How Can the Broadest, Most Effective Movement Be Built?
On June 7, 2026, the Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee (SCFC) voted “to remove the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) participants from membership in our committee,” as the organization announced.
“We are doing this because of ideological differences with the SWP Middle East policy, specifically their support of Israel in the face of Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people. This action is not aimed at the individuals, but firmly rejects the policies they support,” the SCFC explained.
Others active in Cuba solidarity work across the United States have expressed opposition to this decision, even though a number of them also decried the SWP’s position on Israel/Palestine as a “wretched, counterrevolutionary position on Zionism,” as Pete Seidman, a leader of the Miami Coalition to End the U.S. Blockade of Cuba, put it in a letter reproduced below.
“The expulsion of the SWP in Seattle is a dangerous precedent,” said a letter signed by 14 Cuba solidarity activists. “It establishes a rule that we cannot unite in action with those whom we disagree with on other matters. It erects barriers to uniting growing numbers in a live and actual anti-imperialist fight against Washington’s war on Cuba — which should certainly include those who are not ‘anti-imperialists’ themselves.”
Responding in part to this letter, SCFC leader Cindy Domingo stated, “This decision was not taken lightly nor was it done overnight.” She was referring to the SCFC expulsion of the SWP, in a letter to Cuba solidarity activists reproduced below. “Some of us have many decades of work in building broad coalitions and alliances and have traversed significant struggles in determining the principles that must be upheld in building these types of coalitions. Let me make this clear, in this expulsion, we are not talking about individuals who are Zionists — we are talking about an organization that holds a Zionist line — supports Israel in their genocide against the Palestinian people. They sell their line in all our Cuba events with their literature and newspaper and in private discussions held with people.”
“I don’t think this discussion centers so much on non-exclusion for the SWP as it does on much more important forces that we have to think about carefully,” said Seidman in his letter cited above. “In particular, this has to do with Cubans and Cuban Americans.”
Some of these Cuban Americans are opposed to the Cuban revolution and support “regime change” in the Caribbean nation, while at the same time they express opposition to U.S. threats of military attack against Cuba and call for an end to the U.S. blockade. Should they be excluded from the work to broaden opposition to U.S. policy on the basis that they are not “anti-imperialists,” Seidman asked.
In addition, it is not only Cuban Americans or other Cubans in the diaspora who are opposed to U.S. policy toward Cuba, but who do not support Cuba’s socialist revolution. A May 2026 poll showed that 64% of the U.S. population oppose a war against Cuba. A March 2026 poll showed that a plurality (48%) opposes the U.S. oil blockade of the island. These numbers reflect increased possibilities of winning support among working people and their unions. This is a source of strength that Cuba solidarity groups in places like Los Angeles and Chicago have already begun to tap.
This trend in public opinion is also apparent in the stance taken by a number of members of the U.S. Congress and other politicians, who have recently spoken out against the U.S. blockade but call Cuba’s government a “dictatorship”— such as New York mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Wouldn’t involving these forces — clearly not “anti-imperialist” — in the anti-blockade movement be a huge help to Cuba’s cause today?
We publish below for the information of our readers materials related to this debate, which we think involves important considerations for winning new forces to the movement to oppose Washington’s relentless and increasingly brutal economic war against Cuba. This is especially the case as the people of the Caribbean nation are confronting the most severe economic and social crisis since the victory of the Cuban revolution on January 1, 1959, largely as a result of the cruel and inhuman policies of the U.S. government.
These materials have been circulating in recent weeks among Cuba solidarity groups and individuals.
They include the announcement by the SCFC of its June 7 decision to expel the SWP; a letter signed by 14 individuals active in Cuba solidarity work expressing opposition to the SCFC action; a letter by SCFC leader Cindy Domingo cited above; the letter by Pete Seidman also cited above; and another letter by Cuba Sí NY-NJ Coalition leader Ike Nahem on this matter.
The text of each of the items below is from the original. Headlines and photos are by World-Outlook. Due to their length, we publish these materials in two parts, the first of which follows.
— World-Outlook editors
(This is the first of two parts. The second can be found in Part II.)
*
Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee Addendum Announcement
After a great deal of discussion and soul searching, our committee voted to expel our four members who are also members of the Socialist Workers Party. Here is our summary statement explaining the decision:
“The Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee voted on June 7, 2026, to remove the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) participants from membership in our committee. We are doing this because of ideological differences with the SWP Middle East policy, specifically their support of Israel in the face of Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people. This action is not aimed at the individuals, but firmly rejects the policies they support.
We want to acknowledge that our inclusion of SWP and the distribution of their materials during SCFC events has caused harm to our organization and our ability to cooperate with our sister organizations engaged in solidarity and anti-imperialist work in our area.
SCFC is joining with other regional Cuba solidarity organizations to increase our presence and intensity of our work to fight for the Cuban people. Solidarity is so important at this time when Cubans face life-threatening conditions and are facing the threat of imminent US military intervention. We fight to lift up the life affirming policies of Cuba, end the US Blockade, and stand in support of the global struggle against oppression.
“There are no boundaries in this struggle to the death. We cannot be indifferent to what happens anywhere in the world, for a victory by any country over imperialism is our victory; just as any country’s defeat is a defeat for all of us.”
— Ernesto Che Guevara, June 14, 1928- October 9, 1967
*
Letter by Cuba Solidarity Activists
(The following is a letter signed by 14 activists in Cuba solidarity work across the United States and circulated in late June and early July 2026 to other groups and individuals working to expand opposition to Washington’s economic war against Cuba.)
As Washington ramps up its oil blockade and war threats, the stakes are extremely high for the people of Cuba. Our united fight against the U.S. blockade has never been of greater importance. Moreover, we also have growing opportunities to increase our political impact by gaining support from broader layers of the population.
The cruelty of Washington’s policies will cause a growing revulsion among fair-minded people and a profound polarization within the Cuban-American population (we can expect — and already see — a significant number of Cuban-Americans deeply upset by the oil blockade and military threats against their families).
Our normalisation movement must consider how to relate to these potential developments to deepen our adversaries’ problems. New sectors of resistance will emerge in concrete and unexpected ways. Working with new iterations of resistance requires tactical ability and the courage to struggle alongside people with whom we have important disagreements.
Common opposition to the blockade should be our only political test. If we impose other political entry requirements, we unnecessarily narrow ourselves — and Cuban people lose.
In this context, the undersigned oppose the expulsion of the Socialist Workers Party from the Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee. This is not a matter of endorsing the SWP’s or any other group’s broader politics. The only politics that should matter in our coalitions are active opposition to the U.S. blockade and war threats against Cuba.
We also urge the NNOC [National Network on Cuba] co-chairs to reaffirm our since-our-founding policy of non-exclusion.
The expulsion of the SWP in Seattle is a dangerous precedent. It establishes a rule that we cannot unite in action with those whom we disagree with on other matters. It erects barriers to uniting growing numbers in a live and actual anti-imperialist fight against Washington’s war on Cuba – which should certainly include those who are not “anti-imperialists” themselves.
Our strength lies in our unity.
Signed by (organizations for identification purposes only):
Steve Eckardt (Chicago Cuba Coalition)
Pete Seidman (Miami Coalition to End the U.S. Blockade of Cuba)
Gary Prevost (Minnesota Cuba Committee)
Brenda Lopez (U.S. Hands Off Cuba Committee)
Mark Satinoff (Cuba Sí NY-NJ Coalition)
Barbara Mutnick (Cuba Sí NY-NJ Coalition)
Mark Friedman (LA Hands Off Cuba)
Julie Wolenski (Chicago Cuba Coalition)
Mark Kuehner (Southsiders for Peace, Chicago Cuba Coalition)
Duane Stilwell (Phoenix, Arizona)
August Nimtz (Minnesota Cuba Committee)
Bob Miller (Cuba Sí NY-NJ Coalition)
Diane Stradling (Portsmouth, New Hampshire)
Rita Barouch (Bay Area Cuba Solidarity Network)
*
Letter by Cindy Domingo on SCFC Expulsion of SWP
(The following is a letter that Cindy Domingo, a leader of the Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee, sent to a number of Cuba solidarity activists on June 24, 2026. It is published with the author’s permission.)
I am writing this as an individual who is in the core of the Seattle Cuba Friendship Committee who read the minutes of the US-Cuba Normalization Committee meeting and received a letter that has been circulated with some signatures on it regarding the expulsion of SWP from SCFC.
First, I am surprised that a letter was drafted and circulated without any discussion on the circumstances that led to the expulsion, the struggle that occurred between the SCFC and SWP and the isolation of the SCFC has suffered because of our working relationship with the SWP in a time when the broadest coalition is being built in the Pacific Northwest around Cuba solidarity. Secondly, you did not have the decency to send SCFC the letter directly. If not for John Waller, who knows how long it would take for us to see the letter. I find this tactic divisive and not very strategic — some of you who know us in the PNW [Pacific Northwest] very well and for many years, could have picked up the phone or email to discuss this issue. But I guess you who do not live or do political work here seem to know what is best for our work or how we should build a broad coalition around Cuba in this urgent time.
This decision was not taken lightly nor was it done overnight. Some of us have many decades of work in building broad coalitions and alliances and have traversed significant struggles in determining the principles that must be upheld in building these types of coalitions. Let me make this clear, in this expulsion, we are not talking about individuals who are Zionists — we are talking about an organization that holds a Zionist line — supports Israel in their genocide against the Palestinian people. They sell their line in all our Cuba events with their literature and newspaper and in private discussions held with people.
I have been doing Cuba solidarity work in the PNW since 1999. Today, there is the broadest coalition being built in solidarity with Cuba and joining to build the No War on Cuba work. Ten organizations alone in Seattle are working together including DSA [Democratic Socialists of America], PSL [Party for Socialism and Liberation], Seattle Against War and other organizations that you want us to ignore in order to work with the SWP. These other organizations refuse to work with SWP because of their support of Israel.
So please don’t tell us how to build a broad coalition in the Pacific Northwest in solidarity with Cuba because we are doing it based on principles that we have decided are good for our work and for Cuba.
Thank you to Chery L and John W for letting us know what all you were doing!
*
Letter by Pete Seidman on SCFC Expulsion of SWP
(The following is a letter that Pete Seidman, a leader of the Miami Coalition to End the U.S. Blockade of Cuba, sent to John Waller, a leader of the National Network on Cuba (NNOC), on June 26, 2026. It has been lightly edited by World-Outlook for readability. It is published with the author’s permission.)
Dear John,
A couple of big things in politics this week seem important to add into this discussion: the sweeping victory of the Mamdani slate in the New York City (NYC) Democratic Party primaries and the vote by the United Auto Workers (UAW) national convention to divest from holding Israeli bonds.
The vote in the largest Jewish population city outside of Israel for (shorthand) a pro-Palestine slate and this first national industrial union to take a similar stand surely show important shifts that we’ve long known have been underway.
Clearly, they weaken the argument that taking a position on Palestine per se automatically rules out support from unions. I totally welcome that! But I would add, to be realistic, the argument still holds for the majority of unions.
In NYC, for example, the Mamdani win came despite the opposition by the big city unions to the candidates he endorsed. Even there, I think the popular vote demonstrates that the union positions reflect a growing gap between the officialdom and the rank and file on the issue of Palestine.
If the argument about expelling the SWP was solely based on its wretched, counterrevolutionary position on Zionism, it would seem that this position was not sufficiently taking note of new, exciting developments in the real world.
However, I would like to examine this a little further. I don’t think this discussion centers so much on non-exclusion for the SWP as it does on much more important forces that we have to think about carefully.
In particular, this has to do with Cubans and Cuban Americans.
The Miami Coalition had a very successful meeting last Thursday [June 18, 2026] opposing U.S. war threats against Cuba (see Miami: Cuban Americans Speak Out Against U.S. Threats, Blockade).
One of the features you can readily see from the article is the high participation of younger Cuban Americans. Even more important is the letter read to the meeting from the Minister of the Miami Unitarian Universalist Church by a member of the congregation’s social justice committee.
The Rev. Dr. Harold Marrero wrote that he is “a Cuban refugee” who supports regime change in Cuba. “I support a peaceful, democratic transition, chosen and led by the Cuban people, with free expression, accountable government, human rights, and room for every person to live without fear.”
However, he stressed, “I do not support military intervention. I do not support replacing one form of domination with another…. I reject the idea that we can free a people by starving them.”
What are we to make of that? Can we find ways to unite in action with this minister (the first to address us in such a manner, whose church hosted a fundraiser two months ago that netted $2,200 sent to Global Health Partners)? Is his plainly stated counterrevolutionary position on the Cuban government a barrier to principled collaboration?
The same question was posed for us when Jorge Medina (“El Protestón Cubano”) started what became the monthly caravan movement in Miami back in 2020. After much discussion and careful tactical efforts, our positive response to that initiative by someone whose counterrevolutionary politics eventually led him to abandon the movement he started resulted in a very important movement of mainly Cubans in Miami that, as I’m sure you agree, helped to materially strengthen our international movement against the blockade.
For these reasons, the matter of expelling an organization because it has a different position, a reactionary position, on anything but the issue of opposition to the blockade of Cuba (and the related demands we make re removing Cuba from the U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism (SSOT) list, no war, etc.) sets a dangerous precedent for how we are to work with other forces — not because of their position on Palestine, but even with their position on the Cuban regime.
Right now, I am sure you agree that the beleaguered government of Cuba needs support from every possible quarter willing to give it. Our movement needs to be politically equipped to rise to that challenge. The possibilities of engaging Cubans who despite their attitude towards the revolution are appalled at the suffering caused by Washington’s genocidal policies or at the thought of bombs falling on their families in Havana… depend on us having the right position on what political test we will apply. This goes way beyond the issue of the SWP, which is just a tiny little canary in a much bigger coal mine! They are nothing compared to the political weight and moral authority of Cubans and Cuban Americans who begin to publicly declare, “Not in Our Name.”
For these reasons, I think opposition to the expulsion of the SWP remains important. Perhaps this should be explained more fully as I have tried to do here. But I do believe the political points above were argued and re-argued at length, even if in a rather limited political discussion, in the NNOC meetings and bylaws debate. I don’t think it’s worth anyone’s energy to rehash all that so soon after the vote. I believe all of us need some experience to see what the consequences of that vote will be.
Unfortunately, the expulsion in Seattle doesn’t seem like a great beginning in that learning curve! I believe there will be similar discussions and votes in many local areas as politics develops.
In solidarity,
Pete
PS: I can’t help but remark that yesterday, on Facebook, the Seattle/Cuba Friendship Committee posted a picture of some members holding up their beautiful new banner and noting that Seattle’s Democratic Congressional Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who recently went on a five-day visit to Cuba and has spoken out vigorously against the blockade, had joined them in the photo. “We love her,” they proclaimed. So, an elected member of the Democratic Party (albeit in its “left wing”) is welcome despite that party’s critical role in sending bombs to the Zionist regime while members of the SWP, who support the dropping of those same bombs, are not?
(This was the first of two parts. The second can be found in Part II.)
If you appreciate this article, share it with friends and subscribe to World-Outlook (for free) by clicking on the link below.
Type your email in the box below and click on “SUBSCRIBE.” You will receive a notification in your in-box on which you will have to click to confirm your subscription.
Categories: Cuba/Cuba Solidarity