Trump in Guayabera

The incoming U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, may soon become the world’s most stretched manager. Its office must tackle the U.S.’s chronic imbalances with China, Iran’s flirtation with nuclear weapons, and more recently, an institutional crisis in South Korea. All while staying consistent with his boss's rambling promises.

Instead, he should be looking closer: His biggest Trump card might just be waiting in Cuba.

The small island first sparked U.S.-Latin America tensions—and has continued to do so for more than a century. In 1898, the U.S. joined Cuba in its struggle for independence, achieving in months what the island had struggled for decades to do: defeat Spain. However, the U.S. went on to occupy the island for a decade, and left only after forcing Cuba to grant it the right to intervene militarily.

The outcome fuelled a strong wave of anti-Americanism among Latin American elites, revealing them, for the first time, that they shared their region with a potential invader. Writers and poets from all across Latin America despised the U.S. for its attack on Hispanic culture, which they held in much higher regards. Argentine poet Paul Groussac, drawing on Shakespeare, described the U.S. as a true Caliban—half human, half monster. After all, the U.S. had retained Puerto Rico after the war, and could do the same with others if it chose.

The sentiment, however, turned critical in 1959, when a small revolutionary guerrilla seized control of the island. The country had been long ruled by a former U.S.-backed politician turned dictator, and crowds rallied behind revolutionary leader Fidel Castro as he triumphally entered La Habana. However, a mysterious detonation at the capital’s largest port led Castro to believe Washington was planning an invasion, quickly signing a defence agreement with the USSR. The White House retaliated with a controversial blockade that Latin Americans criticise to this day.

Ever since, conflicts between the U.S. and Latin America have had the island as backdrop.

During the 1970s, for instance, Washington sponsored coups in countries like Argentina, Chile, and Bolivia, in an effort to impede further Soviet influence in the region. Cuba, in contrast, provided a haven to those that were sent into exile. As a result, Cuba’s diplomatic influence grew strong even during the wave of democratisation that overspread the region in the 1990s. Today, the most moderate Latin American left-wingers still support Cuba.

The security concerns that justified the economic blockade no longer hold, and thus Mr Trump should lift it. The policy has failed to bring about regime change, and Russia is today a mere shadow of the USSR. Even China, The U.S.’s biggest enemy, is far from the global dominance Moscow ever sought. Furthermore, the U.S. could take the lead in the negotiations. Cuba is suffering one of its biggest economic crises, and in today multi-polar order may be more willing to engage in talks.

After all, the U.S. must recognise that Cuba’s influence stretch far beyond its borders, and has successfully backed authoritarian backslides in the region, like in Venezuela. By prompting negotiations, the U.S. could thus influence the region’s most unstable countries in a better direction. It is worth noting that many of the migrants fuelling the U.S. southern border crisis come from countries with strong ties to Cuba: Mexico, Venezuela, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

Paradoxically, a visit to Havana could enable Mr. Trump to reboot U.S.-Latin America relations while tackling one of the most significant crises facing his country in recent years. That way, he might just make America great again, simply by wearing a guayabera.