NEW YORK, 28 October 2026 — The United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly urged an end to the decades-long United States economic embargo on Cuba on Wednesday, 28 October 2026, but a United States lobbying push led several countries to oppose the resolution or abstain for the first time in years. The vote — 130 in favour, 17 against and 25 abstentions — showed a marked shift from last year's tally of 165 in favour, 7 against and 12 abstentions, according to Reuters.
Illustration: The United Nations General Assembly hall in New York with delegates seated at their desks.
What Happened
The 193-member General Assembly has adopted a resolution calling for an end to the embargo annually for more than three decades, with the exception of 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. This year's result, however, was notably different. Support fell by 35 votes compared with last year, while the number of countries voting against more than doubled and abstentions more than doubled. Among those voting against were the United States and Israel. Several Western countries, including Germany and Italy, abstained for the first time in many years, Reuters reported.
The vote followed a tense build-up. Tensions between the two nations at the UN escalated ahead of the vote, including shouting matches between Cuban and American representatives in the corridors of the UN and on the floor of the General Assembly on Tuesday, 27 October, according to Reuters. The atmosphere reflected a wider deterioration in the relationship, with the administration of US President Donald Trump stepping up pressure on Cuba, including, as Reuters noted, the use of the military in January to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro — a move that has sharpened Havana's sense of vulnerability.
After the vote, the US envoy to the UN, Mike Waltz, presented the result as a diplomatic success. "I'm satisfied that so many countries now, including major economies like Korea, like Germany, and others have shifted their position," Waltz told reporters. "Diplomacy takes time, but now that we've had a tripling of countries that have shifted, we expect that to only to continue to grow," he added, according to Reuters.
Cuba's Foreign Minister, Bruno Rodriguez, responded sharply on X after the vote. "The US government is once again isolated in its attempt to continue strangling the Cuban people and subjecting them to an act of collective punishment and genocide," he wrote. "Neither its most insane pretexts nor its pressures nor media circus will prevail over the force of facts and truth," he added, according to Reuters.
Background
The United States has maintained a trade embargo on Cuba for more than 60 years, making it one of the longest-running sanctions regimes in the world. The embargo dates to the Cold War era, imposed after the Cuban revolution, and it has survived every US administration since — tightened at some moments, eased at others, but never lifted. Only the US Congress can lift it, which means the annual General Assembly vote carries political weight but no legal force.
Illustration: Diplomats raising their hands to vote in a large international assembly hall.
The annual vote has traditionally been one of the most lopsided in the General Assembly, with overwhelming majorities calling for the embargo's end and only the United States, Israel and a handful of others opposed. That pattern is precisely why this year's shift matters: the resolution still passed comfortably, but the movement in the numbers — 35 fewer votes in favour, 10 more against, 13 more abstentions — is the largest change in the vote's recent history and suggests the US lobbying campaign found a receptive audience in capitals that had previously voted with the majority without much debate.
The lobbying effort appears to have focused on allies, and the abstentions of Germany and Italy are the most visible evidence of its effect. Both countries are major economies with historically close ties to Washington, and their decision to abstain rather than support the resolution marks a departure from years of practice. South Korea was also named by Waltz among the major economies that shifted position. The precise motivations of each abstaining capital will be debated, but the pattern points to a deliberate US strategy of treating the annual vote as a contest worth fighting, rather than a ritual to be endured.
For Cuba, the vote arrives at a difficult moment. The island's economy has been under severe strain, and Havana argues that the embargo is the principal cause, describing it as collective punishment. Washington disputes that framing and presents the embargo as a response to the Cuban government's record. The annual vote has long been Havana's best opportunity to demonstrate international support for its position; this year it still demonstrated that support, but in diminished form.
Why It Matters
The vote matters first because of what it reveals about US diplomacy. The Trump administration's willingness to invest political capital in a non-binding vote — and to claim the result as a victory even though the resolution passed — shows how the administration measures success: not by winning the vote outright, which was never realistic, but by shrinking the majority and fracturing a consensus that had held for decades. By that measure, the shift from 165 to 130 votes in favour is a tangible result.
It matters second because of what it signals to Cuba. A smaller majority does not change the embargo's legal status, but it weakens Havana's ability to present the embargo as universally condemned. If the trend continues in future years, Cuba's diplomatic position could erode further, even as the material effects of the embargo remain unchanged. Conversely, if the shift proves to be a one-year response to specific US pressure, the majority could recover — the next vote will be watched for exactly that reason.
Third, the vote is a barometer of wider alignments. Abstentions by European allies are not decisions taken lightly, and they suggest that some capitals are recalibrating their public positions on Cuba in light of their broader relationships with Washington. The vote therefore tells observers something about the state of transatlantic diplomacy that goes beyond Cuba itself: how much weight allies place on aligning with the United States in symbolic votes, and where they draw the line.
Finally, the episode illustrates the limits and the uses of the General Assembly. The Assembly cannot lift the embargo, and everyone in the hall knows it. But the vote still matters as a public record — a yearly snapshot of where the world stands, and of how that standing changes. This year's snapshot is different from last year's, and that difference is the story.
What Happens Next
In practical terms, nothing changes immediately. The embargo remains in place, since only the US Congress can lift it, and there is no indication that Congress is moving to do so. The resolution is, as ever, a political statement rather than a legal instrument.
Illustration: A sunny street in Havana, Cuba, with colourful old buildings and classic cars.
Diplomatically, both sides will claim the result and build on it. Washington, encouraged by what Waltz described as a tripling of countries that shifted, can be expected to press the same case next year, aiming to shrink the majority further. Havana, for its part, will work to hold its remaining supporters and win back abstainers, arguing that the embargo's human cost outweighs any diplomatic argument for it.
The key question for the next vote is whether the 2026 shift represents a durable realignment or a single-year response to concentrated US lobbying. Germany's and Italy's abstentions will be particularly closely watched: if they return to supporting the resolution, the 2026 result will look like an aberration; if they abstain again, or if others join them, it will look like a trend. Either way, the annual vote on the Cuba embargo — long one of the General Assembly's most predictable rituals — has become, once again, a contest worth watching.
Sponsored: explore today's featured sponsored offers
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the UN General Assembly vote on 28 October 2026?
The Assembly voted on its annual resolution urging an end to the United States economic embargo on Cuba. The resolution passed by 130 votes in favour, 17 against and 25 abstentions.
How does this year's result compare with last year?
Last year's tally was 165 in favour, 7 against and 12 abstentions. Support fell by 35 votes this year, while opposition more than doubled and abstentions more than doubled.
Which countries voted against or abstained?
The United States and Israel were among the 17 countries voting against. Germany and Italy were among the countries abstaining for the first time in many years, according to Reuters.
Does the vote lift the embargo?
No. The General Assembly vote carries political weight but no legal force. Only the US Congress can lift the embargo, which the United States has maintained for more than 60 years.
How did the US and Cuba react to the result?
US envoy Mike Waltz welcomed the shift in positions and said he expected it to grow. Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez accused the US of trying to strangle the Cuban people and described the embargo as collective punishment, according to Reuters.
Sources
- Reuters, "US gets more countries to oppose UN resolution condemning its Cuba embargo," 28 October 2026.
- United Nations General Assembly voting record, 28 October 2026, as reported by Reuters.
Comments
Post a Comment