Related videos:
The departure of the Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel has become the focal point of the negotiations that the Donald Trump Administration is conducting with Havana.
According to what was reported this Monday The New York Times and later confirmed by the correspondent for the Spanish newspaper ABC in New York, Javier Ansorena, Washington has conditioned any significant progress on the departure of the designated Cuban president from power.
According to the report, U.S. officials reportedly communicated to negotiators that Díaz-Canel must resign, although leaving it up to the Cuban side how to carry out that step.
Four sources familiar with the discussions indicated that this demand is part of an attempt to push for internal changes without completely dismantling the system.
Ansorena summarizes it succinctly: "The U.S. initiates contacts both inside and outside of Cuba and demands Díaz Canel's departure for an agreement."
The key piece of the negotiation
Washington's demand would not be a secondary detail, but rather the focal point of the process.
According to The New York Times, the White House is seeking to remove Díaz-Canel from power as a condition to advance agreements that would alleviate the economic suffocation of the island.
The political calculation behind this stance indicates that the Cuban leader represents an obstacle to deeper economic reforms.
From the American perspective, their departure would facilitate an internal readjustment of the system without the need to dismantle the entire structure of the regime.
In that regard, Ansorena himself notes that Trump might be attempting to "claim a piece of decisive importance" with the departure of the current Cuban president, who is considered part of the hardline faction of Castroism.
In addition to Díaz-Canel, Washington would also like to see the departure of other members of the hard core who share his political stance, although no other names have been specified so far.
Contacts with the regime and the opposition
In parallel to this demand, Washington has established a network of contacts with key players both within and outside the Cuban power structure.
"The Trump Administration has begun conversations with Cuban figures in Mexico and has also maintained contacts with Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, the grandson of Raúl Castro," the journalist states, citing government sources.
Rodríguez Castro, known as "El Cangrejo," maintains direct ties to the historical center of power.
At the same time, Secretary of State Marco Rubio's team would be in communication with opposition figures in exile, such as Rosa María Payá, leader of Cuba Decide.
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has maintained a tough stance against the regime.
Economic pressure as a tool
The conversations are taking place amid significant economic pressure driven by Washington. According to Ansorena, the strategy involves restricting Cuba's access to key energy sources.
As is well known, to force that downfall, it has compelled Venezuela to cut off oil supplies to Cuba, on which the island relies, and has achieved the same with Mexico.
The result would be "a desperate situation for the Cubans and their regime, amid shortages and protests."
In this context, the Cuban government has started to show signs of openness.
Vice Prime Minister Óscar Pérez-Oliva Fraga announced on NBC that Cubans abroad will be allowed to invest in the private sector and own businesses on the Island, a measure related to the negotiations.
A "decapitation" in the Venezuelan style
Trump's strategy aims for a change in the leadership rather than a total transformation of the system.
Ansorena emphasizes that the U.S. president seeks "a decapitation of the regime's leadership similar to what he achieved with Maduro in Venezuela."
This would involve maintaining part of the power structure but forcing a reconfiguration that allows for greater cooperation with the United States.
In the Cuban case, this could translate into economic reforms and a possible easing of repression.
A change with a significant political impact
If it materializes, the departure of the Cuban leader would represent the most significant political upheaval in decades within the island.
It would also represent a symbolic victory for Trump, who could present the event as the downfall of a leader from a government that has historically been opposed to the United States.
However, the scenario could also lead to tensions within the Cuban exile community, which for years has aspired to a more profound change that entails the complete end of the system.
The rhetoric of Trump
Trump himself has hinted at the extent of his intentions. In statements from the Oval Office, he claimed that "it will be an honor to take Cuba."
In response to a journalist's question, he insisted: “Yes, taking Cuba, in some way. Whether I liberate it or take it for myself. I believe I could do whatever I wanted with it.”
A pulse in development
For now, negotiations continue without confirmed results. What seems clear is that Díaz-Canel's tenure has become the focal point of the standoff between Washington and Havana.
More than an immediate regime change, the U.S. strategy aims to force an internal reconfiguration of power in Cuba, amidst a growing economic crisis and a context of unprecedented external pressure.
Reactions from Cubans: Skepticism towards a limited change
The possibility of Díaz-Canel's departure has sparked intense debate among Cubans, especially on social media, where skepticism about the actual impact of such a measure prevails.
Many opinions agree that the leader is not the true center of power, but rather a figure within a broader structure.
“The problem is not him, it’s the Castros”, summarizes one of the most widespread perceptions.
Other comments emphasize that Díaz-Canel "is not the key player," regarding him as an executor of decisions made by actors with greater influence within the system.
From that perspective, its replacement would be a superficial change, without structural consequences.
There are also those who warn that any real transformation should involve the entire ruling elite and not be limited to the replacement of the president.
Without substantial reforms, they argue, a movement of this kind would hardly have any impact on the economic crisis or the political situation of the country.
Filed under: