Related videos:
The Cuban Foreign Minister, Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, fiercely criticized American politicians this Saturday for promoting the deportation of Cuban migrants, describing the legislative initiatives that could leave hundreds of thousands of islanders in an irregular situation as an “act of cruel cynicism.”
"The threat from anti-Cuban politicians to deport Cubans who have emigrated to the U.S. is an act of cruel cynicism. Driven by an economic blockade and encouraged to emigrate, the very government of that country incited them to lie upon arriving at the border to protect them as refugees," Rodríguez wrote on his X account (formerly Twitter).
His statements come at a time of great uncertainty for the Cuban community in the United States, after it was revealed that nearly 550,000 migrants could lose their residency permits if their immigration status is revoked obtained through the "credible fear" pathway, a crucial argument in the application for political asylum.
While the Cuban government reiterates that it will continue to receive its deported citizens as part of the bilateral immigration agreements with Washington, the official narrative asserts that mass emigration is a direct consequence of U.S. policies.
Havana attributes the economic embargo—referred to as the "blockade"—and the historic Cuban Adjustment Act, which for decades provided a straightforward path to legal residency for Cubans arriving on U.S. soil, as the main causes of the exodus.
According to the regime, these policies have encouraged thousands of people to leave the island under the promise of migratory benefits, distorting the migration phenomenon and promoting irregular emigration. In its speech, the Cuban government insists that the exodus does not reflect a structural internal crisis, but an external design aimed at destabilizing the country.
However, reality contradicts that stance. The majority of migrants who sought political asylum at the United States border did so under oath, having fled a dictatorship and citing political persecution, censorship, repression, harassment by State Security, or a lack of basic freedoms. Many identified the regime as the direct cause of their decision to escape.
This contradiction places the government of Havana in a political and moral dilemma. Accepting the mass return of these individuals means welcoming back those who testified that they left Cuba out of fear of the system, a narrative that undermines its official propaganda of stability and respect for citizens' rights.
Moreover, a significant number of these migrants—who have publicly shared their criticisms of the system on social media and in the media—could face reprisals or surveillance upon their return, which reinforces the international perception that Cuba is not a safe country for dissent.
Although the regime tries to present itself as understanding, assuring that the deportees “will be treated with dignity,” as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MINREX) recently stated, there is a clear effort to conceal the root of the problem: the deep social, political, and economic unrest that drives Cubans to emigrate en masse.
The incongruity between the official discourse and the experiences of those who leave reveals a fundamental conflict. While the regime blames external factors, it avoids taking responsibility for the lack of opportunities, rampant inflation, political repression, and the absence of freedoms plaguing the island.
As the number of potential deportations increases, Havana's position becomes increasingly untenable: it must accept the return of those who blame it for their departure, without being able to entirely deny the reasons that led them to seek asylum as political refugees.
Filed under: