For decades, Cuba has usually entered the American conversation through the lens of Cold War history, communist rule, or economic sanctions. Now the State Department is arguing that the story runs much deeper. According to a newly released report, the Cuban government has spent more than 60 years carrying out a long-term campaign of espionage, political influence, and ideological subversion inside the United States—one that officials say continues today.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose parents emigrated from Cuba, promoted the report on social media, calling attention to what he described as the regime’s long-running efforts to undermine the United States from within.
“For more than six decades, the Cuban regime has been the leading sponsor of radical leftism and Third Worldism in the United States,” Rubio wrote on X. He added that the State Department is exposing what it considers the full history of Cuban espionage and subversion, arguing that Americans deserve to understand the scope of those activities.
Now, here’s where the report really digs in. It doesn’t simply accuse Cuba of gathering intelligence. It argues that Havana developed an entirely different strategy—one built around infiltration, influence, proxy organizations, and ideological warfare instead of conventional military power.
According to the report, Cuba understood from the beginning that it could never defeat the United States through direct conflict. Instead, officials say the Castro government invested in intelligence networks, cultivated political movements, recruited sympathizers, and supported revolutionary causes that could weaken the country internally over time.
For more than six decades, the Cuban regime has been the leading sponsor of radical leftism and Third Worldism in the United States.
The State Department is exposing the full history of Cuban espionage and subversion in our country.
The American people deserve to know.…
— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) July 20, 2026
The report describes that strategy as a sustained campaign of attrition, alleging that Cuba infiltrated parts of the U.S. government, developed relationships with activists across multiple generations, and played a significant role in supporting left-wing revolutionary movements both in the United States and throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Rubio echoed that argument during remarks delivered last week at an international conference on political terrorism. He said Cuba’s intelligence and ideological network helped build elements of the modern far left in both the United States and Latin America and remains connected to activist movements operating across the West.
Stay with me, because the report goes even further.
It argues that Cuba’s influence extended beyond espionage into shaping political narratives. According to the document, Havana became a central force in promoting a form of Marxism focused less on traditional economic revolution and more on opposition to the United States and Western institutions.
The report claims that while Cuba’s domestic economic system has struggled for decades, its efforts to influence political movements abroad achieved far greater success. It specifically points to recent periods of unrest in the United States, asserting that events including the 2020 George Floyd protests, the rise of Antifa, and pro-Palestinian activism on college campuses can, in varying degrees, be connected to Cuban influence or ideological support.
The report also highlights Cuba’s public messaging during the nationwide protests that followed George Floyd’s death. According to the State Department, Cuban officials and state media repeatedly portrayed the unrest as evidence that the United States lacked credibility when criticizing Cuba’s own human rights record.
Another major theme running through the report is education and culture. Rather than relying primarily on violence, the State Department argues that Cuba sought to influence future generations by encouraging ideas that would weaken confidence in American institutions. The report contends that universities, nonprofit organizations, activist groups, and media organizations became environments where those ideas could spread over time.
The document characterizes this as a strategy designed not to defeat America from the outside, but to encourage internal division and political conflict from within. It argues that ideological influence became a more effective long-term weapon than military confrontation ever could have been.
