Cuba’s Next Leader Will Not Be Found in Washington

The article published by The New York Times on August 7, where it is revealed that the Trump Administration would be looking within or around the structures of current Cuban power for a figure capable of leading an eventual transition, deserves attention and a clear response.

Cuba needs to change. At this point, this should be beyond discussion. We need to transform our economy deeply, open real spaces for private initiative, offer legal security, attract capital, fully incorporate the diaspora and create institutions capable of restoring confidence and hope to Cubans inside and outside the island.

But one thing is recognizing that Cuba needs a new direction, and quite another is accepting that the next Cuban leadership will be decided in Washington.

I disagree. Cuba’s future must be decided among Cubans.

According to The New York Times, the Administration would be looking for a pragmatic figure within the system itself, someone capable of facilitating a transition and establishing a different relationship with the United States. The reference that inevitably appears is Venezuela and the role played there by Delcy Rodríguez.

One can understand the political logic from the United States perspective, but Cuba is not Venezuela.

Our history is different, and so is our relationship with the United States. The Cuban transition, when it comes—if it hasn’t already begun—must respond to our own reality and take place on our terms.

Months ago I warnedin several of my articles that Cuba was wasting time and, with it, its capacity to decide the conditions of its own transformation. What we are seeing today demonstrates why that warning was important.

By postponing for too long the decisions that were known must be made, others begin to imagine those decisions for Cuba.

That is precisely what must be avoided, and Havana’s response cannot be to take refuge again in the discourse of external threat, because that is no longer enough.

I repeat that the best defense of Cuban sovereignty is not to immobilize the country, but to transform it; to create an economy that works, to allow Cubans to prosper, to “liberate productive forces,” and to give the private sector the space it needs.

Cuba has to change because Cuba needs it, not because Washington orders it. And the United States must also understand where the limit is.

I deeply believe in a different relationship between our two countries. I want a Cuba that has an extraordinary economic relationship with the United States: US investment, trade, tourism, technological cooperation and access to the international financial system. I want to see Cuban and American entrepreneurs collaborating, and I want to see our diaspora returning, investing, participating and helping to rebuild the country.

After more than six decades of confrontation, we must aspire to something much greater than permanently managing conflict.

But a new relationship between Cuba and the United States must begin with respect, and this begins by recognizing something elementary: the United States can help Cuba build its future, but it should not impose its government on it.

And not because the United States is our enemy. It is not. But because no nation can begin a new stage of its history by handing another country the decision of who should govern it.

That belongs to Cubans, to all of us. To those who live on the island and to those of us who live abroad. To those who supported the Revolution and to those who opposed it.

To those who for decades have been confronting each other and, above all, to the new generations who don’t have to inherit our divisions.

That is why I still believe that Cuba needs a national pact. Not to distribute positions, nor to decide who won or who lost. And much less to replace one elite with another.

We need a basic understanding about the country we want and about the rules that should allow us to coexist after so many years of confrontation.

The true Cuban challenge is not finding a successor but rebuilding a nation.

Whoever assumes responsibility for leading Cuba in a new era will receive a country deeply wounded: a weakened economy, deteriorated infrastructure, an energy system in crisis, millions of Cubans living abroad and a society laden with frustrations, wounds and mistrust.

No man or woman will be able to solve that alone, and certainly not by governing for one part of Cuba and against the other.

The Cuba that comes will have to add, reconcile, listen, acknowledge mistakes, and make justice without confusing justice with revenge.

It will have to understand that our diaspora is not a different country but that we are part of Cuba.

Here too Washington can help enormously, because the United States has the capacity to facilitate a peaceful transformation, support economic reconstruction, open opportunities for the private sector, accompany negotiation processes and help Cuba fully reintegrate into the world.

That would be US leadership. Choosing who should govern Cuba is not.

And Havana should take very seriously what The New York Times reveals, not to use it as a new justification to close doors and windows, but to understand the urgency of the moment.

Every reform that is postponed, every opportunity that is lost and every space that remains closed reduces our capacity to conduct ourselves what will inevitably come.

Sovereignty is not proclaimed, it is exercised. And it is exercised by fostering a country strong enough, legitimate and open to decide its own destiny.

I believe we still have time to achieve a Cuban transition, peaceful, orderly, inclusive, without revenge or impositions.

A transition in which the United States is an important partner, the international community accompanies, our diaspora participates fully and Cubans within the island finally have the leadership role that corresponds to them.

We should not fear change, but fear arriving too late to guide it.

That is why the discussion opened by The New York Times should not be reduced to what name Washington is considering.

That is not the debate that interests me, but something much more important: what Cuba do we aspire to and who will have the legitimacy to lead it.

My answer to the second question is simple: Cubans, no one else.

Cuba’s future needs friends, partners and allies, but it needs, above all, Cuban leadership that is not sought in Washington, but built among Cubans.