that is, tens of thousands of satellites. Defending against a full Russian or Chinese attack would require hundreds of thousands of satellites. And that would be for a missile burn time of three minutes. During the Cold War, the U.S. and Soviet Union demonstrated that they could reduce the burn times of their solid-fueled missiles. If the U.S. deploys a space-based boost-phase system, one should expect Russia, China, and North Korea to work to reduce their burn times enough to effectively eliminate the possibility of boost phase intercepts. The practical difficulties of boost-phase intercept have led the Pentagon and some advocates to talk about using space-based systems for midcourse defense instead. This would give the interceptors more time to reach their targets—perhaps 15 minutes, rather than less than three. That would reduce the total number of interceptors needed to have one or two in place to reach a single target in space at any time.

But this switch would simply return to the first show-stopping problem: countermeasures. These systems cannot distinguish warheads from decoys, regardless of whether the interceptors are based on the ground or in space. Attempting to intercept all the warheads and decoys each missile releases would vastly increase the number of interceptors required in orbit. And it is far more expensive to field a midcourse defense in space. In addition to the costs of building and launching thousands of interceptors, satellites have a limited lifetime, which depends on their altitude. Midcourse interceptors would all need to be replaced roughly every ten years. The cost of building and launching the satellites would come due again and again. The Pentagon appears poised to spend enormous amounts of money only to end up where it started: with an ineffective mid-course defense. Policymakers must beware of the promise of high-priced fixes that solve nothing.