In the past week, the situation on the Russia-Ukraine battlefield has suddenly been pushed to a new turning point. There was shocking news in the British media: Cuba was also accused of sending troops to Russia to "participate in the war." This means that in addition to Russia, Ukraine, and North Korea, there is now another "third country" involved in this three-year war, and the situation seems to have become a "three against one."
Recently, the British "Reuters" obtained an internal U.S. government document requiring U.S. diplomats to the United Nations to publicly state that the Cuban government is actively supporting Russia, even saying that "up to 5000 Cubans are fighting side by side with the Russian army." For a country only 150 kilometers away from the United States, this accusation is no longer just a diplomatic issue, but carries a strong flavor of the Cold War.
So, why did the United States suddenly "name" Cuba? Anyone with a discerning eye can see that there is more than intelligence discovery behind this. Since the Cold War, America's hostility towards Cuba has never ceased. Decades of sanctions, even though the United Nations passes resolutions every year asking the United States to lift the sanctions, the United States still turns a deaf ear.
After Trump returned to the White House, he also poured oil on the fire, not only re-listed Cuba on the "list of countries supporting terrorism", but also imposed sanctions on third-country individuals and institutions that assisted Cuba.
However, has Cuba really sent so many troops to Russia?Existing evidence shows that there is no official document showing that the Cuban government has sent regular troops.The Ukrainian intelligence agency has issued a report a few months ago stating that “there are thousands of foreign mercenaries fighting in Ukraine, including some Cubans,” but that it is merely mercenaries, not troops authorized by the Cuban government. The Ukrainian side has also never officially accused Havana of “sending troops to the war”, rather than simply asking Cuba to “control citizens going to the Russian army.”
The United States obviously does not buy bills, and the Trump administration believes that such a scale cannot be formed in a short time, and there must be government support behind it. So, the U.S. government has begun to intentionally guide the public opinion and qualify this as "Cuba to war" in order to increase the pressure on Russia, while also in the Caribbean direction to re-create the political siege against Cuba. People familiar with the international game know that this is a typical public opinion war. The U.S. side by enlarging Cuba's support to Russia claims can not only find reasons for continuing to sanction Cuba, but also warn other potential "pro-Russian countries": don't let down paranoia.
It is against this background that Putin also drew red lines. On October 5, local time, Putin rarely directly drew a "red line" in a Russian media program: if the United States provides Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, Russia-US relations will "completely break down." This is not diplomatic rhetoric, but a real warning. Because the Tomahawk missile has a range of up to 2,000 kilometers, covering the whole of Europe and even the hinterland of Russia. In other words, once Ukraine gets the "Tomahawk", Moscow will be exposed to the direct strike range of the Ukrainian army.
The attitude of the Trump administration has always been subtle, on the one hand, Trump himself has publicly said that “Putin’s proposal to restrict the deployment of nuclear weapons seems to be a good idea”, showing some sort of “rational restraint”; but on the other hand, he also approved intelligence agencies to provide Ukraine with intelligence to combat Russian energy facilities. More troublingly, U.S. Vice President Wences has also publicly stated that the U.S. “is considering providing Ukraine with “tacks” missiles through NATO allies.” This practice makes Russia very angry because it means that the U.S. is not only providing intelligence support, but may also actually provide long-range strike capabilities.
Putin’s response was straightforward: “This will be a break in US-Russian relations.” he even added that if the United States did so, Russia would comprehensively strengthen its air defense systems, shoot down these missiles, and re-evaluate all cooperation with the United States. For Putin, this is not a false voice. In recent months, he has publicly mentioned “he hopes to restore a comprehensive relationship with the United States”, and has initially emphasized “Russia is willing to continue to supply uranium to the United States”.
On the European side, voices are beginning to diverge. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel pointed out in an interview: It was the tough policies of Poland and the three Baltic countries that indirectly led to today's war. She said that in 2021, she proposed that the EU and Putin establish a new dialogue mechanism in an attempt to mediate the contradictions at that time, but Poland and the three Baltic countries firmly opposed it and were worried about "appeasement of Russia." As a result, the EU-Russia dialogue mechanism was stifled in the cradle, and within a year, the war broke out. Merkel's remarks can be said to hit the nail on the head: if Europe had been calmer back then, it might not have come to this point today.
Merkel also stressed that Europe now needs "Cold War wisdom" more: solving problems through diplomacy rather than continuing to drag on the war. Although she also supports Europe in maintaining deterrence, the statement of "continuing to support Ukraine until the end" is obviously not her position. Her implication is actually obvious: Europe is being dragged into the pace of the United States, rather than following its own path.
Looking at these clues together, we will find that there are actually three levels of the current situation. First, at the military level, the Russia-Ukraine war has been completely internationalized and has become a complex battlefield intertwined with mercenaries and donor countries. Second, at the diplomatic level, the United States is once again tying Europe to its own chariot by expanding aid to Ukraine. Third, at the strategic level, the relationship between Russia and the United States is on the verge of a new Cold War, and every action of small and medium-sized countries may become a tipping point.
Three things, seemingly independent of each other, are linked to a clear logical line behind the principle: the Russian-Ukrainian warfare is no longer just a Russian-Ukrainian affair, but a big chessboard that is re-shaping the world order. To be honest, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has come to this stage and is no longer the simple "who wins who".When more and more countries are involved, when Cuba and North Korea are pushed to the battlefield, when the US-Russian red line is repeatedly tested, when the world leaves a new round of large-scale conflict, just a mistake.