It is nothing more and nothing less than the last attack of the United States against Cuba that aims to dramatically intensify the interventionist actions of the Empire to imprint the blockade on its extraterritorial nature.
It is difficult for any sane person to understand why the current U.S. Administration has the right, from a legal perspective, to put this law into practice.
Perhaps if we go back to the background of the historical-concrete context in which such a monster came to light, we could find some explanation for the erratic behavior of the U.S. President Donald Trump.
The legislative elections of 1994 gave the Republican Party control of both chambers in the US Congress, which led to an increase in the influence of anti-Cuban groups.
For the Democrat Willian Jefferson Clinton, president then of the United States, it was difficult to maintain the dominion over the opposition fortified in those moments with the majority support of the Senate.
On the other hand, capitalism had emerged as the prevailing social system in a globalized world that was betting on the fall of the Cuban Revolution and the proclamation of the United States as a power destined to dominate the world.
Amidst thathostile context and under the ideal that the Revolution had its days numbered, the law emerged as the first legislative proposal of the Republican Senator Jesse Helms, after his inauguration in office, and an election campaign in which he had announced his intentions to increase sanctions against Cuba.
Nonetheless, and even under strong criticism from Congress, Willian Clinton disapproves of the Law on the grounds that it would affect not only Cuba but also United States allies.
However, the downing of two planes of "Hermanos al Rescate", an anti-Cuban organization, on February 24th, 1996, unleashed, once again, the hysteria of the most recalcitrant sectors of the United States and finally the Law was approved on March 12th of the same year.
Although, hermeneutics allows different interpretations of the Helms-Burton Act according to the subjectivity of the person who studies it, there is no doubt: we all agree that it is an open aggression against the sovereignty of Cuba.
The activation of the Title III on May 2nd should cause outrage in every decent Cuban because it is a juridical spawn that seeks to give legal strength to the imperial claws in the ancestral attempt to asphyxiate the Cuban Revolution.
The words of our president Miguel Díaz-Canel, referring to the fact, endorse the perennial commitment to history: "Nobody is going to snatch us, neither by seduction nor by force, the Homeland that our parents fought for."