In a recent broadcast of the National Television News (NTV), the official journalist Oliver Zamora Oria dedicated his analysis segment to the immigration measures promoted by President Donald Trump, focusing on the deportation process of Cubans from the United States.
Throughout his speech, Zamora Oria provided a critical view of the U.S. government, accusing it of cynicism, electoral opportunism, and disregard for the human rights of migrants. He further pointed out that it is a "lamentable reality" for those who, in his opinion, once believed in the Republican rhetoric.
However, her complaint ultimately went unheard due to the scandalous lack of consistency in the official Cuban narrative. The very regime that vehemently condemns foreign immigration policies is unable to guarantee basic rights to its own citizens, including those who once emigrated and later decided to return.
Indeed, what Zamora Oria described as "a kind of unveiling" - a curious analogy from a spokesperson of the regime who seems to be seeking Spanish nationality - in U.S. foreign policy, perfectly aligns with the way the Cuban State has historically managed migration: as a tool for social control, diplomatic pressure, and propaganda.
Since the 1960s until today, emigration has been manipulated by those in power to eliminate opponents, ease internal tensions, or negotiate with other governments. In times of crisis, it has been encouraged; in times of appeasement, it has been regulated. However, it has never been treated as a natural human right: the right to emigrate and to return has always been conditioned by ideological loyalty, political utility, or economic convenience.
That is the great contradiction that the NTV report deliberately omitted. While on camera there are cries for the situation of Cubans facing deportation processes in the U.S., inside Cuba, those who return are punished.
The repatriated individual, far from being welcomed with open arms, must undergo a cumbersome bureaucratic process: requesting permission, paying fees, presenting medical and legal documents, and in many cases, going through the political filter that determines whether their return is deemed "appropriate" or not.
But even those who navigate the maze of paperwork and succeed in repatriating do not automatically regain their rights.
There are multiple testimonies —some collected by CiberCuba in recent years— that report on repatriated individuals who have been denied the right to vote, access to properties, the ability to open businesses or even legal residency in their own family homes. In more severe cases, repatriated individuals who invested in small ventures have been imprisoned for operating outside the narrow legal framework imposed by the State.
Zamora Oria spoke about a "long list of intimidation and repression" in U.S. politics. But he did not mention that in Cuba, this list is also extensive and routine. It includes not only repatriates but also activists, journalists, artists, opponents, and ordinary citizens who criticize the system or simply demand respect for their rights.
The "climate of fear" that the journalist attributed to the U.S. could very well describe the atmosphere within the island: one in which having a different opinion can cost one their freedom or access to basic services.
The criticism of the “anti-Cuban machinery in Florida”, another target of the official discourse, is also contradictory. The regime condemns politicians who —according to its perspective— manipulate the immigration issue for electoral purposes. However, the Cuban government itself has made migration a tool of political and diplomatic negotiation.
In times of bilateral tensions, it has resorted to using the threat of a migratory wave as leverage against Washington, while during periods of greater openness, it has encouraged the sending of remittances and investments from Cubans abroad under the narrative of "reunion with the homeland," without substantially changing the living conditions or rights of those who return.
In summary, the Cuban regime uses the migration issue according to its current interests. When it is useful in its ideological battle against the United States, it presents itself as a defender of the rights of emigrants. When the emigrants wish to return, it becomes judge and jailer.
There is no coherence, only political calculation. There is no genuine willingness for reconciliation, only economic necessity. A Cuban outside of Cuba is valued only as long as they send dollars. Those who return are valued as long as they don’t cause any trouble.
The most concerning aspect is that this double standard is neither occasional nor accidental; it is a structural part of the Cuban political system. Citizens, both inside and outside the island, are treated unequally depending on their relationship with those in power.
The emigrant is valued when they generate income, but seen as suspicious when they demand rights. The repatriated individual is welcomed if they remain silent, but rejected if they question. This exclusionary logic not only violates basic principles of justice and citizenship, but also reveals the true face of the Cuban State: one that does not tolerate individual autonomy, even when it manifests as a desire to return home.
That the official television denounces deportations with indignation may seem, on the surface, like a humanitarian gesture. However, coming from a regime that does not allow its citizens to enter and exit freely, that criminalizes dissent, and that administers rights as favors, this gesture is nothing but pure propaganda. This is not real concern: it is cynicism.
And that is what both Cubans within the island and those living abroad must understand. The true drama is not only in the threat of being deported from another country. It is also —and above all— in not being able to return with dignity to one's own.
Because as long as the Cuban regime continues to view its emigrants as bargaining chips and its repatriated citizens as second-class citizens, no discourse on human rights will be taken seriously. And no report can hide the underlying truth: that the Cuban state still does not fully respect the rights of all its citizens, regardless of their location.
Filed under:
