In January 2020, a military strike by the United States assassinated Qasem Soleimani, the former commander of the elite Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, then deputy head of an Iraqi paramilitary organization known as the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMU).

The assassination increased not only the escalation between the U.S. and Iran-linked Shiite militias, but it also enabled the Iraqi parliament to request then Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi to end foreign military presence in Iraq. Correspondingly, Shiite militias carried out a total of nearly 100 attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities and bases hosting  U.S.-led coalition troops in Iraq, compelling the U.S. to reconsider its combat mission in Iraq.

At first, the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic facilities and bases forced the U.S. to downsize its military mission in Iraq. Accordingly, the U.S. withdrew approximately half of its 5,000 forces from Iraq in 2020. The majority of the remaining forces serve as advisers to Iraq’s military. The U.S.-led coalition handed over eight bases to the Iraqi military last year and pulled international troops back to larger garrisons such as Camp Taji, Erbil, and Ain al-Asad airbases.

Meanwhile, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi has been facing pressure from Iraqi Shia factions in the country and militias allied with Iran to implement the Iraqi parliament’s nonbinding decision to end foreign military presence in Iraq. Al-Kadhimi has strived to reduce coalition combat forces, and instead to increase NATO’s role in Iraq, where in 2018 he invited some 500 NATO personnel to raise Iraqi military and security competencies during Iraq’s strategic dialogue with the U.S.

The U.S. withdrawal of combat missions from Iraq will not stop drone and rocket attacks by the Shiite militias on U.S. diplomatic facilities and bases hosting the U.S.-led coalition troops in Iraq.

On the one hand, the strategic dialogue meetings have resulted in reducing the U.S.-led combat mission against DAESH in Iraq, the majority of whom are American soldiers, by 60 percent. On the other hand, NATO agreed to expand its military consultation mission in Iraq to roughly 4,000 troops.

Moreover, Josep Borrell, high representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy and vice-president of the European Commission, announced that NATO is planning to establish a second base for training missions in Erbil. Thus, the U.S. has shared the responsibility to respond to attacks from Iran-linked Shiite militias with its allies in NATO.

Cuba’s gradual easing of restrictions following the coronavirus pandemic has been discussed in terms of its economy. An article published recently highlights the pandemic predicament as the main reason in Cuba’s dwindling tourism statistics.

COVID19, however, was not the only reason for Cuba’s contracting economy. On the 59^th anniversary since Kennedy signed the executive order for the blockade against the island, Cuban President Miguel Diaz Canel noted that the island incurred losses of over $144 million since 1962. The largest deficit, however, was reached between 2019 and 2020, when the reversal of the Obama Administration’s policies towards Cuba, which included normalization of relations, caused a loss of over $5 billion dollars.

Blaming the Cuban Revolution suffices for the capitalist narrative. Even when reforms are announced, these are juxtaposed against the central economic model which was implemented in 1959. However, an early assessment in 1961 shows that Cuba was on track with fulfilling its promises to the population, laid down in Fidel Castro’s defense speech, ‘History Will Absolve Me,’ in 1953. On trial for the Moncada Barracks Attack, Fidel Castro not only defended his position but also utilized the moment to communicate the revolution’s political program. Land, industrialization, housing, unemployment, education and health were the six main points highlighted by Fidel Castro.

By 1961, an early assessment indicated that the revolution was fulfilling its promises. The emphasis upon education, health and agrarian reform indicated the will to rebuild Cuba in the face of shortages faced due to its elite workforce abandoning the island for the US. In February 1962, US President J.F. Kennedy authorized a complete blockade over Cuba, even as the US busied itself with the creation of USAID – a governmental agency ostensibly promoting economic development, and used as a veneer for infiltration in Cuba.

The blockade was instrumental in Cuba’s shift towards the Soviet Union and it was during this time that Fidel publicly declared allegiance to Marxism-Leninism.

This is not to say that Cuba was not heavily dependent upon the Soviet Union, particularly in the aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Such dependence became clear upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989, when Cuba entered into the ‘Special Period’ and found itself isolated. In Fidel’s words, ‘From day one to the next, we found ourselves without fuel, without raw materials, without food, without soap, without everything.’

In 1992, the Cuban Democracy Act  reinforced the blockade until the government complied with US requests for free market economics and constitutional change, among other requirements. The Helms Burton Act of 1996 further intensified the blockade, expanding the embargo to include foreign companies dealing with Cuba, while explicitly outlining the US plans for a transition government replacing Fidel Castro.

Meanwhile, Cuba continued expanding its education and healthcare programs, distinguishing  itself in the region, as even the World Bank acknowledged in 2014. However, the blockade has long been recognized as one of the main impediments of Cuba’s economic growth.

In February, the Cuban government announced it would be lifting restrictions on self-employment to stimulate the local economy in terms of imports and exports. US mainstream media, however, is lamenting the reforms as not capitalist enough, albeit timely enough to meet the possible shift in diplomatic relations between Cuba and the US under the Biden Administration.

Cuba’s self-reliance and its regional cooperation with Latin American countries were both strategies devised to challenge the Western economic development concepts.

What the US expects from Cuba, however, differs from what the Cuban system aims to achieve. The reforms were not aimed at establishing a capitalist model in Cuba, but rather to enable the island to cope under the deprivation caused by the US blockade. While the US equates a possible Cuban departure from socialism with economic prosperity, the Cuban model remembers the US exploitation of the island, and the absence of any sustainable development in Cuba. In 2019, Cuba was ranked top in the global ranking for sustainable development – an achievement with historical roots dating back to 1953.

Recognizing the role the Cuban Revolution played in Cuba’s success also requires thorough consideration of the US role in hindering Cuba’s economic development. Cuba’s self-reliance, and its regional cooperation with Latin American countries, were both strategies devised to challenge the Western economic development concepts that do not go beyond the capitalist model and the desire that Cuba submits to the same. Furthermore, the US placed many hurdles for trade with Cuba to proceed seamlessly, with the threat of sanctions looming overhead as a means of coercion for the island to abandon its revolutionary principles and practice.

The coronavirus pandemic, however, provided an opportunity for the international community to view Cuba through its own lens. In the early days, as footage of health services worldwide collapsed with the influx of hospitalizations and rising death tolls, Cuba burst onto the international scene with its medical contingent – the Henry Reeves Brigade. A testament of Fidel’s words during the Haiti earthquake in 2010  – “We send doctors, not soldiers!” – when Cuba sent its medical teams as the US increased its militarization of humanitarian aid, the Henry Reeves Brigade offered its services to countries worldwide. Italy was one of the first countries welcoming the medical brigade, as images on TV illustrated the inability of the healthcare system to cope with the sudden onslaught.

While Cuba offered its help abroad, Cubans at home benefited from a healthcare system that tended to their needs. Unlike the US, for example, which mismanaged the pandemic from the start, Cuba is now the first Latin American country close to developing its own vaccine.

As the Business Insider plainly stated in its headline, Cuba ‘has a history of fighting disease without help from the West.’ Which begets the question – what would Cuba achieve internationally if the US blockade was lifted, and the island was able to trade freely in the international arena?

With a vaccine on the horizon, a plan to inoculate all Cubans by the end of 2021, the possibility of vaccinating tourists visiting Cuba while also providing additional doses, it cannot be denied that the advances in healthcare are one of the strongest factors in Cuba’s economy, or would be without the embargo.