Donald Trump (10:10)

I'll be the honor of having the honor of taking Cuba. That'd be good. That's a big honor, taking Cuba. Taking Cuba in some form. Yeah, taking Cuba. I mean, whether I free it, take it. I think I could do anything I want with it. You want to know the truth?

Amy Goodman (10:28)

Later in the broadcast, we'll go to Havana for the latest. In Afghanistan, the Taliban government says 408 people were killed and 250 injured Monday evening after Pakistan, they said, targeted a drug treatment center in Kabul with an airstrike. Pakistan denies the bombing of any health facilities. But reporters who visited the wreckage of the Omar Addiction Treatment hospital found the 2000-bed facility on fire and in ruins with dozens of bodies being carried out on stretchers. The UN reports scores of civilians have been killed since Pakistan's defense minister last month declared open war on Afghanistan. The Trump administration's approved BP's proposed $5 billion oil drilling project in ultra deep waters off the coast of Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico. Bp, formerly known as British Petroleum, is the same company responsible for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, the worst oil spill in US history. Environmentalists warn the new project threatens Gulf communities, sensitive deep sea ecosystems and imperils marine life. And voters in Illinois head to the polls today for primary elections that could determine the balance of power in the next Congress. Ahead of the election, AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, poured nearly $22 million into Illinois's congressional races. Among APEC's targets is Kat Abuhazela, a progressive running for Illinois's 9th district, covering parts of Chicago and its northern suburbs. She's condemned the war in Gaza as a genocide and has made cutting US Military aid to Israel a top campaign prior. She says AIPAC poured $7 million through two shell PACS to defeat her, even as a dark money group was caught paying social media influencers $1,500 each for scripted attack posts. Meanwhile, several candidates are competing for the Senate seat of retiring Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, with a flood of super PAC spending also influencing that race. And those are some of the headlines. This is democracy now, democracynow.org, the war and Peace Report Report. I'm Amy Goodman in New York with Democracy Now's Juan Gonzalez in Chicago. Hi, Juan.

Juan Gonzalez (12:43)

Hi, Amy. And welcome to all of our listeners and viewers across the country and around the world.

Amy Goodman (12:47)

And Juan, I look forward to seeing you next Monday on March 23rd at Democracy Now's postponed but now for sure 30th anniversary celebration at Riverside Church. We will be live Streaming that@DemocracyNow.org Amy this is democracy Now. I'm Amy Goodman with Juan Gonzalez. We begin today's show in Iran as Israel's military says it's assassinated Iran's security chief, Ali Larajani, one of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic. Larajani was seen as the de facto leader of Iran following Israel's assassination of the supreme leader, Ali Khamenei on the first day of the war on February 28th. Israel claims it's also assassinated Gholam Reza Soleimani, the head of the Basij military. We begin the show with Trita Parsons, Iranian American executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, author of several books, including Losing an Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy. Trita, if you can explain the significance of this moment, Iran has not confirmed this, but Israel says it has killed the security chief, Ali Larajani, who is he and also the head of the Barezh militia. Talk about both of that them. Also, Trina, if you could start again. We just didn't have your audio out.

Trita Parsi (14:23)

I was just saying that it is confirmed that Larry Johnny's son was killed in this attack, but it's not clear at this point whether Larry Johnny himself was killed. It appears likely, but we don't know yet for certain. And it would be a very significant development almost on par with the killing of the supreme leader. In the past couple of months, he had emerged as a critical person within the Iranian theocracy. He was not so much a decision maker as he was the person who was creating consensus, the consensus maker within that system, but also someone that was seen as much more open to the idea of reaching a diplomatic solution. In fact, there had been some diplomatic outreach between him and a very key person in the White House prior to this war back in December. So he was definitely seen as someone who the United States potentially at some point could deal with. Whether the Israelis deliberately targeted him because they just had the opportunity because it was an effort to kill any potential off ramp for Trump by eliminating those who could engage in diplomacy with him. Or whether this is something that has more to do with the fact that perhaps the strategy now is shifting back towards regime decapitation after it's become clear that reopening the straits militarily is going to be extremely difficult. And as a result, the US And Israel are shifting back towards what they started off this war with was by trying to see if they could decapitate the regime and cause regime implosion. I don't find that Very likely. This is definitely a huge tactical blow to the Iranians, but the system already has preparedness for eventualities of this kind. We saw that after the killing of the supreme Leader. And the same thing will happen with the head of the besieged that has now also been killed.

Juan Gonzalez (16:23)

And, Trita, in a recent article you wrote, I'm wondering your sense of where this war is heading. You wrote, one of the main mistakes on the American side. They believe the Iranians feared war more than surrender. In reality, they fear surrender far more than they fear war. Can you expound on that?

Amy Goodman (16:46)

Yeah.

Trita Parsi (16:46)

I think that the United States and the Trump administration went into this war with a very false perception of Iran's state of strength or weakness. They believe that Iran was much, much weaker than it actually was. This was also a narrative that had been dramatically pushed by the Israelis, knowing very well that the argument for attacking Iran would very much be premised on the idea that it would be a relatively easy and quick thing to do. You need to convince Trump that it's easy and quick in order for him to go along with it. They succeeded in that. See what Marco Rubio said in his testimony in the Senate in January, essentially saying that there is a window of opportunity attacking because of this unique weakness of Iran. The weakest it has been since 1979 was the line. And it and the perception on the Trump administration side was that either the Iranians would simply be forced to capitulate and surrender, or the regime would implode, and in order to avoid that, they would strike a deal that would essentially surrender in order to safeguard their own survival. But this is a fundamental misread of the theocracy in Iran, not just because its strength was clearly not as weak as the US Thought. On the contrary, we see now very clearly they were very well prepared for this type of a war and have managed to, in some ways, increase power, particularly their leverage through the Strait of Hormuz, but also because of the fact that at the end of the day, surrender was never in the cards. This is a theocracy that could survive war. It could even survive losing a war. But if it were to surrender, it would lose its base of support, the 15 to 20% of the population that still support it. They would be completely unforgiving of any such measure. And that would be a far clearer death knell to the theocracy than even a military life.

Amy Goodman (18:33)

Trita, before you go, I know you have to leave within the min it, what do you say to the analysts who are now saying with Lara Gianni if in fact he is dead, killed by Israel, that Israel recognized him as a negotiator behind the scenes, whether it's with Russia or the United States, and that they don't want these negotiations to take place.

Trita Parsi (18:57)

No, from the Israeli standpoint, it's absolutely clear they want this war to continue as long as the US Is in the war and actively bombing Iran. They're very fearful of Trump declaring victory and just ending the war. They have still achieved quite a lot because the Iranian military has been significantly degraded in several different aspects. However, the Israelis have fought so hard to get the United States to go into a full scale war with Iran. For more than 20 years, they have tried to do this. So now, when that has finally been achieved, it is in their interest to prolong this war as long as they can and kill off any potential off ramps that Trump may be looking for. And if Trump actually were to look for an off ramp actively, a critical counterpart of his would most likely have been Ali Darijani. And we've already seen that several people who could have played that type of a role have been killed. And the remaining people within the bureaucracy tend to be the much more hardline ones who would, who also see a benefit in prolonging the war rather than negotiating an end to it.

Amy Goodman (20:01)

Trita Parsi, we want to thank you for being with us. Executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, author of several books including Losing an Obama, Iran and the the Triumph of Diplomacy. Coming up, Harrison Mann, a former US Intelligence officer who resigned from the army over the war in Gaza. His new piece I was a U.S. intelligence analyst. Here's what a ground invasion of Iran could look like. Back in 30 seconds. I wanna go all over the world and startling. Living free. I know that there somebody who is waiting for me. I build a boat steady and true as soon as it's done, I'm gonna sail. Here's someone performed by Lela Downs in our Democracy now studio. This is democracy now, democracynow.org, the war and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman with Juan Gonzalez. As we continue our look at the US And Israeli war on Iran. Numerous nations have rejected a requ From President Trump to send warships to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has largely shut down the critical waterway. About 20% of the world's world's oil exports flows through the strait. On Monday, Germany's defense minister said, this is not our war. President Trump criticized allies who are refusing to help.

Donald Trump (22:03)

I don't do a hard sell on them because my attitude is we don't need anybody. We're the strongest nation in the world. We have the strongest military by far in the world. We don't need them. But it's interesting. I'm almost doing it in some cases, not because we need them, but because I want to find out how they react.

Amy Goodman (22:24)

Meanwhile, Trump continues to give mixed messages on his war plans. On Friday, he was interviewed by Brian Kilmeade on Fox News.

Danielle Monteiro (22:34)

When are you going to know when it's over?

Harrison Mann (22:36)

When I feel it, okay?

Danielle Monteiro (22:37)

I feel it in my bones.

Amy Goodman (22:39)

When I feel it in my bones. This all comes as the US is sending 2,500 Marines and an amphibious assault ship to the Middle East. We go now to Harrison Mann, former U.S. army major who resigned in 2024 from the DIA, that's the defense Intelligence Agency over the Biden administration's policy in Gaza. He's now a senior fellow at WINW Without War, a network of activists and groups working for a more peaceful, progressive US Foreign policy. His most recent piece for Zatteo is headlined, I was a U.S. intelligence analyst. Here's what a ground invasion of Iran could look Like. Harrison Mann, welcome to Democracy Now. Tell us what that ground invasion can look like as the US Is bringing thousands more US Troops troops to the Gulf region.

Harrison Mann (23:34)

Thank you. So for context here, I think really from day two of this war, the Trump administration has not known what to do and how to get out of this. So there's really little left to try other than a ground invasion. The other context I want to add is that from the Israeli side, as your last guest, Trita, mentioned, a long war that aims to collapse the Iranian state is good for the them. So with that in mind, there's a couple options that Trump administration officials themselves have floated in the press. One is doing a landing on something called Kharg island, which handles 90% of Iran's oil exports and is located deep in the Persian Gulf past the Strait of Hormuz. Another option, also floated by Trump officials themselves, is some kind of raid on Iranian nuclear nuclear sites to try and secure or sabotage Iran's highly enriched uranium. To talk about the Marines you mentioned, I think it's really important to note, you know, we've seen this Marine Expeditionary unit described as 5,000 troops, or you said 2,500 marines. There's 5,000 sailors and marines aboard these ships. Altogether, there's only about 1,200 actual ground troops, which is a relatively small number if you're talking about, about invading a country, even if it's just seizing a small island. So I want us to keep that in mind. I think the target that seems to have risen to the top of Trump's list, we saw him and Lindsey Graham tweeting about it over the weekend, is Khorg Island. Again, it's a piece of critical oil infrastructure. The idea is that if you can capture it, you will basically get to hold 90% of Iran's oil exports ports hostage. The issue with this is that you have to sail. If you're going by ship, you have to make it through the Strait of Hormuz, which the US Navy currently determines is too dangerous for it to go through. Or if you fly in, you're still landing on an island that's just about 15 miles off the coast of Iran. So frankly, I think any attempt to seize this island would be close to a suicide mission. I hate to say it, with US Troops within range, not just of the drones and missiles that Iran has targeted the whole Gulf and Israel with, but also shorter range weapons that they haven't had the opportunity to use yet, artillery, rockets, short range drones. And it's really easy to imagine how if you drop troops on that island, they could really end up being trapped there, which would really play into the hands of the Iranian government. And I think a US Mass casualty event or even a de facto hostage situation would be much more valuable to Iran's surviving leaders than the oil terminal that the operation would purportedly capture.

Juan Gonzalez (26:23)

And Harrison man, what about the logistics nightmare? Even if they were able to land troops, which I'm sure they would be able to, the logistics nightmare of protecting and supplying any force like that so deep into the Persian Gulf and so close to Iran.

Harrison Mann (26:41)

Yeah, again, I think resupply or even insertion or evacuation by sea is extremely dangerous for all the weapons I mentioned. Plus, Iran, as has been discussed in the news, can mine these waters both around the island and in the Strait of Hormuz, they have drone boats in addition to aerial drones. If you want to try and do resupply or reinforcement by air, that might be possible. But it's possible to ambush aircraft as well. We saw the Houthis do it in the campaign in the Red Sea over the past two years. So even aerial resupply or insertion would be quite fraught. And it's a real risk that you have U.S. troops trapped under fire and running out of supplies on this island. And I want to mention this really applies to anywhere that you put U.S. troops on Iranian soil. Some figures on Fox News have also discussed trying to Land troops near the Strait of Hormuz to clear out anti ship missiles there to make it safe for oil tankers and shipping to go through. I mean, that really gives you the exact same risk of troops trapped in Iran where it's extremely difficult to resupply or just get them out of there.

Juan Gonzalez (27:53)

I wanted to ask you also about Israel. Israel is involved now in a multi front war here, not only with Iran and defending itself against missiles coming retaliatory strikes from Iran, but in Lebanon as well. There are still Israeli troops in Syria and they're fighting two domestic fronts in the occupied territories of the west bank also and in Gaza. How long can Israel in your sense keep up this kind of multi front war?

Harrison Mann (28:27)

I think Israel can honestly keep it up as long as the US continues to supply it with munitions and an incredible amount of air defense and air protection. Right. There's nothing really keeping the Israeli military from pulling out of Iran and focusing entirely on Lebanon. The US is already fighting the war Netanyahu wanted for him. Right. Israeli air power is not adding a whole lot to that. So we could see that happen. They could keep going in Lebanon for, for a while if they continue to enjoy US air defenses, resupply of interceptors, and now the ground munitions, tank and artillery shells that they need to fight in Lebanon. The political side of that I'm less sure of. I think we're heading towards a nearly unprecedented level of rockets and drones and missiles actually hitting things inside Israel, not being intercepted, so. So I don't know how long Israeli people will put up with that before demanding political change. But so far Netanyahu has been pretty successful at keeping public support or at least preventing substantive opposition to starting new wars, especially over the past two years.

Amy Goodman (29:38)

What about Harrison Mann? And if you can just say what the DIA does, what you resign from the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Harrison Mann (29:47)

Yeah. So it's sort of like a miniature CIA and it performs a lot of the same analytic functions. So my office was responsible for assessing strategic intentions and military capabilities of all of the countries in the Middle east, figuring out what they were going to do and what the status of their armed forces were. So right now they're probably looking very closely at how many Iranian missiles and navy assets and other strategic assets are left.

Amy Goodman (30:16)

And can you talk about during the US war on Iraq, when the US invaded, Bush would always talk. President George W. Bush. Bush. About the coalition of the willing. To say the least, we're talking aboutat this moment doesn't look like there's any coalition. You have Italy saying And this is a right leader of Italy. Right. Giorgia Meloni. Diplomacy needs to prevail. Estonia, when talking about this coalition, it's a bit rich. Spain, the objective must be for the war to end. Australia, we won't be sending a ship to the Strait of Hormuz. Germany, it's not NATO's war. War. The significance of Trump first castigating all these allies and then saying they have to do something here and they saying they won't.

Harrison Mann (31:04)

Yeah. I mean, and just historically, it takes a lot for European leaders not to follow the US Into a Middle east intervention, if you look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and the general complacency there. So I think. I think this is the latest fissure Trump is creating in the NATO alliance and the U. S. Europe relationship, where he's transgressed so much that Europeans are not willing to assist. But I do want to note that, you know, the US Navy, US has more aircraft carriers than all these countries combined. The help from European countries, I think would be much more symbolic. Symbolic than actually materially necessary to change the course of this war.

Juan Gonzalez (31:51)

And in your former agency, the dia, you were tasked with understanding and developing military strategy. What level of a strategic blunder do you consider what has happened here with this war in Iran, historically speaking, in terms of the US and its military?

Harrison Mann (32:12)

Yeah, I think on the American side, it's just totally strategically bankrupt. Again, no plan after the first 24 hours when it didn't immediately turn into Venezuela with a seemingly successful regime replacement operation. And we've seen them really just throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. Right. It was less than two weeks ago that Trump policy was trying to foment a Kurdish uprising and fracture Iran.

Juan Gonzalez (32:38)

Right.

Harrison Mann (32:39)

They abandoned that in like 48 hours. Now we're seeing him basically try and do policy by tweet and seeing if Europeans are willing to bail him out. Amy, as you mentioned, they're absolutely not. And I think it's important to note that Donald Trump was probably surprised by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, by the attacks on all the Gulf states, by the skyrocketing oil prices, and we're also going to see foodstuffs go up because 30% of the world's fertilizer goes to the Strait of Hormuz as well. But the people who drove him into this war are not dumb and very much expected this. I don't think this is a surprise to Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, or Benjamin Netanyahu, who is very much getting what he wanted, which is Dragging the US into what he hopes will be a decisive war of annihilation.

Amy Goodman (33:31)

And of course, this is an election year and the concern about the level of danger the U.S. troops face, not to mention others. But I mean, 200 troops injured, 13 dead. Over the weekend, the Pentagon named six U.S. servicemembers who were killed when their military refueling plane crashed in Iraq. Last week, the family of Technical Sergeant Tyler Simmons, including his grandma, spoke to NBC in Columbus, Ohio. They criticized the war in Iran.

Harrison Mann (34:02)

This could have been prevented. We didn't need to be in this war. You know, this is uncalled for and this is what we get.

Amy Goodman (34:11)

Families are suffering right now. Not only our family, but there are other families that lost loved ones. And just to create a war because you want to create a war, it's not right. The grandmother of one of the U.S. army, the grandmother of one of the servicemen who was killed in the last 30 seconds, we have Harrison Mann. When President Trump was asked on Air Force One about these latest six dead service members, he wenthe said next question. He wouldn't even answer it. The significance of the lack of support for this war at home, home, even among the military.

Harrison Mann (34:52)

Yeah, I think that's the effect of really clear strategic and tactical negligence when it comes to putting our troops in harm's way. Right. Strategic negligence, like the very brave parents of this deceased pilot said, sending them into harm's way for no good reason, no reason to really explain why their son died. And then on the tactical level, we've also sent them to war without really obvious protections that could have saved lives. The first six servicemembers who died were killed by a drone, basically inside of a trailer. No overhead protection, no very rudimentary precautions that could have maybe saved their lives. So unfortunately, Trump and Hegseth aren't really hiding that. They're not concerned about how many lives they spend while they try to figure out what they're doing in Iran.

Amy Goodman (35:41)

Former U.S. army major who resigned in 2024 from the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's CIA, over the Biden administration's policy in Gaza. Now a senior fellow at Win without War. This is democracy now, democracynow.org, i'm Amy Goodman with Juan Gonzalez. Cuba plunged into an island wide blackout, leaving millions of people without power after the national electricity grid completely collapsed Monday. This was at least the third and the largest blackout to hit Cuba in just about four months as the US Energy blockade has cut off the island from accessing desperately needed fuel. No oil shipments have reached Cuba in more than three months, according to the Cuban government, compounding a humanitarian crisis caused by decades of US Sanctions. Meanwhile, the New York Times reported Monday, Trump's negotiators told their Cuban counterpar reports during recent talks that Cuban President Miguel Diaz Canel must be removed from power. President Trump spoke to reporters at the White House Monday.

Donald Trump (36:49)

I do believe I'll be the honor of having the honor of taking Cuba. That'd be good. That's a big honor.

Harrison Mann (36:57)

Taking Cuba.

Donald Trump (36:58)

Taking Cuba in some form. Yeah, taking Cuba. I mean, whether I free it, take it. I think I could do anything I want with it. You want to know the truth?

Amy Goodman (37:07)

Whether I free it, take it, or can do anything I want with it, President Trump says. For more, we're joined by two guests in Havana. We go to Danielle Monteiro, Cuban journalist and producer with Belly of the Beast, an independent media outlet covering the impact of U.S. sanctions on Cuba. And in San Diego, California, we go to Sarah Cosima, assistant professor in history at University of California, San Diego, who's just returned from Cuba. Her recent piece for the Guardian headlined, and in the other US Target of regime change, Cuba, I saw real hardship and resilience. But, Danielle, let's turn to you right now in Cuba. Talk about this largest blackout that we have seen, what it means for the people, what it means for Cuba and what's happening.

Danielle Monteiro (37:56)

Thank you for having me. I mean, what's really heartbreaking about these latest blackouts that we have is that at this point point, you know, for our daily lives, it doesn't feel any, you know, that much different from normal days. What I'm trying to say is because now fuel is coming in, I mean, blackouts have extended significantly over the past few months. You know, right now in Havana, which usually pairs a lot better than the rest of the country, we're talking about, you know, at least 12 hours there. You go to the provinces, like, you know, outside of the city where my family lives, shifts, they're getting by with three, four, five hours a day. So, of course, the national blackout has tremendous impact through Gallup. But what I'm trying to convey is that because blackouts have extended so much due to the old blockade, it doesn't feel that different. Right now. The power grid is coming back on. It usually takes them about a whole day to bring it entirely throughout the country. And authorities have said that precisely because there's less fuel, it takes them longer to bring back the grit. And of course, the consequences of this, I mean, not just the national blackout, but the old blockade as a whole, it's it's tremendous. I think for the first time in. In my life, the, you know, sanctions, you know, feel completely unavoidable. I think you. You cannot find someone in Cuba that's not being affected by the current state of affairs.

Juan Gonzalez (39:18)

And Daniel, what about the fact that even Latin American countries that have had with Cuba and have progressive governments like Brazil and Mexico and are also oil exporters, that they have not stepped forward more strongly to assist Cuba with oil?

Danielle Monteiro (39:41)

I mean, I think that just speaks to the world we're living in. I mean, Trump has exerted all of the pressure he can on other countries, and sadly, it has worked so far, and we're just living through the results. Of course, it saddens me as a Cuban. I suffer it every day. You know, this is not just, not some abstract or the theoretical notion. For me, we suffer it every day, and it's terrible. I mean, we're talking about. I have no other way to describe it as sanctions are literally killing people right now because the conditions are so bad. And this has everything, absolutely everything to do with what the US Is doing to my country.

Juan Gonzalez (40:18)

And how do you react to this announcement of the Cuban government that it will now be allowing Cuban Americans to own businesses and invest in the Opportunity Island?

Danielle Monteiro (40:29)

I think that is actually a news that was rather possibly received by people in Cuba. I mean, you have to understand that over the past 15 years, the country has been progressively opening up to investment coming from the outside and also from the inside of the country. So that is actually something that didn't necessarily surprise anyone listening to the news and that most people have no problem with.

Amy Goodman (40:53)

And what President Trump said from the Oval Office, Danielle, how it's being received in Cuba, that the US That President Trump would take it or free it or whatever, but that that's going to happen very soon. And the demand that the Cuban president, Diaz Canel, must leave

Danielle Monteiro (41:18)

it is absolutely outrageous. I mean, we're talking about the idea of a negotiation or a talk between two countries cannot start with the premise of one of the parties stepping out. So if the goal was to actually come to an agreement and to actually improve the lives of the Cuban people, then that would not be the premise. But of course, this does not surprise us. We understand what this oil embargo means and what it has always meant, what sanctions have always met. This is regime change through starvation. That is what they're trying to do. And right now, with the oil blockade, conditions are worse than they ever have been. So as a Cuban, as someone living here, here, all of My family is here. It is absolutely outrageous to listen to, you know, Donald Trump and the administration in the United States saying that they're trying to help Cuba, they're trying to liberate Cuba, because they don't articulate the price that they're asking people to pay.

Harrison Mann (42:08)

Sure.

Danielle Monteiro (42:09)

They're saying that they want freedom, they want democracy, they want. They talk about all of these good things that are going to bring to the Cuban people, but they should really articulate the means to get there. The means to get there. Is the Cuban people suffering? Is the Cuban people dying?

Amy Goodman (42:21)

Have you experienced in Cuba? We have the reports of a magnitude 5.8 earthquake this morning on top of the national blackout.

Danielle Monteiro (42:33)

Yes. In the east of the country, it is not very uncommon to have this. This quakes. Fortunately, they don't usually actually cause that much. That much damage out there. But, you know, at this point, it just feels like, what else is going to happen? You know, I look back at, you know, in January, I found myself and at home, you know, Maduro's abduction had just happened, and, you know, the idea of an actual US Invasion to Cuba for the first time became very real in my head. And we happen to live very close to a military base here in Havana. And I find myself having a conversation with my wife and, you know, basically just thinking, what room in the house do you think we would survive if they bomb? And by the end of the conversation, we're just looking at each other and going like, can you believe we're even having this conversation? And I think that's just the general feeling of being in Cuba right now with everything that's coming from Washington. What else is going to happen? When is this going to stop?

Juan Gonzalez (43:29)

Yeah, I'd like to bring in Sarah Cosima, assistant professor in history at the University of California, San Diego. Professor, you've been. You've visited Cuba over the years, particularly in the rural parts of the country. You recently returned from Cuba. Cuba. Could you talk about what you saw in the conditions there?

Sarah Cosima (43:50)

Yeah, thanks for having me on. And, you know, I'd just like to say I. My. My experience is. Is very consistent with what Daniel was just explaining. You know, the east is much farther from the ports in which petroleum and food arrives. And so they have many. They have fewer resources. The situation is much harder. There have been prolonged blackouts for that have lasted many hours, more than they've lasted in Havana for months now, but those have gotten worse in the last few weeks. So when I was there, they were getting maybe 16 hours of blackouts and maybe twice a day, three hours of electricity. And within the period that I was there, it was reduced to maybe three hours of electricity a day. And right now, it seems that people have gone at least 25 hours, 26 hours since electricity. At this point,

Amy Goodman (44:54)

I want to ask Danielle about the response of the Cuban people. Obviously, like we saw with Iran. I mean, you have Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, you know, urging people to rise up in Iran. He says, you can, you know, take people to water, but you can't make them drink. President Trump was urging that. What do you see happening? Are people angrier at the United States or at the Cuban government at this point?

Danielle Monteiro (45:29)

I think when you're, when you're hungry, your politics are, I want food. You know, I think for the majority of people, that, that, that's what they're feeling. Feeling. Look, I don't see that, you know, the, the goal that the US Is trying to achieve here, which is the, the majority of the people rising up, that simply has. Hasn't happened. There are minor protests, you know, when the blackouts happen, but that's been happening for the past five years. That is not new. So, like, that, that change that, you know, the US Is hoping to achieve in Cuba is simply not happening right now. I think people are very aware of what's going on, and they're paying the price of decisions that have been made, but they're more concerned with what do I do today, what do I eat tonight, than anything else. Because, as I said, when your concerns are expressing as those, that is the extent of your politics.

Juan Gonzalez (46:21)

And I wanted to ask also, Professor Kazima, this Trump claim that the leadership of Cuba must change, that he will decide this absolute narcissism of our president, that he decides that he's the one that makes. That he's the one that makes change in every one of these countries. Your sense of how this is being received among the Cuban people?

Sarah Cosima (46:51)

Yeah, I mean, so I think it's not being received well. When I was there just a few weeks ago, I spoke to many people and I asked them straight up, like, what do you want to happen? What would you like to see? And even people who, who have, you know, who were vocal critics of. Of, of the political system and some who are less vocal critics of the political system. Nobody, nobody agreed with what Trump was doing. None of them. And so I think, you know, Cubans are a highly educated population. They, they have access to the news. They understand the maneuvers, they understand the tactics. And I think right now they're feeling really blindsided. They just, you know, it was confirmed on Friday that they, that the government is in negotiations with the United States. And so the process of sort of like understanding and processing that was just beginning on Monday, yesterday when this announcement happened. And I think, you know, multiple, multiple people told me with outright anger in their voices that they, that they, that they wouldn't allow this, something like this, that they would fight back. So, you know, ultimately, Gibbons have fought for sovereignty many, many times, and it doesn't seem that they're going to just sort of lie there while this is happening. Again.

Amy Goodman (48:18)

We just have a minute and I want to go back to Danielle and Havana Q about this convoy that is headed to Cuba. Many groups involved, including progressive international Code Pink. How much of a difference at this point does international solidarity make mean?

Danielle Monteiro (48:41)

I would argue that international solidarity is now more important than ever, especially coming from the United States. Because, I mean, what everyone is hearing about Cuba is this oil embargo, is how everything is so bad in the country. I mean, the idea of having people coming over and showing a different face coming from the United States and showing that we can still help each other. I think this is, I would argue Cuba has needed solidarity for a while now, but it certainly needs it right now in terms of difference it can actually make. I mean, it depends on what they bring in. We need everything that anyone can bring in at this moment. But I think the most important part is the symbolic value of having all of these people coming over and showing their support for the Cuban people to fight the narrative that's coming from the Trump administration.

Amy Goodman (49:26)

Danielle Monteiro, I want to thank you for being with us, Cuban journalist, producer with the independent media outlet Belly of the Beast, joining us from Havana, Cuba, and Sarah Cozume, assistant professor in history at University of California, San Diego. We'll link to your piece. In the other US Target of regime change, Cuba, I saw real hardship and resilience. Coming up, eight anti ICE protesters have been convicted on terrorism charges for taking part in a demonstration outside the Prairieland ICE jail in Texas. They each face up to 15 or at least 15 years in prison. Back in 20 seconds. Sam. Orlando Paz, here on Democracy now, democracynow.org, i'm Amy Goodman with Ron Gonzalez. We end today's show in Texas where a federal jury Friday convicted eight anti ICE protesters on terrorism charges in a closely watched trial that's raised fears over the Trump administration's intensifying crackdown on activists and First Amendment rights rights. This marked the first time terrorism charges were successfully brought against activists by the Justice Department as federal prosecutors accused the protesters of being members of Antifa. The trial focused on a shooting that happened during a protest outside the Prairieland ICE Jail in Alvarado, Texas, last year. A total of nine protesters stood trial at a packed Fort Worth courtroom facing an array of federal charges, including attempted murder, murder. The protesters were also indicted on state criminal charges. For more we go to Charlotte, North Carolina, where we're joined by Javier Dahanon. An attorney with the People's Law Collective and the National Lawyers Guild has provided legal assistance to the DFW Support Committee, a coalition that's assisting over a dozen activists who were arrested at the Prairie Land protest last July. He represents one of the defendants, Elizabeth Soto, in the State Council case. Soto and seven others involved in the Prairie Land protests were convicted Friday on federal terrorism and other charges. Thank you so much for being with us, Javier. If you can start off by explaining what happened that day and what these charges are that these eight protesters were convicted of and what they face.

Javier De Hanon (52:31)

Good morning. Yes, happy to be here and to be able to give more information. I think after the trial that I was able to see in some weeks, I wanted to present what happened based on some of the protesters perspective. I mean, what happened on July 4, 2025, was a noise demonstration. We heard during the trial that if you were someone who was interested in immigrant justice, in immigrant rights in the Dallas Fort Worth area area, and you happened to join a very large signal group chat that had political announcements, events and rallies and so on, you would have found out about the noise demonstration on July 4, 2025. And if you decided to go, you would have been there with other.

Amy Goodman (53:22)

Javier, just to be clear, you're talking about a noise protest.

Javier De Hanon (53:27)

Yes, a noise demonstration. A noise demo is a very common type of protest that happens outside of prisons and jails. And usually they happen in loud days, right. Fourth of July, New Year's Eve. And what people do outside is just literally noise. The purpose is to get people inside to remember that they're not forgotten, that they are seen, that they are heard. And that is what was happening on July 4th. There was a flyer noise demonstration, come make noise noise. What was different is that there were fireworks. And for me, this isn't so uncommon. I have seen noise demos across the country that also feature fireworks. But it was after the fireworks were shot that around the facility that the people inside the wardens call 911. The fireworks did not damage anything. This was very clear on trial. The fireworks did not even hit any Fence any part of the building, buildings. It was raining that day, but unfortunately as people were leaving, that was seen on the videos we heard from the officers. People were leaving as the police was arriving. One of the office, the first driving officer from Alvarado Police department got off his car, drew his firearm at some of the protesters and then shots were fired in his direction and then the officer shot fire back. What happened was a noise demonstration that anyone could have gone to and unfortunately shots fired back and forth after the officer drew his firearm. The charges unfortunately were not only material support for terrorism, they were a riot. They were using explosives in the commission of a felony. The fireworks and then an arrange of attempted murder charges. Which of all those charges, only one person was found guilty, the person alleged to have shot the rifle.

Juan Gonzalez (55:28)

And Javier, can you talk about the federal prosecutors attempt to accuse all of the protesters of being part of antifa?

Javier De Hanon (55:37)

Yes. So what we heard from the Federal Government since July 4, 2025 is descriptions that are similar to what we're hearing in Minneapolis, in Chicago, in Los Angeles, in Portland and now in Vermont that people who are standing up for immigrants are terrorists, are antifa, are masked villains, are wearing black to be disguised and never been found. During the trial we heard repeatedly the reference to something they call the North Texas antifa cell. The Department of Justice still says this is a thing. But then we heard from cooperating defendants explaining that no exists, that they didn't even know that they were a part of Antifa to begin with, as the government alleges. So this case, although it is the federal government's first successful antifa trial, it actually didn't even need antifa to have any convictions. The convictions, riot material, support for terrorism, attempted murder, use of explosives, don't even need an organization or that there is even a terrorist organization. The antifa of it all, for my perspective, was purely political.

Juan Gonzalez (56:49)

Political.

Javier De Hanon (56:49)

And we saw that from the so called expert that the government used.

Juan Gonzalez (56:54)

And we have only a minute, but could you talk about some of the witnesses for the prosecution and their connections to right wing organizations?

Javier De Hanon (57:04)

Yes. So really the, the biggest witness that the prosecution presented was Kyle Scheidler, I believe is his last name, and he was presented as the expert on antifa for the government. He actually works for a think tank, has been considered a hate group and the director of that think tank has been exposed as being Islamophobic and having all these very right wing, very conservative beliefs. This person got on the stand and he actually admitted that he helped write the indictment for the federal government. So the so called expert on antifa, which even the judge wasn't impressed about about, was also the one who wrote this antifa indictment for the federal government. I mean, beside him we had dozens and dozens of officers from every imaginable agency, FBI, atf, Alvarado police, Johnson county, other towns police all called on the scene after the shooting occurred after the July 4th noise demonstration.

Amy Goodman (58:13)

Javier, we just have 15 seconds. What happens next? They've been convicted of terrorism. Eight of these protesters facing at least 15 years in jail each.

Javier De Hanon (58:23)

Yes. What's next is that the fight continues. There will be post trial motions, there will likely be appeals. And as you mentioned, there are a lot of state cases that are still pending, not just for these defendants, but for other defendants that never had federal charges from the same event. And so the the battle will go on in North Texas and hopefully more people can support the supporters through their own resources.

Amy Goodman (58:47)

Javier, we're going to have to leave it there. Javier de Hanon, attorney with the People's Law Collective, National Lawy Guild. That does it for our show. I'm Amy Goodman with Juan Gonzalez for another edition of Democracy Now.