Seguir leyendo

Con sus 80 años, 11 de ellos como presidente de Brasil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva es uno de los líderes democráticos más experimentados del mundo.

En una entrevista con EL PAÍS, el líder sindical elegido tres veces para encabezar el mayor país de América Latina puso voz al asombro de muchos ciudadanos por la actual situación geopolítica: “Es como si el mundo fuera un navío a la deriva, sin ninguna institución que oriente el comportamiento civilizatorio de las naciones”.

Seguir leyendo

Surquillo (Lima, Perú) está de moda y todo indica que no dejará de estarlo.

Así lo aseguran quienes trabajan en este distrito limeño, que en los últimos años ha despegado de la mano de su gastronomía.

Nuevos restaurantes lo sitúan ahora como el lugar en el que abrir experiencias culinarias innovadoras y menús degustación, pero lo que realmente lo distingue es que estas apuestas contemporáneas conviven con los menús del día de siempre, las carretillas de comida callejera y los mercados icónicos que desde hace décadas marcan sus calles.

Ese contraste es lo que ha generado que los turistas que llegan a Lima atraídos por una de las mejores gastronomías del mundo sumen Surquillo a su lista de sitios imprescindibles para visitar (y probar).

Seguir leyendo

El Gobierno ha reconocido que el derrame que afectó gran parte del Golfo de México desde febrero se originó en instalaciones de Petróleos Mexicanos, tal y como adelantó EL PAIS el 30 de marzo.

Tras semanas de asegurar que no había evidencias de que hubiera algún problema en las plataformas petroleras de la zona, el grupo interdisciplinario creado para atajar esta problemática ambiental ha reconocido que “existe evidencia de que hubo un derrame de hidrocarburo en las inmediaciones de la plataforma de Abkatún Cantarell de Pemex”, aunque aún “no se tiene aún un estimado del volumen total”.

Tres funcionarios de la petrolera han sido separados de su cargo.

EL PAÍS reveló que, de acuerdo a diversas fuentes públicas, el buque Árbol Grande, contratado por Petróleos Mexicanos para reparar ductos submarinos, pasó 200 horas sobre un oleoducto en activo identificado con la clave Old AK C, que va del campo de Cantarell a la terminal marítima de Dos Bocas.

El Gobierno asegura que conoció estos datos el pasado 3 de abril.

Seguir leyendo

Venezuela sigue dando pasos para la normalización diplomática tras casi una década aislada de organismos internacionales bajo las sanciones de Estados Unidos al régimen chavista.

El Fondo Monetario Internacional ha anunciado este jueves que reanuda las relaciones con Venezuela tras siete años suspendidas.

Seguir leyendo

By Dr.

Isaac Newton News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Thurs.

April 16, 2026: The minister finishes speaking.

The outcome is already clear.

People notice, but their reactions fade into silence.

Empty praise follows, smooth and practiced, covering what remains unspoken.

No one objects.

No one corrects.

Certainty is performed rather than examined.

In small states, leadership is revealed not in open failure, but in the quiet habits that hide it.

In closely connected societies, distance does not exist.

Professional, family, and social ties overlap.

Every word carries consequence.

Speaking honestly can affect future opportunities, so truth competes with caution.

What is said depends as much on timing and tone as on facts.

Silence becomes a powerful presence.

Insight often lives in what is implied rather than stated.

Over time, leaders come to represent more than their role.

They embody stability, identity, and shared history.

Questioning them can feel like challenging the community itself.

Evidence may remain visible, but its influence weakens.

Loyalty protects relationships, sometimes at the cost of judgment.

Leaders become symbols, not just decision makers.

Where Truth Retreats and Distortion Grows Truth does not disappear, but it moves.

In private spaces, it is direct and unfiltered.

Decisions are questioned, mistakes are named, and alternatives are explored.

In public, language becomes careful and controlled.

By the time information reaches leadership, it has been softened.

What remains feels complete but lacks depth.

Approval increases while understanding narrows.

This pattern is not unique to small states, but it intensifies within them.

Pressure builds quietly as honest insight is reduced before it is shared.

Over time, reality asserts itself.

When it does, it arrives with force.

In tightly connected systems, the effects of error move quickly.

Decisions shape economic outcomes, public confidence, and institutional strength with little delay.

Small distortions grow fast.

There is little distance between action and consequence.

The Discipline of Truth in Leadership Leaders who want clarity must create it.

When they respond well to difficult truths, they signal that honesty matters.

People adjust.

Fear begins to loosen.

Clear standards help separate personal loyalty from performance.

Broader input brings sharper perspective, especially from those who are not dependent on approval.

Discipline keeps perception aligned with reality.

A simple test reveals much.

Ask three people who do not rely on you, “What am I getting wrong?” Listen fully.

If answers are cautious or identical, truth is still restricted.

If the response is uncomfortable, it is likely closer to reality.

Loyalty can become a form of currency.

It can grant access and influence.

When it outweighs competence, performance declines quietly.

Agreement remains visible, but systems weaken.

When accuracy is valued instead, standards recover and trust strengthens.

Leadership is defined by the environment it creates.

In strong systems, people speak openly.

Information moves without distortion.

Decisions reflect the full picture.

In these spaces, what is heard carries meaning, not performance.

Every system eventually meets reality.

Some encounter it early and adjust.

Others delay until correction becomes unavoidable.

The defining question for any leader is simple: Did the truth reach you in time to change what mattered or are you satisfied with chasing pretty butterflies over deadly waterfalls?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Dr.

Isaac Newton is a leadership strategist, educator, and institutional advisor focused on governance, institutional transformation, and ethical leadership.

With training from Princeton, Harvard, and Columbia, his work integrates leadership research, psychology, public policy, and faith-informed ethics.

As coauthor of Steps to Good Governance, he has designed and delivered seminars for corporate boards, educators, public officials, and community leaders across the Caribbean and internationally.

His work equips leaders to navigate complexity with clarity, act with courage, and build systems that endure.

RELATED: Church And Politics In The Caribbean And Africa: Prophetic Voice, Public Trust, And The Moral Future Of Nations

Bogotá, Colombia – Noticias Caracol, one of the largest media outlets in Colombia, released a statement on March 20 regarding an investigation into two of its lead journalists, Ricardo Orrego and Jorge Alfredo Vargas, following allegations of sexual abuse against some of their female colleagues.

The allegations sent shockwaves through the media industry, in part because of the reputation both men had built over their careers.

For decades, Orrego was the voice of Colombian sports, leading coverage of multiple World Cups and other international sporting competitions, while Vargas had been the charismatic anchor of Caracol’s prime-time news show for over 20 years.  Days after announcing the investigation, the network sent a follow-up message: both men had been removed from their positions despite them denying the allegations. Soon after, Orrego published a statement from his lawyer on X, saying the firing was “one sided” and that he would comply with any investigation.

Vargas also published a statement saying he was stepping away from Caracol while saying he maintained “respect” and “good behavior” while working as a journalist.

The firings marked a pivotal moment for Colombian newsrooms and inspired dozens of female journalists to come forward and share their own experiences of sexual harassment, sparking a massive wave of solidarity under the hashtags #YoTeCreoColega (I believe you, colleague) and #MeTooColombia, while also exposing a deeply-rooted culture of harassment and abuse.

Fear: a reason for sharing an open secret Before social media changed the news landscape, the men and women appearing on Colombian television screens to report the news became trusted icons for aspiring journalists, including myself.  As their star-power rose, questioning them became more difficult.  Longtime Colombian journalist Yolanda Ruiz wrote in her column for Spanish newspaper El País that the industry “has prioritized the ratings of its stars over the dignity of female journalists,” creating a “throne of impunity that is finally beginning to crumble.” “It cannot be a surprise when the ‘open secret’ finally explodes,” she wrote.  The harassment isn’t just contained to the television industry either.

According to a 2020 study by the Observatorio de la Democracia at Universidad de los Andes, which surveyed 158 female reporters, six out of 10 participants reported being victims of gender-based violence in their workplaces, while a staggering 77.9% stated they were aware of this kind of abuse against their female colleagues.

Several journalists (in this case, regardless of gender) have also claimed to be victims of workplace bullying, stemming not only from bosses and power figures but also from their own colleagues.  Beyond the situations of workplace and sexual harassment, journalists in Colombia also face low salaries and severe labor instability.

According to a study by Universidad del Rosario, which surveyed 277 journalists, nearly half of the participants (137) stated they would leave the profession for another field if given the chance.  This reveals a toxic environment where intimidation was normalized at every level of the newsroom, creating a cross-sectional pattern of abuse that silenced those trying to build a career or keep their current positions within the industry.

Same pattern, different workplaces Following the Caracol journalists’ harassment allegations, Colombian journalists Paula Bolívar, Juanita Gómez, Mónica Rodríguez, Laura Palomino, and Catalina Botero began the #MeTooColombia movement.  They were inspired by the #MeToo hashtag that arose in the U.S.

in 2017 following revelations of sexual abuse by Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein.  The group of reporters also established a dedicated communication channel (yotecreocolega@gmail.com) for victims to share their stories of abuse within newsrooms.

The response was overwhelming: in just a week, they received at least 200 emails with testimonies ranging from 1993 to 2025.

In the case of Juanita Gómez and Catalina Botero, both prominent journalists who previously worked at Noticias Caracol and who currently serve at weekly news magazine Semana and state-owned radio station RTVC respectively, the initiative started by sharing on social media their own experiences.

Through her account on X, Gómez detailed aggressions she suffered from a well-known anchor while on an international assignment in 2015.

“I would tell her that having to force a journalist/presenter off you, several times and with pushing, so he wouldn’t kiss you in an elevator… is not normal and should never have happened,” Gómez wrote.

“I would also tell her to talk to her female colleagues, hopefully many of them, because they have much worse stories, and surely together they would find a way to report the harasser.”  This encouraged other women who worked at TV channel RCN, newspaper El Espectador, and other Colombian media, to share their own experiences.

Some questions began to surface: if this is a systemic pattern across the entire media industry, why has only one outlet spoken out publicly?

And more importantly, why is this reckoning happening only now?

The fact that Juan Roberto Vargas, the director of Noticias Caracol, has publicly addressed the situation inside the media outlet as “painful” and “sad” marks a significant first step, one that directors of other major media outlets should follow.

His commitment to taking “decisive measures” sets a precedent in an industry where silence has long been the standard response to internal abuse.

The end of an era: Breaking the cycle of impunity Eight years ago, Lina Castillo publicly accused Hollman Morris—the current director of the public radio broadcaster RTVC—of sexual and workplace harassment.  The journalist’s public allegations were turned against her, however, after Morris filed a defamation complaint, arguing her accusations were damaging his reputation.  Driven by the #YoTeCreoColega movement, a group of more than 40 women, including journalists, lawyers, and writers, joined together to sign an open letter questioning the case against Castillo and denouncing Morris’s legal actions.

They argue that his goal is not to seek justice, but “to silence the women who report him.” In March, following pressure from social organizations, the case was transferred to a higher court to ensure “gender sensitive analysis.”  Additionally, Jineth Bedoya, an award-winning journalist who became a symbol of the fight against gender-based violence following her kidnapping, torture, and rape at the hands of right-wing paramilitaries in 2000, recently took the issue of harassment in newsrooms to lawmakers.   On March 25, Bedoya testified before Congress, calling on lawmakers to end the “pacts of silence” that have protected predators in newsrooms for decades.

“A group of women journalists is here today to remind you that, for decades, women in the media have had to carry the burden of gender-based violence,” she stated.

“No more pacts of silence in newsrooms.

Today is not the time to remain silent.” The #MeTooColombia movement is also seeking legal recourse for victims.

The Attorney General’s Office reported over 50 complaints of sexual and workplace harassment within the media industry in less than a week after the initial allegations involving journalists from Noticias Caracol came to light.

Victims were encouraged to report abuse to a special email set up by the Prosecutor’s Office: denuncia.acoso@fiscalia.gov.co.  The tip of the iceberg?

On April 7, the Ministry of Labor published a document detailing immediate measures imposed against Noticias Caracol.

This followed an inspection of Caracol TV and BLU Radio facilities, which could potentially be extended to other media companies.

“There are clear signs of a possible failure in the mechanisms for prevention, attention, and investigation of workplace sexual harassment within the company,” the statement pointed out.

The investigation also revealed that one of the accused, Ricardo Orrego, had received prior warnings in 2023 and 2025.

However, there are no documents identifying the complainants behind them or any evidence of a structured disciplinary procedure.

Regarding the disgraced journalist, the Ministry ordered a “documentary reconstruction process” for the warnings issued to Orrego.

The goal is to “identify the original complaints, the departments involved, and the reasons why no formal disciplinary procedures were ever carried out.” At the same time, the inspection uncovered 15 new complaints of potential sexual harassment.

These cases had remained invisible, either because victims didn’t report them or because the company simply failed to handle them through the proper channels.

While Caracol’s decision to go public marks a rare and necessary first step, the Ministry’s ongoing oversight serves as a reminder that this is an open investigation—and a warning for the rest of the industry.

Hear from the women As this report focuses on a culture of silence within Colombian media, Latin America Reports reached out to several victims of harassment directly.  These journalists shared their stories on the condition of anonymity to protect their safety and professional careers.  Their testimonies offer a look at the cases that have remained hidden for years.  Giving a voice to these experiences is essential to breaking the cycle of harassment and silence, prioritizing the human experience over the data: The abusive touching from that older man—who claimed to be the owner of a renowned media outlet—left me completely paralyzed.  He approached my friend and I when we were just young women, speaking in a sickening tone. ‘Do you want to be part of my team?

Please, don’t hesitate to contact me,’ he told her, while his hand kept moving all over her body and his mouth was disturbingly close to hers.

“You should remain silent and avoid creating unnecessary drama… It’s for the best,” the HR leader told me when I tried to ask for help regarding my abusive boss.

I tried so hard to remain calm, but the harassment became my shadow.

He would call me desperately at any hour, screaming and berating me for no reason.

My phone became a source of terror.

I stopped sleeping, and when I finally had a moment of peace, my anxiety wouldn’t let me rest.

I found myself waking up every few minutes, trembling, just to check my screen, waiting for the next blow.

I decided to talk to him man-to-man as a last resort.

He looked at me with a smirk and said: ‘You have to understand that humiliations are part of the daily grind here.

Only those of us who live in the newsroom know how to truly value them.’ Then, he softened his voice: ‘Don’t worry, you have a brilliant future ahead.

You are on the right track.’ But his ‘mentorship’ was a lie.

Just minutes later, I overheard him mocking me to a colleague, calling me a ‘crying baby’ who was unable to perform even the simplest tasks (even though I was doing my work and his).

I decided to give up.

Nobody ever listened.

Or worse, they were spectators of the mistreatment and chose to look the other way.

Being an intern arriving in a newsroom is a dream come true.

You watch those leading the day, seeing them on a pedestal, unaware of the power dynamics hidden behind the cameras.

The eyes shining and the hunger to ‘reach the top of the world’ are just a few steps away, but you’re new in an industry that is not as you imagine.

Humiliations, screams, and rude remarks, all of them, are the daily meal.

You can see everyone getting nervous, but you can also feel the envy among colleagues—reporters pushing others away, making fun of them, or giving them derogatory nicknames to ruin their reputation.

They are always on the lookout for their failures… It’s like a high school horror movie about bullying.

All of a sudden, the first message arrives on your phone: “Your ass is amazing, can I have a bite?” It comes from a colleague, much older than you, who has been leading the top stories for years and has falsely offered to share his professional secrets with you.

You’re nobody.

You have just arrived at your first job—what can you really do?

Report it to the director?

He doesn’t even know who you are yet; you haven’t even had the chance to show what you’re capable of.

It’s better to say nothing, even if each time the messages get worse and you feel more and more repulsed.

It’s part of ‘building character,’ was always heard.

Featured image: Ricardo Orrego and Jorge Alfredo Vargas Image credit: David Gonzalez for Latin America Reports The post Colombia’s #MeToo moment highlights abuse within media organizations appeared first on Latin America Reports.

BY NAN STAFF WRITER News Americas, WASHINGTON, D.C., Thurs.

April 16, 2026: A bipartisan group of U.S.

lawmakers has taken a major step toward protecting Haitian nationals from deportation, advancing legislation that could extend Temporary Protected Status, (TPS), to an estimated 350,000 Haitians living in the United States.

The measure, H.R.

1689, was brought to the House floor through a rare discharge petition signed by members of both political parties, forcing a vote on the bill despite initial leadership resistance.

The bill would designate TPS for Haitian nationals, allowing them to remain in the United States amid ongoing instability and dangerous conditions in Haiti.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association, (AILA), welcomed the move, calling it a significant example of bipartisan cooperation on immigration.

“This bipartisan action reflects the very best of what Congress can do, which is to put aside politics and come together to protect vulnerable people from being sent back to life-threatening conditions,” said Ben Johnson, executive director of AILA.

Johnson emphasized that Haiti continues to face severe challenges, and returning nationals under current conditions would be both dangerous and inconsistent with U.S.

humanitarian values.

He also noted the critical role Haitian TPS holders play in the U.S.

economy, particularly in essential sectors such as healthcare, construction, hospitality, and food processing.

If the legislation passes the Senate, TPS protections for Haitians could be extended through 2029, offering stability to thousands of families.

Several Republican lawmakers were among those supporting the discharge petition, including Don Bacon, Brian Fitzpatrick, Carlos Gimenez, Mike Lawler, Nicole Malliotakis and Maria Elvira Salazar, among others.

AILA also highlighted advocacy efforts behind the push, noting that hundreds of its members traveled to Washington, D.C.

this week as part of its National Day of Action to urge lawmakers to maintain protections for Haitian nationals.

The organization said it will continue to push for immigration policies that reflect compassion, fairness, and the realities facing vulnerable populations.

The vote marks a rare moment of bipartisan alignment on immigration and could signal broader momentum for similar measures in Congress.

RELATED: Haiti TPS Update 2026: What Haitians In The U.S.

Should Know

By Felicia J.

Persaud News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Thurs.

April 16, 2026: The number of deaths involving undocumented immigrants in U.S.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, (ICE), custody continues to rise in 2026, prompting renewed concerns about detention conditions, medical care, and oversight.

Recent fatalities across multiple states have intensified scrutiny of the immigration detention system, with advocates and families calling for greater transparency and accountability.

Among the latest cases is Mexican immigrant Alejandro Cabrera Clemente, 49, who died April 11 after being found unresponsive at the Winn Correctional Center in Louisiana.

Staff initiated emergency response efforts and transported him to a local hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

Cabrera, who had lived in the United States for over two decades, was in ICE custody pending removal proceedings.Home / News / Immigration / Caribbean Diaspora / ICE Custody Deaths Rise in 2026, Raising Concerns Over Care In another case, Tuan Van Bui, 55, died April 1 at a detention facility in Indiana after being discovered unresponsive.

Authorities said emergency measures were immediately taken, but he was pronounced dead at the facility.

The cause of death remains under investigation.

Additional deaths in March have further raised concerns.

Jose Guadalupe Ramos-Solano died March 25 in California after being found unresponsive in his bunk, while 19-year-old Royer Perez-Jimenez died March 16 in Florida.

Officials are investigating the circumstances surrounding both cases.

Another case drawing attention is that of Mohammad Nazeer Paktiawal, an immigrant from Afghanistan, who died in Texas one day after entering ICE custody after reporting chest pain and breathing issues.

Advocacy groups say these incidents highlight ongoing concerns about medical care within detention facilities, particularly for individuals with underlying health conditions or those who report symptoms while in custody.

The concerns extend beyond detention centers.

In recent weeks, deaths have also been reported shortly after release, including that of a Haitian asylum seeker found dead in Pennsylvania days after leaving ICE custody.

In total, at least 14 deaths involving immigrants in ICE custody have been reported in the first three months of 2026, raising broader questions about the system’s ability to ensure safety and adequate care.

ICE has maintained that individuals in custody are held in safe and humane conditions and receive access to medical care, including emergency services.

However, the growing number of fatalities is fueling calls for increased oversight and potential reform.

As the number of deaths rises, key questions remain about detention conditions, medical response protocols, and protections for vulnerable individuals both during and after custody.

After years of decline, mortality in U.S.

immigration detention centers has soared to its highest level in more than two decades, surpassing even the records set during the coronavirus pandemic, according to a report published in the scientific journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

The spike comes amid a rapid increase in immigration detentions under the Trump administration and mounting complaints about conditions inside the facilities, combined with limited access to medical care and inadequate oversight mechanisms.

Experts cited in an accompanying editorial argue that the spike in deaths sends a warning sign about the health of a population in state custody.

MEXICO  The Mexican government on Tuesday protested the deaths of its citizens in U.S.

immigration custody as President Claudia Sheinbaum pushes back against U.S.

President Donald Trump’s policies on multiple fronts.

The progressive Mexican leader has walked a careful line with Trump for more than a year, addressing provocations with a measured tone and meeting U.S.

requests to crack down on criminal cartels more so than her predecessors, in an effort to offset threats of tariffs and U.S.

military action against the gangs.

But in the wake of mounting deaths of Mexican citizens in custody of immigration officials and the Trump administration’s decision to impose an energy blockade on Cuba — a key Mexican ally –  Sheinbaum has taken a harder line. During a Tuesday press briefing Sheinbaum added that she requested investigations into the deaths of the 15 migrants, and instructed Mexican consulates to visit detention centers daily.

RELATED: Haiti TPS Update 2026: What Haitians In The U.S.

Should Know

The United States is preparing options for a possible military operation against Cuba, according to a report today by daily newspaper USA Today.  Two sources reportedly familiar with the matter told the paper that the Pentagon is increasing its preparedness in case U.S.

President Donald Trump orders the military to intervene on the island, a possibility which Trump and various other high-ranking figures in his administration have mooted.  In response, the Cuban government said that while it did not want Washington to attack, it was prepared for any possible intervention.

This year, relations between the two ideological adversaries have become more tense than at any other point since the end of the Cold War, with the U.S.

removing Cuba’s closest political ally Nicolás Maduro from power in Venezuela and imposing a complete blockade on non-private fuel imports during the first three months of 2026.  However, the commencement of high-level diplomatic talks between the two nations and the recent arrival of a Russian oil tanker in Cuba – which Trump said he had “no problem” with – suggested that mutual desire for a peaceful resolution to tensions was growing.  But earlier this week, Trump said that the U.S.

“may stop by Cuba” after the conflict with Iran reaches a resolution, which may be an indication that ongoing diplomatic talks between Cuba and the U.S.

that seek to de-escalate tensions are progressing poorly.   Nevertheless, Cuban President Díaz-Canel repeatedly expressed his desire for peace with the United States in his first interview with U.S.

media last Sunday, though he warned that he and the Cuban population would be willing to fight to defend the island from any aggression by Washington.  In January, Havana ordered its forces to prepare for war and has hosted countrywide defensive drills to prepare for a potential invasion from the north, yet its ability to defend against a Pentagon-led operation is unknown.  Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at foreign policy think tank Defense Priorities, spoke to Latin America Reports about the likelihood of a U.S.

military operation in Cuba.  She speculated that, although the leak to USA Today was likely a negotiating tactic intended to pressure the Cuban government into making greater concessions in negotiations, “there is planning going on for such a [military] operation … Rubio has made his support for regime change in Cuba clear.

Trump, too, would likely welcome a distraction from Iran that he can sell as a success”.  The expert also explained what a potential intervention might look like: “I doubt they would use exiles, as this has failed in the past.

A Maduro-style approach is possible.

A more complete takeover of the island which is small and weak is an alternative”.

Kavanagh also weighed in on the chances of such an operation’s success.

“[Although]  defenders always have an advantage, I imagine the United States could overpower Cuba’s defenses.

Holding the island for a sustained period might be more challenging”.

The U.S.

has intervened several times in Cuba, which is situated approximately 90 miles off the coast of Cuba.

In the early 1900s, the U.S.

invaded the island on three occasions to protect American economic interests.

In 1961, after the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, Washington also backed a failed invasion attempt of the island by anti-communist Cuban exiles, which came to be known as the Bay of Pigs.  In a rally today, Díaz-Canel drew parallels between the latest threats and the infamous Cold War operation.

“The moment is extremely challenging and calls upon us once again, as on April 16, 1961, to be ready to confront serious threats, including military aggression.

We do not want it, but it is our duty to prepare to avoid it and, if it becomes inevitable, to defeat it.” Featured Image: The celebration of the 50th anniversary of the creation of the United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) in Miami.

USSOUTHCOM is the command of the U.S.

military that would likely be responsible for overseeing any military operation against Cuba.   Image Credit: Department of Defense via Wikimedia Commons License: Creative Commons Licenses The post Pentagon reportedly preparing for action against Cuba appeared first on Latin America Reports.

By Felicia J.

Persaud News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Thurs.

April 16, 2026: The U.S.

Supreme Court is now hearing a case that could redefine one of the most fundamental truths about America: who gets to belong in what is being dubbed the birthright citizenship case.

At stake is birthright citizenship – the constitutional guarantee that if you are born in the United States, you are American.

But this is not just a legal debate.

It is a test of whether history is repeating itself.

Last week, the Court heard arguments in a case challenging an executive order signed in 2025 that seeks to deny citizenship to children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas.

The order, already blocked by multiple lower courts, attempts to reinterpret the 14th Amendment – a move legal experts widely argue cannot be done by executive action alone.

Because birthright citizenship is not a policy.

It is a constitutional guarantee.

Enshrined in the 14th Amendment in 1868, birthright citizenship was designed to settle a question the nation had once answered disastrously wrong: whether Black people born in the United States were citizens at all.

The amendment overturned the infamous Dred Scott decision of 1857, which declared that Black people “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” It was a direct response to exclusion – a deliberate effort to ensure that citizenship could not be denied based on race, origin, or parentage.

But Black Americans were not the only people denied belonging.

Native Americans – the first people of this land – were also excluded from citizenship for decades.

It was not until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 that Indigenous people were formally recognized as U.S.

citizens – long after the country had been built on their land.

In other words, birthright citizenship was never just about immigration.

It was about equality – and who gets to decide who belongs.

And yet, here we are again.

At the center of this case is not just a constitutional argument, but a human story.

The lead plaintiff, identified only as “Barbara,” is a Honduran asylum seeker living in New Hampshire.

She fled gang violence with her family and is now fighting to ensure that her unborn child – a baby who would be born on U.S.

soil — is recognized as American.

Her case raises a profound question: if a child is born here but denied citizenship, what are they?

The implications are far-reaching.

If the executive order were allowed to take effect, babies born in the United States to non-citizen parents – including those here legally on work visas or under temporary protections – could be denied citizenship at birth.

These children would exist in legal limbo, creating what many legal experts warn would become a permanent, multi-generational subclass of people born in America but not recognized as belonging to it.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing the plaintiffs, has made it clear: the Constitution does not allow the government to pick and choose which children born on U.S.

soil are citizens.

That is not just a legal shift.

That is a structural one.

For more than a century, the Supreme Court has affirmed birthright citizenship, including in the landmark case United States v.

Wong Kim Ark, which confirmed that children born on U.S.

soil are citizens regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

That precedent has held – through wars, waves of immigration, and political change.

Until now.

Supporters of the executive order argue that the Constitution’s phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” should be interpreted more narrowly – excluding children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders.

But critics warn that such an interpretation is not only historically unsupported, but dangerous.

Because once a government begins deciding which children qualify for citizenship and which do not, it opens the door to redefining belonging itself.

And that has never ended well.

From slavery to Reconstruction to the civil rights era – and even in the delayed recognition of Native Americans – the United States has repeatedly struggled with the question of who counts as fully American.

Each time, the answer has shaped the nation’s moral and legal foundation.

This moment is no different.

Because once a nation starts deciding which children are worthy of citizenship, it is no longer debating immigration – it is redefining equality itself.

Felicia J.

Persaud is the founder and publisher of  NewsAmericasNow.com, the only daily syndicated newswire and digital platform dedicated exclusively to Caribbean Diaspora and Black immigrant news across the Americas.

RELATED: 11 Immigrants Now Dead In ICE Custody In 2026 As Questions Mount Over Care and Release Practices

Fracttal, the Latin American intelligence company, has acquired TCMAN, Spain’s leading computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) provider in a move that hands the company a foothold in Europe at a moment when the market for AI-driven industrial maintenance software is expanding rapidly.  Founded in Madrid in 1996, TCMAN built its reputation over nearly three decades supplying its GIM platform to infrastructure, industrial and services companies across Spain.

Its client list includes Acciona, Eiggage, Serveo, Mencobra, Sanitas, and Quirón – a cross-section of Spain’s largest operators of physical assets.  More than 250 organizations currently use the platform.

For Fracttal, which already manages over 20 million assets across 60 countries from its base in Latin America, the acquisition is less about technology and more about trust: TCMAN brings established relationships in a market where local credibility matters.  The market behind the move  The timing of the deal reflects genuine momentum in the sector: the global CMMS market is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 11.1% from 2025 to 2030 – reaching $2.41 billion USD by the end of the decade.  The drivers of growth are structural: asset-intensive industries are under growing pressure to reduce unplanned downtime, comply with tightening safety and environmental regulations, and extract more operational life from existing infrastructure, as per Grant View Research.  A shift toward AI-powered predictive maintenance is accelerating that dynamic.

A Mckinsey survey, in fact, found that AI predictive maintenance extends machine life by up to 40% and cuts machine downtime by up to 50%.  The broader predictive maintenance market – encompassing IoT sensors, analytics, and AI – was valued at $13.65 billion USD in 2025 and is projected to reach $97.37 billion USD by 2034, according to Fortune Business Insights.  Europe alone generated $3.13 billion USD of the market last year – and it’s growing steadily.  Fracttal’s proprietary platform, Fracttal One, sits at the intersection of these trends; it connects a physical asset to IoT sensors, processes operational data in real time, and applies AI to predict failures and optimize maintenance schedules.  The acquisition of TCMAN gives the platform a path into European enterprise accounts that would otherwise take years to build from scratch.  What each side brings  The deal has a clear logic for both parties: Fracttal gets a customer base, a brand, and 30 years of sector-specific expertise in Spain – particularly in healthcare and infrastructure – while TCMAN gains access to AI and IoT capabilities that a standalone CMMS vendor of its size would struggle to develop independently.  “Integrating TCMAN’s expertise with our platform strengthens our ability to continue developing intelligent maintenance solutions and deliver greater value to organizations managing complex and distributed assets,” said Raúl Peris, COO of Fracttal.  For TCMAN’s founder, the move represents an evolution rather than an exit:  “For over 30 years, we have helped companies in multiple sectors better manage their assets,” said Eloy Ortega.  “Joining Fracttal allows us to expand the reach of our technology and continue evolving our solutions in a context where maintenance is increasingly strategic.”  The funding context  In January, Fracttal announced a $35 million USD funding round destined to help it deploy and strengthen its AI capabilities, accelerate product development, and expand in Europe and Latin America.  The TCMAN acquisition is the most visible output of that strategy thus far, and suggests the company is moving quickly to use the capital before the competitive window closes.  Regardless, the CMMS and maintenance intelligence space is crowded.

IBM Maximo, SAP, Oracle, IFS, and a growing number of cloud-native challengers all compete for enterprise maintenance contracts.  Fracttal’s differentiation has long been its focus on asset-intensive SMEs and mid-market companies in Latin America, combined with its own IoT hardware line, Fracttal Sense.

The TCMAN deal, then, extends this model into Europe, but doing so while integrating a 30-year-old Spanish software company into a Latin American AI platform will require careful execution.  “Fracttal and TCMAN share the same conviction: maintenance is a key ally in building a more sustainable, safe and efficient world,” said Christian Struve, CEO and co-founder of Fracttal.  “This union allows us to accelerate that transformation, combining decades of industry experience with advanced technology and artificial intelligence.”  Whether that union holds together operationally – and whether TCMAN’s traditional clients embrace the AI-enhanced roadmap – is the question the next 18 months will answer.  Featured image: Courtesy of Fracttal Disclosure: This article mentions clients of an Espacio portfolio company.

The post Fracttal buys Spanish CMMS pioneer TCMAN in a bet on Europe’s industrial maintenance market  appeared first on Latin America Reports.

Caracas, Venezuela — Acting President Delcy Rodríguez’s government continues to make significant shake-ups within Venezuela’s institutions.

Late last week, her administration announced the appointment of Larry Devoe as attorney general and Eglée González Lobato as the new ombudsman.

Various NGOs have questioned the appointments on whether or not they show a willingness towards true political transition in the country following the United States’ capture of Nicolás Maduro on January 3.  The organization Transparencia Venezuela (Transparency Venezuela), dedicated to promoting transparency within public administration and exposing cases of corruption, noted on X that Devoe does not meet the necessary requirements for this position.  “His professional background does not include experience as a judge nor prosecutor.

His career has unfolded primarily at the Ombudsman’s Office and the National Human Rights Council, in addition to his role as the state’s representative before international bodies,” the NGO wrote.

1/8Larry Devoe como fiscal general y Eglée González Lobato como defensora del Pueblo, ¿cumplen realmente con los requisitos para el cargo?

https://t.co/FmHwdvhaIS pic.twitter.com/vwODVjrs1F— Transparencia Vzla (@NoMasGuiso) April 10, 2026 Devoe has held various positions within the Chavista government.

One of the most significant was as head of Venezuela’s National Human Rights Council, which supports “compliance with the instructions of the President of the Republic regarding national public policies on human rights.” He also served as the State’s representative to the Inter-American Human Rights System, representing the government before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), and defending Venezuela against its many human rights abuse allegations.

Devoe replaced outgoing Attorney General Tarek William Saab, who had served in that role for around eight years.

The organization also pointed out what they say is another key problem: “He does not hold a doctoral degree in criminal law, but rather a Master’s degree in Constitutional Law from the University of Valencia, Spain.” In the case of González Lobato, the NGO argues she also does not meet the requirements of Article 280 of the Constitution for the position of Ombudsman: an official who “demonstrates proven competence in human rights matters.”  Before entering politics, González Lobato served as legal counsel for the National Electoral Council (CNE).

She is a sought-after voice for her expertise on electoral matters and has delivered critical statements against the opposition, which she has labeled “traitors.” Ahead of disputed elections in 2024, she often went on television to argue that Maduro could win elections in the country without electoral fraud.

The CNE would later certify elections in favor of Maduro, despite Venezuela’s opposition and international observers presenting evidence to the contrary.  González Lobato replaces Alfredo Ruiz, who had held the position since 2017.

Transparencia Venezuela believes that neither of these appointments represents a change for these institutions, which are central to how the country functions.

“Without guarantees or fundamental reforms, reinstitutionalization is not possible,” they explained.

In a document signed by 60 NGOs, they denounced the selection process for lacking transparency, citizen participation, and independence, violating constitutional principles.

Más de 60 organizaciones cuestionamos la legitimidad de la designación del Fiscal General y la Defensora del Pueblo en #Venezuela.

Advertimos que las deficiencias del proceso no deben normalizarse, y exigimos una actuación independiente y respeto a los derechos humanos.

pic.twitter.com/h6z3saqV8V— Due Process of Law Foundation (@DPLF_info) April 10, 2026 Furthermore, they criticize Devoe’s track record due to his prior ties to bodies involved in political persecution, and point out González Lobato’s lack of experience in human rights.

Despite the objections, the NGOs urged new officials of their ethical and legal obligation to act independently of political power and to guarantee human rights without discrimination.

Specific demands also include the immediate cessation of political persecution, the release of arbitrarily detained prisoners, and the effective investigation of crimes against humanity identified by international organizations.  Likewise, the NGOs urged both government institutions to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the United Nations (UN), conduct transparent visits to detention centers, and promote Venezuela’s re-entry into the Inter-American Human Rights System, in order to reverse the pattern of criminalizing dissent and restore public trust.

The political appointments come at a time when the government is seeking to project an image of “reinstitutionalization” and modernization to the international community.  However, critics believe that they do not truly represent a sign of change in Venezuela, given that those appointed are still very much linked to the government of Delcy Rodríguez.

Featured image: Larry Devoe and Eglée González Lobato.

Image credit: Transparencia Venezuela via X.

The post New attorney general, ombudsman appointments in Venezuela draw criticism  appeared first on Latin America Reports.

By Felicia J.

Persaud News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Weds.

April 15, 2026: At a time when Americans are facing cuts to healthcare and rising costs for food, gas, and basic goods, a recent U.S.

Senate report reveals something deeply contradictory: millions of taxpayer dollars are being paid for deportations to Africa and other foreign nations, forcing them to take in immigrant deportees who are not their own.According to a report released recently by U.S.

Senators Jeanne Shaheen, Chris Coons, Chris Murphy, Tim Kaine, Jeff Merkley, Cory Booker, Chris Van Hollen, Tammy Duckworth, and Jacky Rosen, the Trump administration has spent more than $32 million on so-called “third country deportation” deals – sending migrants to countries they have no connection to.Among the recipients are Rwanda, Equatorial Guinea, and Eswatini – African nations now central to a controversial system raising serious economic, ethical, and geopolitical concerns.The numbers are staggering.In one of the most extreme cases, the administration paid Rwanda $7.5 million, plus an estimated $601,864 in flight costs, to accept just seven people – roughly $1.1 million per deportee.Equatorial Guinea received $7.5 million to take 29 individuals, at an estimated $282,126 per person.Eswatini was paid $5.1 million to accept 15 people.This is not just immigration policy.

This is outsourcing deportation at premium prices.

And it is happening with countries that raise serious governance concerns.Equatorial Guinea ranks 172 out of 182 countries on the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index, placing it among the most corrupt nations globally.Eswatini ranks 153rd out of 182 countries, with a score of just 23 out of 100, reflecting rising public sector corruption.Rwanda, by contrast, ranks 41st least corrupt globally, with a score of 58 out of 100, making it one of the stronger performers in sub-Saharan Africa.Yet, according to the Senate report, there is little to no oversight on how U.S.

taxpayer funds are used once transferred.

Even more troubling is how inefficient – and at times absurd – this system has become.In some cases, the United States is paying twice to deport the same individual.

One example cited in the report involved a Jamaican national who was deported to Eswatini at a cost of more than $181,000, only to be flown back to Jamaica weeks later – again at U.S.

expense.The Jamaican government made it clear: “The Government has not refused the return of any of our nationals.”That directly contradicts the administration’s claim that third-country deportations are necessary because home countries refuse to accept their citizens.

So, what is really driving this policy?The Department of Homeland Security has argued that some migrants are “so uniquely barbaric that their own countries won’t take them back.”But the data – and even internal accounts – suggest something else: a costly system designed less for efficiency and more for deterrence.

Or as one lawmaker put it bluntly: “We spent so much of last year hearing about how we have to cut waste… but we are spending millions of dollars on this.”Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was even more direct: “For an Administration that claims to be reining in fraud, waste and abuse, this policy is the epitome of all three.”And that may be the most important takeaway.

Because this is not just about immigration.

It is about how policy is being executed – through opaque deals, questionable partners, and significant US taxpayer expense – with little accountability and even less transparency.It is also about what happens when human beings become bargaining chips in international agreements, sent to countries they have never known, with uncertain protections and unclear futures.

For African nations now drawn into this system, the implications are equally serious – raising questions about sovereignty, responsibility, and the long-term cost of participating in what is effectively a global deportation network.At its core, this policy raises an uncomfortable question: why are African nations agreeing to take in Black and brown migrants who are not their own, in exchange for millions?

Because when human movement begins to follow money instead of law, it forces us to confront a history we claim to have left behind.

Felicia J.

Persaud is the founder and publisher of  NewsAmericasNow.com, the only daily syndicated newswire and digital platform dedicated exclusively to Caribbean Diaspora and Black immigrant news across the Americas.

RELATED: Sinners, Vampires,  Nicki Minaj & Trump

A conversation between Kirsten Welker, moderator of NBC News’ talk show “Meet the Press”, and Miguel Díaz-Canel aired on Sunday, marking the first time that a major U.S.

media outlet has interviewed the current Cuban president.  The discussion focused on the current state of U.S.-Cuba relations and saw Díaz-Canel insist that he would not resign in the face of U.S.

pressure while aguing that sanctions on the island were the driving factor behind his people’s suffering.  The Cuban politician did, however, express hope that current diplomatic talks between the two nations would culminate in a peaceful resolution and reverse the recent escalation of bilateral tensions.  1.

Defiance towards U.S.

threats  Responding to reports that the U.S.

sees his dismissal from power as key to any successful negotiation, Díaz-Canel emphasized that, “In Cuba, the people in positions of leadership are not elected by the U.S.

government … we have a free, sovereign state”.   Díaz-Canel warned that both he and the Cuban population would be prepared to fight for such independence; he told Welker that, if the United States attempted to enforce political regime change through military action, he himself would be “willing to give my life for the Revolution” and would not be alone in his conviction.  Invoking the words of Cuban independence hero and general Antonio Maceo, Díaz-Canel warned that “whoever tries to take power over Cuba will only get the dust of its soil, drenched in blood, if he doesn’t perish in the struggle”.

Such a sentiment, the politician warned, is universally shared amongst Cuban people because “that is how we have been trained”.

The current readiness of Cuba’s military and population for the kind of irregular and asymmetrical warfare that Díaz-Canel referred to in the interview is unclear.

The Cuban National Defense Council announced in January that its regular and irregular forces would transition into a state of preparation for war.  Also, Cuba has a mandatory national service program designed specifically to deter and defend against a U.S.

invasion.

Therefore, the regular forces of the Cuban military can theoretically be bolstered by a mobilization of a paramilitary force of over 1 million trained troops at any time.

Considering this well-practiced defensive posture, Díaz-Canel predicted that a U.S.

invasion of the island “would be unsustainable and untenable”.   Though there is no way to prove Díaz-Canel’s claims about Cuban political unity in the face of U.S.

threats, Dr Philip Brenner, an expert in U.S.-Cuba relations and professor at American University who spoke to Latin America Reports about the state of U.S.-Cuba relations, argued that the Cuban anti-regime opposition finds itself in a weak position.  “There is no legitimate opposition in Cuba, there is no opposition party”.

Furthermore, when discussing the anti-regime Miami-based Cuban opposition movement, Brenner argued that he “see[s] no way in which people who have been living outside of Cuba will have an effect on the future of Cuba other than through investment … There is no movement in Cuba that would really bring any of these dissidents into a leadership position”.

However, growing anti-government dissent on the island could be a sign that the Cuban population is not as supportive of the Cuban political leadership as Díaz-Canel suggests.  2.

Hope for improved relations Despite his warnings about the potentially deadly consequences of American aggression, Díaz-Canel stressed that “both the American and Cuban peoples deserve … peace” and reiterated his desire that the current talks between the U.S.

and Cuba could achieve that peace.  “I think dialogue and deals with the U.S.

government are possible, but they’re difficult … Cuba has always been willing, throughout all the years of the revolution, … [to have] a civilized, neighborly relationship with the United States”.  On occasion, both sides have shown willingness to engage in high-level diplomatic talks, as was the case when revolutionary leader Raúl Castro and former U.S.

President Barack Obama oversaw a normalization in relations in the mid-2010s.  Nevertheless, Cuba’s posture during the Cold War, when it aligned with the USSR, the principal ideological adversary of the U.S., was more hostile.  Specifically, Díaz-Canel listed the various areas of potential cooperation between the two countries, including combatting “drug trafficking, fighting terrorism, [working on] migration, issues of … transnational crime”.  There has indeed been cooperation in these areas before; the U.S.

previously agreed with the Cuban government to the admission of at least 20,000 legal migrants from Cuba a year, a deal designed to reduce irregular migration between the countries and slow the exodus of the Cuban population to American shores.

Despite their governments’ mutual hostility, the U.S.

and Cuban Coast Guards have also historically cooperated in operations against drug trafficking and terrorism.  Although Díaz-Canel saw continued and further cooperation on such issues as desirable, his positivity about the negotiations had a strong caveat; “we have always said that we need to build that relationship from a position of respect, from a position of equal footing, without having conditions imposed on us”.  In practical terms, that means that discussions about the nature of Cuba’s leadership and internal political system are off the table for Cuban negotiators.  Dr.

Brenner emphasized the importance of this perceived diplomatic equality to any solution: “What the United States has to understand dealing with Cuba is that Cuba is not going to respond to threats, to the appearance of giving in to U.S.

demands.

They want to have a respectful negotiation that is mutually satisfactory”.

3.

Identifying U.S.

sanctions as principal cause of Cuban suffering The Cuban leader decried American sanctions, calling them “genocidal” and referring to them collectively as “the blockade”.

Díaz-Canel attributed the Cuban people’s suffering solely to the “policy of permanent hostility by the U.S.

government at the national level.”  Because of the U.S.

sanctions, he argued, “we lack financing to buy food, to buy supplies for our production and services [industries] … [to buy] the medicine that we need and to carry out the repairs that we need for our national energy system and our industrial factories”.  “Cuba is a country that has been under attack, …  [having suffered] over 60 years of the blockade … We are talking about the longest running blockade in the history of mankind, the most severe blockade, a blockade that is not only aimed at the Cuban people but at the American people and other peoples”, Díaz-Canel added.

Many, including representatives of the United Nations, agree that U.S.

sanctions on Cuba impoverish the country’s population by causing shortages of spare parts, machinery, food, medicine, fuel and other essential goods and services.  Dr.

Brenner also pointed out that Cuba’s inclusion in the U.S.

State Department’s state sponsors of terrorism (SST) list “makes it … [particularly] difficult for Cuba to engage in international commerce because most international transactions, regardless of whether the United States is actually involved, … travel through New York banks … [which are] very loathe to handle any transaction that involves Cuba” for fear of being sanctioned under the SST.  Others, however, point to Cuban government mismanagement, failure to reform and corruption as key factors in the nation’s economic woes.  Although Díaz-Canel suggested that he himself and Cuba’s collective leadership may have made some errors in economic judgement, he did not specify any and told Welker that the Cuban “people who are suffering … largely understand who the main culprit is”.  4.

Openness to economic, not political, reform Cuban negotiators have stressed that any reforms implemented after negotiations with the U.S.

and Cuba conclude will be economic in nature.

Some of these reforms have already been announced; Cuban Americans will now be allowed to invest in businesses on the island and remittances sent from abroad will be able to be withdrawn in cash as U.S.

dollars in Cuban currency exchange offices.  Dr.

Brenner suggested that such reforms demonstrated that the Cuban government is “willing to bend a lot … to regularize its relationship with the United States”.  Díaz-Canel made occasional reference to these changes and indeed seemed enthusiastic about the possibility of greater American participation in Cuban economic life.  “We can have investments and businesses from America, businesspeople in Cuba.

We have a Cuban community living in the United States and we should also provide them with facilities, both in the United States and here … American people can come to Cuba for cultural and sporting exchanges … and exchange healthcare [expertise]”, he said.  The Cuban president cited the recent cooperation of U.S.

and Cuban healthcare practitioners on a potentially revolutionary Alzheimer’s drug developed by Cuba’s Center for Molecular Immunology (CIM) as a potential blueprint for future American-Cuban cooperation in key sectors.  Following the U.S.

operation to capture Cuban ally and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the U.S.

left the Venezuelan regime intact but decided to effectively control the Venezuelan oil industry.  Perhaps Díaz-Canel is hoping for a similar arrangement of political continuity with greater economic exchange in Cuba; during the interview, he said, “We’re open for foreign investment in Cuba, in oil exploration and drilling.

There will be an opportunity for American businessmen and firms to come and participate in Cuba’s energy sector”.  The Cuban leader even expressed admiration for the development of Vietnamese and Chinese “socialism”; Vietnam and China both retain their one-party communist political systems with more market-oriented, less centrally-planned economies than Cuba.  Díaz-Canel’s admiration of such systems could suggest that he is open to steering Cuba in the same economic direction as Vietnam and China, though he clarified that the beginning of those two nations’ major economic development coincided with the lifting of U.S.

sanctions, which clearly remains the Cuban leader’s economic priority.  5.

Rejection of human rights criticism Towards the end of the interview, Welker challenged Díaz-Canel on Cuba’s human rights record, citing the detention of Maykel “Osorbo” Castillo Pérez, a Cuban musician and the co-founder of the Cuban anti-government dissident organization Movimiento San Isidro.  Osorbo was sentenced to nine years in prison in 2022 for alleged “public disorder and defamation of institutions and organizations”.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has concluded that he was detained solely on the basis of pro-democracy activism.  Díaz-Canel did not directly address Osorbo’s individual case, but instead attacked what he viewed as a manipulative media-driven campaign to discredit Cuba’s political system.

“They [the media] speak about political prisoners in Cuba … there are people in Cuba who are not in favor of the revolution … and they protest on a daily basis in different ways against the revolution and they are not in prison”.

The narrative that Cuba arbitrarily detains peaceful opponents, he continued, “is a big lie … [designed] to vilify and to engage in a character assasination of the Cuban Revolution”.  Various human rights groups contradict this claim; Amnesty International, for example, reports that Cuban authorities routinely restrict freedom of expression, criminalize peaceful dissent and mistreat arbitrarily detained prisoners.  Díaz-Canel, however, claimed that those imprisoned were not peaceful opposition activists, but rather malicious actors who ”promote vandalistic acts and disrupt safety … often financed by terrorist organizations and … agencies of the U.S.

government which promote subversion against Cuba”.  Those prisoners, he went on to argue, “would be in jail in any country in the world … for engaging in vandalism and [seditious] crimes”.  Amnesty International refutes this claim too, reporting that the Cuban authorities label activists and journalists “common criminals, mercenaries and foreign agents” to legitimize their detention.  Human Rights Watch (HRW) corroborates these claims; according to HRW the majority of the approximately 1,500 people detained after the widespread protests of 2021, were peaceful demonstrators or bystanders.  Cuban NGO Justicia 11J also claims that, of the 760 prisoners of conscience still behind bars in Cuba in March, 358 were arrested for their participation in the 2021 protests.  Featured Image: Cuban exiles in Miami hold placards calling for an end to the Cuban dictatorship and criticizing Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel Image Credit: Luis F.

Rojas via Wikimedia Commons License: Creative Commons Licenses The post Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel’s NBC interview: 5 key takeaways appeared first on Latin America Reports.