Origins of the OSPAAAL
The Tricontinental movement, formally recognized as the Organization of Solidarity with the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (OSPAAAL), began in 1966. Its inaugural conference in Havana brought together representatives from 82 nations to coordinate global resistance against imperialism. While historical figures such as Salvador Allende and Amílcar Cabral attended, the movement consisted largely of grassroots organizers. This alliance functioned as an expansion of the Afro-Asian Peoples’ Solidarity Organization (AAPSO), which formed in 1957. Cuba joined this bloc following its removal from the Organization of American States in 1962, seeking partners outside the standard U.S.-Soviet Cold War power dynamic.
Deep historical roots connect this movement to Black political networks in the Americas. Walterio Carbonell, an Afro-Cuban intellectual, championed the original concept of the Tricontinental. He maintained ties to trans-Atlantic activists and pushed for a fusion of race-based and class-based organizing. The OSPAAAL evolved into a prolific producer of political culture. For over four decades, it distributed posters, magazines, and films in multiple languages, creating a recognizable aesthetic. These materials helped build international support for the U.S. Civil Rights Movement and South African anti-apartheid efforts. Despite its 2019 dissolution, the organization remains a study in mid-century transnational solidarity.
Challenging Official Interpretations
The State Department’s July 20, 2026, report, “Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism,” targets this historical movement to frame contemporary U.S. left-wing activism as a foreign conspiracy. As a scholar who authored the first academic text on the Tricontinental, I recognize substantial portions of my research in the report. The State Department adopts my findings regarding the movement’s ties to the U.S. Civil Rights Movement, yet it fails to cite the original work. More importantly, it strips the historical context from the evidence, presenting a narrative that contradicts established scholarship.
The administration argues that the Tricontinental served as a tool for Cuba to incite terrorism within the United States. This assertion ignores the reality of the organization’s structure. The OSPAAAL was an international, nongovernmental body. While Havana hosted the headquarters, the member organizations maintained diverse viewpoints that often clashed with the Cuban government’s own rhetoric. The movement focused its critique on U.S. military policy, not the American people. Activists involved frequently expressed support for the struggle of U.S. citizens to secure their own civil rights.
Historical Reality Versus Political Narrative
Activists who engaged with the OSPAAAL often held complex opinions regarding the Cuban state. Figures like Stokely Carmichael, who served on the executive secretariat, eventually voiced sharp critiques of Cuban domestic policy. Carmichael challenged the government’s assertion that socialist reforms had resolved structural racial inequality on the island. Similarly, Robert F. Williams, a prominent North Carolina NAACP leader, maintained a critical distance from the state despite his personal time spent in Cuba between 1961 and 1965. These individuals demonstrate that one could participate in transnational solidarity while maintaining independent, sometimes adversarial, views toward the host nation.
The Trump administration’s report promotes a rigid binary that benefits political theater. It assumes that opposition to U.S. intervention equates to an inherent threat against the nation. Simultaneously, some ideological circles refuse to criticize the Cuban government, fearing any dissent weakens its sovereignty. The history of the Tricontinental defies these traps. It calls for an opposition to oppression in all forms. The current effort to weaponize this past for modern policy creates a distorted version of the past, serving short-term political goals rather than historical accuracy.