On Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged that the diplomatic engagements between Washington and Havana have yet to yield substantial outcomes. Addressing the media, he stated, "Honestly, I don't see much progress" in discussions with the Cuban regime.
Rubio confirmed recent meetings between the U.S. ambassador and Cuban officials, a visit by the CIA director to the island weeks ago, and ongoing communications from the State Department. However, he emphasized that these interactions have not resulted in any tangible changes.
"At the end of the day, they have to make a decision. Their system is broken. Their economic system doesn't work and can't be fixed under the current political framework. They simply don't know how to make it work. It's a failed state," the Secretary of State asserted.
He was firm in dismissing the economic reforms announced by the regime, labeling them as superficial: "The economic announcements they make are cosmetic, not real. For years, they've just been buying time, hoping we would step back. But Cuba can't keep stalling or expect us to relent."
The U.S. top diplomat also criticized GAESA, the military-business conglomerate of the Cuban Armed Forces, accusing it of holding $18 billion in assets. "Not a penny goes into the state budget or to help the Cuban people," he denounced, attributing the island's longstanding electrical infrastructure collapse, even during periods of free Venezuelan oil supply, to this issue.
Regarding the possibility of a negotiated settlement, Rubio expressed a cautious optimism: "The President's preference has always been a negotiated and peaceful agreement. That's still our preference. But honestly, with the current powers in Cuba, the likelihood is low. If they change their stance, we'll be here."
He refuted claims that Washington's policy toward Cuba constitutes interference or nation-building from abroad. "We're addressing something directly linked to U.S. national security. Cuba is only 90 miles from our shores," he argued, warning that a systemic collapse on the island could trigger a migration crisis and violence impacting the United States directly.
These remarks follow a video Rubio released in Spanish to the Cuban public on May 20, offering a "new relationship" with Cuba and announcing $100 million in humanitarian aid, to be distributed through the Catholic Church, bypassing the state apparatus. In that message, Rubio declared, "Cuba is not controlled by any revolution; Cuba is controlled by GAESA."
During the same press briefing, Rubio was questioned about a formal indictment by a federal grand jury in South Florida against Raúl Castro, related to the February 24, 1996, downing of two Brothers to the Rescue civilian planes, which killed four individuals. Rubio remained reticent about concrete plans but was forthright: "At this point, he becomes a fugitive from U.S. justice. If there's any announcement, you'll probably hear about it afterwards, not beforehand."
"The future of Cuba belongs to the Cuban people, regarding how they want to be governed and what system they choose. But the threat to national security is our primary focus because it directly affects the United States," Rubio concluded.
U.S.-Cuba Relations and National Security Concerns
What are the recent diplomatic activities between the U.S. and Cuba?
Recent activities include meetings between the U.S. ambassador and Cuban officials, a visit by the CIA director to the island, and continuous communication from the State Department.
Why does Marco Rubio criticize GAESA?
Rubio criticizes GAESA for controlling $18 billion in assets without contributing to the state budget or aiding the Cuban people, leading to infrastructure failures despite external resources.
What is the U.S. stance on a negotiated agreement with Cuba?
The U.S. prefers a negotiated and peaceful agreement, although Rubio admits the chances are low with the current Cuban leadership, but remains open to changes in their approach.
How does the situation in Cuba impact U.S. national security?
A systemic collapse in Cuba could lead to a migration crisis and violence, directly affecting the United States due to its proximity, posing a significant national security threat.