If Marcos can’t leave in the coming days — that is, pack his suitcase, say goodbye to his family, catch a plane at Havana airport, and land in the United States in a matter of minutes — it will be because he obeyed the law. He has waited nine long years to be reunited with his father. He refused to pay a coyote (smuggler), take any migratory route through Central America, arrive in Mexico, and cross the border as an illegal immigrant. Now, that the day of his appointment at the Havana embassy has arrived, Donald Trump has announced that Cuba is one of the 12 countries whose citizens will be restricted from traveling to the United States starting this Monday. Marcos is nervous. His family and friends can’t believe it. No one knows exactly what will happen.

“They’re all devastated. It’s nine years of his life that no longer make sense,” says his friend Mabel Cuesta, a Cuban academic based in Houston, who shared the story with EL PAÍS. “He waited all this time to go through a legal process, just as the U.S. government requires, and the reward for that commitment to legality is to punish him.”

Marcos, 32, whose name has been changed to protect his legal process, went to the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana last Thursday to apply for an F2B visa, which is granted to unmarried sons and daughters over the age of 21. Although the application was approved, the visa has not yet been issued by consular officials. At 12:01 a.m. this Monday, everything changed for Cubans like him— both immigrants and non-immigrants — with B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas. “Now he’s in limbo; he might not be able to travel,” says Cuesta.

These are the consequences of the latest measure taken by the Trump administration to curb the entry of foreigners into the country — just as it had set out to do from its first day in the White House, and as it did during its first term. While in 2017, the travel bans targeted around eight countries, mostly Muslim-majority; now, the ban has been extended to others in Africa and the Middle East, and, in the Americas, to Haiti, Cuba, and Venezuela. The Cuban and Venezuelan diasporas — particularly affected since the Republican’s re-election — did not hesitate to support Trump in the November elections.

Regarding Cuba, Trump stated in his recent announcement that it is a state sponsor of terrorism, whose government “does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States,” has “historically” refused to accept the repatriation of its nationals, and, on top of that, has a 7.69% “overstay rate” for B-1/B-2 visas and an 18.75% rate for F, M, and J visas.

As for Venezuela, Trump offered a similar justification: that the country “lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents;” does not have screening and vetting measures; has “historically” refused to accept back nationals; and has a 9.83% overstay rate for B-1/B-2 visas.

‘I hope the community is feeling this as yet another blow’

The travel restriction on Cubans and Venezuelans comes after the suspension of humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which had granted them certain benefits in the United States. Little by little, the U.S. government has stripped them of work permits, legal protections, and any form of assistance they previously had access to.

Cathy Camionero, a 54-year-old Venezuelan living in Virginia, believes that more than a measure to ensure “national security,” as Trump claims, this is a “racist action, meant to segregate and justify measures that don’t respect due process,” she says.

Camionero says that many, like her, won’t be able to welcome visiting relatives from Venezuela this year — relatives who typically attend their children’s graduations. “This is a time of vacations and graduations,” she says. “Many of us in this country wait for our loved ones, our parents, our grandparents, to come and witness the graduations of our children, who grew up here or graduated here. Now they can’t come celebrate with us.”

Still, she’s not surprised by this measure, because her community has been among the most battered since Trump came to power. “One day he takes one thing from us, the next day something else. He wants to deport Venezuelans without negotiating due process, yet at the same time he negotiates with [Venezuelan President] Nicolás Maduro. There’s a lot of inconsistency in this government,” she argues.

That’s why some feel this measure — like other anti-immigrant policies from the White House — feels like a betrayal of the communities that voted for Trump, who now feel the president has turned his back on them. Cuesta says it’s “yet another abandonment,” and “another betrayal.”

The Cuban-American community, to which Cuesta belongs, traditionally votes Republican, and “this president, since taking office, has done nothing but continue to marginalize the most vulnerable segments of the Cuban American family — that is, those who are still in Cuba or those who have arrived in recent years.”

“It’s yet another demonstration of how, in this white supremacist order, any alternative subject who demonstrates otherness — and that’s the case in Cuba, even if they don’t want to admit it — will be marginalized and basically put at a disadvantage,” the academic says. “I hope the community is experiencing it for what it is, as another blow to the possibility of reinventing ourselves in exile.”

An ‘arbitrary and profoundly cruel’ measure

The decision to ban and restrict travel from a dozen countries apparently came after an attack by an Egyptian citizen on a group advocating for the release of hostages in Gaza. Although Egypt is not on the list of restricted countries, the incident was enough for Trump to once again lash out at those trying to come to the United States. “We don’t want them,” he said in a video announcing the new measure, which has thrown tourists, regular travelers, students, and family members into uncertainty. As a result, it’s been opposed by several groups and organizations.

“We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens who won’t be able to see their grandparents, aunts, and uncles, no exceptions,” María José Espinosa, a foreign policy expert and executive director of the Center for Engagement and Advocacy in the Americas (CEDA), tells EL PAÍS. “These people have visas valid for five years. They are people with legal documentation, who have come to the country to visit their families or to participate in academic, commercial, and cultural exchanges.”

According to Espinosa, recent history shows that travel bans, such as those implemented under the Trump administration, “have not proven to be effective tools in preventing real threats of terrorism. Rather, they have isolated the United States and weakened its position in the world.” In addition to arguing the measure “arbitrary and profoundly cruel,” the CEDA director goes further, insisting that it is also legally confusing and “promotes chaos.”

“The proclamation states that those who already have visas will be able to keep them. A State Department spokesperson said that even if people already have a visa, they won’t be able to use it while the proclamation is in effect,” she says. “It’s curious that after so many years of preparing this proclamation, the final version is so confusing.”

Indeed, the measure has caused anxiety and confusion among many who were planning to travel to the U.S. soon. Although the announcement states that people with valid visas are exempt from the ban — as are permanent residents, athletes, and Afghan beneficiaries of the Special Immigrant Visa program — no one feels truly safe from the reach of Trump’s order.

“When news like this happens, it’s inevitable to feel concern and unease,” says a young Cuban woman who asked to remain anonymous and is about to start a PhD at the University of Pennsylvania. “I’ve always felt that anything could affect my entry into the United States. Nothing guarantees entry, even if you have an approved visa.”

Although she has been concerned about her future since the start of Trump’s second term, she says that now “the atmosphere feels more tense than usual.” “My status as a citizen of one of the countries included on this and other lists puts me in a position of absolute vulnerability and instability,” she insists.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

In August 2023, the names of the first Cuban soldiers serving with Russia on the front lines of the war against Ukraine became known: Andorf Antonio Velázquez García and Álex Rolando Vega Díaz, two 19-year-old recruits in uniform, their faces beardless and frightened, appeared in a video pleading for help after being hired from Cuba to supposedly carry out construction work. They said they were promised a monthly salary of over $2,000 and that they would be guaranteed a Russian passport. Without understanding how, they ended up in the combat zone. “It’s all been a scam,” they stated at the time. “We need your help to get out of here.”

These statements had a strong impact in Cuba and fueled suspicions in a sector of society that the Havana government was silently facilitating the deployment of mercenaries to the war, supporting its long-standing partner in the conflict. Last May, the Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense (GUR) released an estimate that puts the number of Cubans mobilized since the beginning of the Russian invasion in 2022 at 20,000.

According to Ukrainian intelligence data — obtained from the analysis of foreign passports of mercenaries who signed contracts with the Russian army, to which they had access — this is the largest Cuban intervention abroad since the Angolan war in the mid-1970s. Between 6,000 and 7,000 Cubans are currently on the battlefield, according to the same sources, the second -largest contingent after the more than 10,000 soldiers sent by North Korea. Ukraine estimates that between 200 and 300 Cubans have died in the war.

Some of the stories of deceased Cubans have spread on social media: last year, for example, that of 21-year-old Raibel Palacio, who died after a Ukrainian drone attack; 26-year-old Yansiel Morejón, a former boxer and teacher; and 31-year-old Michael Valido, who hoped to return to the island soon. There are many more faces and names. There are others who have never been heard from again. Today, for example, nothing is known about Andorf and Álex, whether they returned home after their one-year contracts expired, or if they lost their lives on the battlefield. EL PAÍS attempted to contact their families but has not received a response.

Ukrainian intelligence had already revealed a list of 253 passports belonging to Cuban recruits in 2023. Since then, they say, the numbers have increased. The new report claims that more than 1,000 arrived between March and May, of whom 38 have already lost their lives.

“There is no doubt that the Cuban regime is actively participating in the war against Ukraine, facilitating the active recruitment of mercenaries, and sending its own security troops,” Maryan Zablotskyy, a member of the Ukrainian legislative assembly who presented the report in the United States, told EL PAÍS. According to this information, 40% of the Cuban recruits are part of the government’s military apparatus. “The depth of their knowledge is indisputable. The rest are people who may or may not know what is coming,” Zablotskyy asserts.

Ukrainian intelligence’s work with identity documents has yielded other data: the youngest Cuban to have gone to war was 18 years old, and the oldest was 62. The average age is 38, and there are people from virtually every province in the country. “Cuban mercenaries are offered $2,500 a month,” estimates Zablotskyy. “Based on signing bonuses in Russia and other countries, the Cuban government can easily get $50,000 per mercenary.” From the testimony of some soldiers, it is also known that there have been irregularities with the promised payments. “In all cases, those who sign contracts with the Russian army receive a bonus. Since we know that sometimes these bonuses do not reach the recruits, it is very likely that the Cuban government receives them,” adds the legislator.

A trip to war by “deception”

The names Elena Shuvalova and Dayana became popular in Cuba some time ago. They spread by word of mouth among young people desperate to get away somewhere, no matter where. Their WhatsApp contacts or social media profiles, even the ads they made offering “packages” to travel to Russia, spread like wildfire in Cuban neighborhoods. According to several testimonies, these female recruiters offered contracts in Russian, which people signed without even understanding what was on them. For a one-year contract, they were guaranteed about $2,500 a month, a Russian passport, and free travel.

Many flew to Moscow from Varadero Airport in Matanzas without a visa, as Russia is one of the few countries that doesn’t require this procedure for Cuban citizens. A Cuban who has lived in that country for years, who prefers to conceal his identity, told EL PAÍS that recruits are taken to a military police station to sign the contract, and “when they receive the initial payment, they take the money they spent on the ticket.” “The contract with the Russian army is open, anyone can sign it, and if you’re a foreigner, you can apply for Russian citizenship after a year of service,” he explains.

Amid the economic crisis that has fueled the largest recent exodus from Cuba, this seems to have become a way out for those who didn’t have enough money to reach the United States or to try their luck in another country. However, many of those who have gone claim to have been deceived. “They all claim not to understand the seriousness of war once they face it,” says Zablotskyy. At first, they are told they will be going to work as construction workers, laborers, or security guards.

This is what allegedly happened to Frank Dario Jarrosay Manfuga, a 36-year-old musician and former geography teacher from Guantánamo Bay, in eastern Cuba. Last year, he traveled to Russia to work in construction and ended up enlisting in the army. In March, he was captured by the Ukrainians. In the prison where he remains, he was visited twice by Orlando Gutiérrez Boronat, secretary general of the Cuban Resistance Assembly (ARC), who has denounced the presence of Cubans in the war. Boronat told this newspaper that, on Frank’s first day at the Russian military training center in Ukraine, he saw four Cubans die before his eyes during an attack in Donetsk.

“I took the step out of necessity, not for anything else,” Frank told him during the interview. Today, the Havana government won’t accept him back, and the Moscow authorities don’t recognize him as a mercenary. Frank, however, maintains that he prefers to remain imprisoned rather than return to the misery he experienced on the island, according to Boronat.

“You don’t have to go to war and believe false promises”

In May of last year, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel wished Russian leader Vladimir Putin “success” in the “special military operation” on Ukrainian territory. This was confirmation of Havana’s support for Moscow since the beginning of the offensive in 2022. It is not in Havana’s best interest to compromise its historic ally, one of the few that has helped sustain the country’s depressed economy in recent years. Between 2006 and 2019, Russia lent Cuba $2.3 billion. In 2014, Putin forgave 90% of Cuba’s $35 billion debt to Moscow. Amid the country’s constant power outages, news broke of a $65 million Russian loan to purchase oil and a $2 million donation to repair the country’s aging power plants. Other agreements refer to investment and tourism promotion.

“Russia has offered some advantages to Cuba, but it expects tangible benefits for them as well,” says economist Ricardo Torres, a former researcher at the Center for the Study of the Cuban Economy and a professor at the American University in Washington. “During the war, I think the Russians appreciated the diplomatic support Cuba has given them, at the UN and in other international forums. The question is, if relations between Russia and the United States improve substantially, and the war ends, what Cuba can offer loses value.”

Cuba, so far, has offered its silence and covert support on international stages. At the beginning of the invasion, however, it denied sending mercenaries to Russia. Following numerous reports of a trafficking network from the island, the government imprisoned 17 people apparently involved. A statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed that “Cuba is not part of the war in Ukraine,” and the government made it clear that a crime of “mercenaryism” could carry up to 30 years of imprisonment. However, it later emerged that the Cuban authorities had released the detainees.

Therefore, a widespread theory is that the recruitment of Cubans to go to war has official complicity. “Of course, no recruitment of this kind would have occurred without the explicit approval of the Cuban government,” says Zablotskyy, who last month denounced the situation in Brussels, at the headquarters of the European Parliament. “There should be sanctions against the regime for its actions. At the very least, I think it’s reasonable for the European Union to cancel the regime’s funding,” he maintains.

Zablotskyy also insists that the cost of going to war is too high for Cubans, who should think twice before taking the step. “The mortality rate among Cubans is very high. The Russians later don’t participate in prisoner exchanges with the Cubans,” he says. “The Cuban government also doesn’t recognize mercenaries and doesn’t ask for the return of those captured. And the Russians break their promises to release anyone within a year. Any Cuban who signs the contract stays indefinitely until the Russians decide to let them go. You don’t have to go to war and believe false promises.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

President Donald Trump has issued a blanket travel ban that will block people from 12 countries from entering the United States. Arguing that citizens of those countries pose “national security risks,” he has revived one of his most controversial policies from his first term—the “Muslim ban”—and like that policy, this proclamation could face several legal challenges.

History of Trump’s travel bans

During his first term, Trump implemented an order banning Muslims from entering the United States. It aimed to limit the entry of foreign nationals from certain countries into the United States under the pretext of national security. Commonly known as the “Muslim ban,” the order suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for four months, indefinitely halted the entry of Syrian refugees, and temporarily banned the entry of citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen — many of which are mentioned in the new order. The Department of Homeland Security began detaining travelers and revoking thousands of visas, causing confusion and legal challenges across the country.

The legal challenges led to the issuance of a nationwide temporary restraining order, and the Ninth Circuit upheld the suspension of key parts of the order. Over time, the Trump administration issued revised orders, culminating in Presidential Proclamation 9645, which was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. President Joe Biden formally revoked the travel bans in 2021. However, upon returning to office in 2025, Trump reinstated a broader version through Executive Order 14161, reigniting debates about immigration and national security.

Under Order 14161, he implemented this new proclamation that includes several countries that are considered a threat to national security.

In a video, the president linked this action to last Sunday’s terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, and said it highlighted the dangers posed by people who remained in the country after their visas expired. However, the suspect in the attack is from Egypt, a country not on the list of countries subject to the travel ban.

Which countries did he ban from traveling to the US?

In the executive order, Trump states that he has “determined to partially restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following seven countries”:

• Burundi
• Cuba
• Laos
• Sierra Leone
• Togo
• Turkmenistan
• Venezuela

He also placed five countries on his list of “Full Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern” They are as follows:

• Afghanistan
• Burma (Myanmar)
• Chad
• Congo
• Equatorial Guinea
• Eritrea
• Haiti
• Iran
• Libya
• Somalia
• Sudan
• Yemen

These restrictions will apply to anyone from these countries who is outside the United States on the effective date of the order and who does not have a valid visa on that date.

What are the exceptions?

The order states that it will not apply to individuals who are legal permanent residents of the United States, those with dual nationality, and any athlete or member of an athletic team traveling for any major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State.

There is also an exception for foreign nationals traveling on the following valid nonimmigrant visas:

• A-1
• A-2
• C-2
• C-3
• G-1
• G-2
• G-3
• G-4
• NATO-1
• NATO-2
• NATO-3
• NATO-4
• NATO-5
• NATO-6

Similarly, it applies to individuals with immigrant family and adoption visas (with proof of identity and family relationship).

• IR-1/CR-1
• IR-2/CR-2
• IR-5
• IR-3
• IR-4
• IH-3
• IH-4

Likewise, the ban does not apply to special visas from Afghanistan, special immigrant visas for US government employees, and immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities suffering persecution in Iran.

When does the ban take effect?

The travel ban on the aforementioned countries will take effect on Monday, June 9, at 12:01 a.m. Unlike the order that banned Muslims from entering the country, which took effect immediately, this one has been given several days to avoid problems at the country’s points of entry.

What happens if they try to travel to the United States?

When the “Muslim ban” was implemented, people were denied boarding on flights to the United States. Some were stranded in another country while in transit. Dozens were detained at airports without access to their cell phones or legal assistance. This could happen with this new measure, but it is expected to have less impact at domestic airports due to the time given for the action to be implemented.