Why We Must Not Ignore Havana Syndrome

Last month, the undersigned participated in a conference at the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI) to discuss the national security implications of “Havana Syndrome,” the debilitating anomalous health incidents (AHI) that have been directed against American officials and their families at home and abroad in recent years. Based on the testimony at this conference—from doctors who treated the victims and researched its causes, from investigative journalists, and most eloquently from the victims themselves—as well as our own additional study and investigation, we believe the U.S. Government must reexamine its conclusions regarding the origins of these attacks and provide expanded medical coverage to the victims to meet their continuing health needs.

Indeed, at our recent conference, one participant suggested that the most recent of these attacks in Russia, Cuba and other countries may have been part of a Russian program to disrupt or sideline U.S. intelligence-gathering in advance of the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

So far, our intelligence community has shamefully refused to acknowledge the existence of this Russian program despite the testimony of survivors and the recent death of Michael Beck, a former intelligence officer who served in Moscow.  Only now has Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard suggested that previous intelligence assessments wrongly concealed Russia’s responsibility by claiming that it was “very unlikely a foreign adversary is responsible for AHIs.” 

The victims of Havana Syndrome deserve better of their government.  By publicizing these attacks and taking strong countermeasures against Moscow, the United States will go far to convince Moscow to terminate these attacks once and for all and persuade other states not to try to emulate Moscow’s tactics.

Therefore, we believe that at least two steps should be taken.

First, the 2023 and 2025 Intelligence Community Assessments (ICAs) on AHI must be reassessed. There is enough public information to call into doubt their conclusions that it is very unlikely a foreign adversary is behind the AHI attacks. Whether the Intelligence Community can definitively name a culprit is one thing, but it should acknowledge that some hostile power is behind the AHI attacks. This would be consistent with the Intelligence Community Experts Panel report that, “a subset of AHIs cannot be easily explained by known environmental or medical conditions and could be due to external stimuli.” This is necessary because as a December 2024 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) report noted, the analytic line of the 2023 ICA, “influenced CIA’s organizational position on AHIs and became one of several factors that affected how the Agency provided facilitated medical care and other benefits.” AHI must be treated as a line-of-duty injury and not as a naturally occurring medical condition to be addressed through private health care channels.

Second, because AHI victims are found across the Federal workforce and from the SSCI and a Government Accountability Office report, not to mention the testimony of many victims themselves, we know there are still challenges in obtaining adequate treatment, an Ombudsman position should be established at the National Security Council to ensure AHI victims receive the level of care and compensation required for their unique injuries.

Finally, it is clear from the accounts by victims, the undersigned, and by independent observers like David Ignatius, that the systematic attacks on U.S. officials represent a continuing policy that will continue until exposed, resisted, and deterred.  Our officials and diplomats deserve no less.

Ambassador Sandy Vershbow, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia and Deputy Secretary General of NATO, Distinguished Fellow, Atlantic Council

Dr. Stephen Blank, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute

Philip Wasielewski, Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute