The Cuba situation is starting to resemble a pre-conflict playbook

The U.S. pressure campaign against Cuba appears to have entered a new phase, one which raises serious questions about the Trump administration’s endgame for the communist-run Caribbean island.

The Department of Justice on Wednesday unsealed an indictment of former Cuban President Raul Castro, accusing him of murder for the country’s military shootdown of two planes in 1996. Castro, 94, was the country’s defense minister at the time of the incident.

The move, which came on May 20 — a symbolically important date recognized as the official birth of the Republic of Cuba — marked one of the sharpest escalations in tensions between Washington and Havana.

FBI Director Kash Patel described the indictment of Castro and five others as “a major step toward accountability.”

The measure forms part of a broader effort by President Donald Trump to deliver regime change in Cuba, a strategy that has included the recent tightening of economic sanctions and a push to implement an oil blockade on the island since January.

It has caused a worsening economic crisis and left Cuba facing its biggest test since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Cuban Energy Minister Vicente de la O Levy said last week that the island had run out of oil and diesel, describing the country’s predicament as “extremely tense.”

Some of Cuba’s officials have sounded the alarm about a possible U.S. military intervention in recent weeks.

It comes as separate media reported that Cuba has purportedly been building up more than 300 military drones from Russia and Iran to potentially use against U.S. targets and that the Trump administration has been conducting intelligence-gathering flights off the coast of Cuba — echoing a pattern that emerged in the lead-up to U.S. military operations in both Venezuela and Iran.

Antoni Kapcia, professor of Latin American history at the U.K.’s University of Nottingham, said he has consistently doubted that outright military action is being seriously considered on the U.S. side.

In Cuba, however, the state has always taken the military threat seriously and prepared for it, Kapcia told CNBC by email.

“The Pentagon has certainly long held the view that military action would result in US soldiers in body bags on an unacceptable scale. That seems to be why the US [keeps] going hot and cold over Cuba — ‘back channel’ negotiations one minute and threats of immediate action the next,” Kapcia said.

“So far, [Trump] has overtly talked of continuing to use economic measures to strangle the system, and that is certainly what he’s doing — it’s cheaper than war and certainly making [life] even more difficult for ordinary Cubans,” he added.

CNBC has contacted a spokesperson for Cuba’s Foreign Ministry and the White House and is awaiting a response.

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel on Wednesday dismissed the indictment of Castro, saying on social media that it is “a political maneuver, devoid of any legal foundation, aimed solely at padding the fabricated dossier they use to justify the folly of a military aggression against #Cuba.”

Earlier in the week, Díaz-Canel said U.S. threats of military aggression against Havana were well known, adding that if they were to materialize, “it would trigger a bloodbath with incalculable consequences.”

Trump has previously talked up the prospect of a “friendly takeover” of Cuba and said the White House could turn its sights on Havana after the Iran war. The U.S. president has also said he could do anything he wanted with the country, adding that he thinks he will have the “honor” of “taking Cuba.”

Robert Munks, head of Americas research at risk intelligence company Verisk Maplecroft, said that while the Trump administration’s exact intentions remain opaque, Washington’s current posture points less toward an imminent direct move than to letting pressure do the work.

Cuba’s most existential risk is not a foreign intervention “but whether the state can keep the lights on long enough to stay in control,” Munks told CNBC by email.

“Even though security forces are likely to keep a lid on unrest in the short term, there is potential for severe instability as further power cuts cascade into even greater food and water shortages,” Munks said.

“The escalating humanitarian crisis within Cuba remains a wildcard that could yet force either side into improvising responses,” he continued. “Expect the arrival of more aid from regional countries such as Mexico and Uruguay, but the US blockade will continue to dictate the everyday lived experience for ordinary Cubans.”

Alexander B. Gray, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, said the Trump administration’s endgame for Cuba is clear.

“It is to delegitimize the Castro regime and create the conditions for internal change in the medium term that would better align with the US interest,” Gray said in a note published Wednesday.

“That US interest is a regime in Havana that is aligned with US security priorities and opposed to extra-hemispheric meddling by US rivals like China and Russia,” he added.