FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — October 29, 2025
The UN General Assembly adopted the annual resolution calling for an end to the U.S. embargo on Cuba by 165–7–12. “No” votes: Argentina, Hungary, Israel, North Macedonia, Paraguay, Ukraine, United States. Abstentions: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Costa Rica, Czechia, Ecuador, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Morocco, Poland, Moldova, Romania.
Washington, D.C. — Today’s United Nations General Assembly vote delivered an overwhelming mandate to end the economic, commercial, and financial embargo on Cuba—despite an unusually intense campaign to sway governments in the days leading up to the vote. Although this year recorded more “No” votes and abstentions than usual, the campaign ended in defeat: after weeks of pressure and visible U.S. interest, only a handful of votes shifted, and the overwhelming global consensus remained squarely for ending the embargo. The result underscores that the international community remains committed to engagement and respect for sovereignty, while the United States finds itself increasingly isolated in defending a sanctions regime that harms ordinary families and narrows space for constructive relations.
In the run-up to the vote, the U.S. Mission to the UN mounted a visible effort urging member states to oppose the resolution, amplifying its message across official channels and social media. The U.S. Ambassador addressed the General Assembly today urging countries to vote “No,” capping weeks of heightened activity. In parallel, widely cited reporting described instructions to U.S. embassies to lobby allies to oppose or abstain. Against that backdrop, Cuba’s Foreign Minister alleged that governments—particularly in Latin America and Europe—faced “pressure, blackmail, and slander” intended to flip long-standing positions.
Today, the humanitarian picture is even starker as eastern Cuba contends with Hurricane Melissa—battering communities with powerful winds, flooding, and mass evacuations. Families are literally trapped between man-made sanctions and nature-made disaster, and recovery is harder and more expensive when financial channels and trade routes are restricted.
Beyond today’s ballot, the costs of persisting with broad, extraterritorial sanctions are stark. Cuba’s 2025 UN report estimates $7.556 billion in embargo damages from Mar 1, 2024 to Feb 28, 2025, a 49% year-over-year increase—or about $630 million per month. Losses are led by $2.608 billion in foregone exports and $2.570 billion in re-routing and shipping, not to mention other sectors hit particularly hard including agriculture ($932.3M), energy (the utility alone $279.3M), construction ($161.9M), education ($89.8M), and industry ($51.1M).
Among the seven “No” votes and twelve abstentions, several governments faced immediate bilateral calculations—access to U.S. credit or debt relief, IMF/World Bank program considerations, security and defense cooperation, migration and visa arrangements, or trade preferences—that can create leverage unrelated to the resolution’s merits. In Europe, wartime alignments and security framing tied to Russia shaped a portion of the abstentions and one of the “No” votes, even though the text was squarely focused on sanctions policy toward Cuba. In Latin America, fiscal stress and financing needs may also have weighed on decisions. These tactical shifts do not change the strategic picture: an overwhelming majority of the world continues to condemn the embargo.
ACERE’s position is clear. Engagement—not indiscriminate sanctions—best serves the peoples of both countries and aligns with international law. We urge the Trump Administration to restore and expand lawful travel and people-to-people exchanges; fix banking and payment hurdles so families can send remittances and U.S. and Cuban companies can pay for food and medicine on time, without account closures or weeks-long delays; reassess designations and sanctions that block civilian needs and lawful commerce; and return to sustained, practical diplomacy on migration, public health, disaster response, counter-narcotics, and environmental resilience. Domestic political pressure in Washington should not drive a policy that the UN General Assembly rejects year after year.
Finally, we urge the Trump Administration to explore a new approach toward Cuba—one that breaks from the personal interests of top U.S. officials and from the policy inertia of the Biden Administration toward the island—and to pursue pragmatic engagement grounded in international law and U.S. national security interests. The United States will be safer and more prosperous partnering with a stable neighbor—through trade, cooperation, and orderly migration—than risking another failed state on our southern border. Not only would such a course be a gesture of peace welcomed by the international community, as today’s vote shows—it would be the smart thing to do.
