The Latin American Report # 609

The Havana bureau of the EFE news agency, generally hostile towards the Cuban government, has published a wire titled "Are US sanctions the main cause of the Cuban crisis?," in which it consults the opinions of eight economists on the matter. The composition of this ad hoc group of experts is the first element to analyze here, because tell me who you ask, and I'll tell you what you are looking for.

All the interviewees, of course, are known for their academic approach, but ultimately also for their opposition to the Cuban political regime. In fact, they have all ended up clustered around a project funded by the National Endowment for Democracy through a Colombian university. Thus, the essence conveyed by them, in broad terms, is that the main party responsible for the Cuban polycrisis is the Cuban government. One of them goes so far as to state, unfortunately, that "the Cuban government is 100% responsible for the crisis".

One of these economists cited by EFE tends to frame the discussion in the following terms: while it is true that the U.S. sanctions exist and limit the inflow of resources to Havana, the important thing is to see how the Cuban government manages and organizes what can arrive from abroad and the internal potentialities. For me, it is not so easy in this globalized world.

As I have reiterated on many occasions in this space, there is no doubt that an assessment of the statecraft of the Cuban authorities reveals a multitude of inconsistencies, problems, and challenges in all dimensions of government management, from the purely economic to the political. However, it seems to me a tremendous, reprehensible lack of intellectual honesty not to place the fundamental cause of the Cuban problem in the exhaustive US sanctions regime. The US Department of the Treasury has recognized that it applies to Cuba "the most comprehensive" sanctions regime.

Thus, if for a country like Argentina, which is not a weak economy, the resolute support of someone like Scott Bessent is critical to achieving some stability vis-à-vis the markets, imagine what it means for a fragile and exposed economy like Cuba's that a power with immeasurable influence punishes it with the harshest possible sanctions, so many that it doesn't matter if Cuba is conceived by Foggy Bottom as an SSOT, because the consequences of those sanctions far exceed those tied to that condition. It is just a matter of having a basic understanding of what this implies, I repeat, beyond all the doubts, criteria, and accusations, many of them rational, directed against the Cuban political system.

For example, how can one overlook the responsibility of the United States in the tremendous Cuban electrical crisis when the companies importing fuel are designated by OFAC? It is true that many Russian or Chinese companies could, in principle, take on that task, but it is very difficult for those same companies to be willing to sacrifice their participation in the US financial and commercial system. As I was saying, it is a question of studying the problem objectively and measuring accordingly.

This is all for today’s report.