Cuban Historian Criticizes Díaz-Canel's Appearance: "A President Without Real Solutions"

Cuban historian Jorge L. León expressed a harsh critique following the recent televised appearance by Miguel Díaz-Canel. Despite being billed by the regime as a "press conference" with both national and international media, many perceived it as another tightly controlled propaganda exercise.

"We saw a president without real solutions," León posted on social media after Díaz-Canel's more than two-hour address, during which he sidestepped discussing the most pressing issues that plague the Cuban population today: hunger, power outages, collapse of basic services, a hospital crisis, and an ongoing exodus.

León described the event as a "national embarrassment" and argued that Díaz-Canel's speech was out of touch with the reality in Cuba. The president focused on future promises and recycled plans, while the country endures endless lines, decimated wages, and chronic daily anxiety.

Warning Signs in Díaz-Canel's Address

For León, the most alarming aspect of the speech wasn't the rhetoric of "resilience" or "media warfare," but a phrase he viewed as a veiled warning. Díaz-Canel mentioned an upcoming situation that would require "extreme measures," which the historian interpreted as a signal of more sacrifices forced upon the people: cuts, restrictions, tighter control, and potential repression.

"In dictatorship language, 'extreme measures' means the usual," León wrote, asserting that the regime is setting the stage to pass the burden of its own failures onto the population.

In his post, León concluded that the regime is not governing but rather preparing to intensify the crisis. "Cuba doesn't need more propaganda or promises: it needs freedom," he emphasized, describing the televised event as "an exhausted script" and a government unable to address the true emergency.

Controversy Over a "Live Dialogue"

The appearance was also marred by another controversy, as it reportedly wasn't broadcast live, contradicting official propaganda. An apparently minor detail sparked social media, with viewers noticing the watch on the wrist of official journalist Arleen Rodríguez Derivet, the event's moderator, showing a time close to 5 PM, contradicting the narrative that the program aired live in the morning. For many Cubans, this detail suggested the exchange may have been pre-recorded and edited, reinforcing the sense of a staged performance.

Another major criticism was the supposed presence of foreign media. Although the regime portrayed it as a dialogue with international press, the room was filled with representatives from allied outlets like RT (Russia) and Xinhua (China), all Cuban journalists accredited to these media. Additionally, Prensa Latina was included as an "international agency," despite being a Cuban state entity closely tied to the regime's information apparatus, raising questions about the format's legitimacy.

The absence of independent agencies like EFE, AFP, or AP further fueled the perception that the government carefully selected its interlocutors. Moreover, Díaz-Canel appeared visibly uncomfortable, with a trembling voice and nervous gestures in front of the microphones, at a time when the country is experiencing a severe crisis and social tension is mounting.

Although the president persisted in blaming the United States and discussed long-term strategies like solar parks and administrative reforms, he failed to offer immediate solutions for the daily drama of millions of Cubans enduring hours without electricity, transportation, and basic food supplies.