In Angola's hospitals and health centers, Cuban doctors operate under a stringent system of control that begins the moment they sign a contract in Havana and continues until the conclusion of their assignment. This is evidenced by an internal document from the state-run corporation ANTEX S.A., obtained by Martí Noticias, which outlines a system involving withheld wages, confiscated documents, and surveillance over personal lives—practices experts deem as labor exploitation.
The contract, currently active and signed with a healthcare professional, stipulates a salary of $598 per month. However, the doctors only receive $200 in kwanzas (Angola's official currency) at an exchange rate dictated by the company, while the remainder is held in an account in Cuba under ANTEX's control. This money can be deducted for “compensation” or “disciplinary measures” and is only fully received at the end of the mission if no penalties are outstanding.
The regulations delve into personal matters, requiring the medical staff to surrender their passports two months before their visas expire, seek permission for travel within Angola, refrain from marrying or acknowledging children locally, and report any “stable” relationships with locals or foreigners. According to Martí Noticias, under section 13.1.b, signatories must pledge to maintain “ethical, political, social, labor, and moral revolutionary behavior” and to “contribute to the prestige of the Revolution,” effectively turning the labor contract into a political loyalty oath.
Legal experts and specialists state that the contract embodies several indicators of forced labor as defined by the International Labor Organization, potentially constituting human trafficking for labor exploitation, journalist Annarella Grimal reported to Mario J. Pentón of Martí Noticias.
This is not the first time conditions in Angola have sparked outrage. In February, Cuban doctors reported to CiberCuba that ANTEX had halved their monthly food stipend due to "cash flow issues," leaving them with just $100 to live on, while their mission leaders stayed in hotels with all expenses covered.
This leak coincides with the United States intensifying its stance against Havana's medical services export program. On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced travel sanctions against officials from Cuba, Brazil, African countries, Grenada, and former directors of the Pan American Health Organization, accused of engaging in a global forced labor scheme. Rubio criticized programs like Mais Médicos in Brazil and other brigades as “diplomatic scams,” warning countries employing personnel under these conditions to “think twice.”
For years, Washington and international organizations have condemned the Cuban regime for withholding a significant portion of the salaries of its professionals, restricting their mobility, and using them as tools of political influence. Despite the criticism, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez insisted that Cuba would not abandon these missions, which currently employ over 24,000 workers in 56 countries, defending them as “solidarity” efforts and “life-saving.”
For those affected, such as the doctors in Angola, these statements starkly contrast with a reality of strict control, precarious living conditions, and unfulfilled promises.
Insights into the Control of Cuban Doctors Abroad
What are the main issues faced by Cuban doctors in Angola?
Cuban doctors in Angola face issues such as withheld wages, confiscation of documents, limitations on personal freedoms, and a requirement to adhere to political loyalty, which experts classify as forms of labor exploitation.
How does the U.S. respond to Cuba's medical missions abroad?
The U.S. has imposed travel sanctions on officials involved in Cuba's medical services export program, criticizing it as a form of forced labor and warning other countries about participating in such schemes.
Why is the Cuban government criticized for its medical missions?
The Cuban government is criticized because it retains a large portion of the doctors' salaries, restricts their freedom of movement, and uses them as instruments of political influence, which is seen as exploitative.