AA
Share
In recent days, former Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and President Claudia Sheinbaum have once again called for solidarity with the people of Cuba. Both in the issuing and in the reception of those messages—quickly acknowledged by President Miguel Diaz-Canel—it has become clear that the main recipient of the aid is the government of the island.
The confusion stems from the official dogma, shared by both governments—the Mexican and the Cuban—that in both countries the people govern. This confusion is also rooted in an old doctrine and practice of solidarity with Cuba, based on the idea that since the island is a victim of the United States embargo, its government and its system of state-run economy and single communist party must also be defended by the Latin American left.
The problem with this doctrine of solidarity, which is put into practice through organizations in all Cuban embassies in Latin America, is that it distorts the fact that the current model is also responsible for the island’s collapse. Over the last quarter century, the Cuban government has developed an economic policy based on Venezuelan oil subsidies, tourism, and remittances from the diaspora as its main sources of income—an approach that has decapitalized the country.
That unproductive model—not only the US trade embargo—is responsible for rising poverty and inequality, youth emigration and demographic decline, popular discontent, and recurring protests, which the official Mexican press conceals. Therefore, the Cuban people are not truly helped by a policy toward the island that seeks to reproduce that model.
Real help for the Cuban people would be a policy aimed at encouraging reforms that recapitalize the country and allow for the opening of public freedoms. If a process of opening were to begin on the island, Mexico’s role could be pivotal due to the geographic proximity between the two countries. If such an opening were supported by the United States, Mexico could become even more involved through an offer of credit and investment, as well as deeper scientific and technical collaboration.
The policy toward the island pursued by Mexico’s last two governments has not only failed to contribute to such an opening but has instead favored the persistence of the island’s exhausted model. By resorting to the same system of energy subsidies associated with Chavismo and Maduro’s government, the administrations of Morena and the so-called Fourth Transformation (4T) have aligned themselves with the Cuban government’s immobility. In attempting to differentiate themselves from the US sanctions strategy, they have adhered to the official Cuban line.
Now that a new round of negotiations between the United States and Cuba is beginning, this may be a timely opportunity for Mexico—currently renewing its trade agreement with Washington—to recalibrate its approach toward the island and join efforts to encourage economic and political opening.
*This article was originally published in La Razón de México.
