The United States Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent, has presented a forecast that reignites the debate about the political future of the Island: the possibility of a regime change in Cuba, although not immediate, but rather progressive and prolonged over time.
During a television interview with Fox Business, Bessent presented this scenario linking it to the regional context.
"With Maduro out of Venezuela, it seems that there could be a slow-motion regime change in Cuba. A slow-motion regime change might take place there," he stated, suggesting that political balances in Latin America could directly influence the evolution of the Cuban system.
His statements come amid a political controversy in Washington following the publication of a report by the New York Times suggesting potential negotiations between the Donald Trump administration and Havana.
According to that report, the United States supposedly proposed the departure of ruler Miguel Díaz-Canel as a condition to advance in dialogue with Cuba.
However, the official reaction was immediate and forceful.
The Secretary of State, Marco Rubio outright rejected that version and questioned the credibility of the sources used.
"The reason why so many American media outlets continue to publish fake news like this is because they keep relying on charlatans and liars who claim to be well-informed," he said.
In the same vein, the White House reinforced the message of denial.
The Director of Communications, Steven Cheung, defended the official stance and discredited the content of the report.
"The only ones who know the situation in Cuba are President Trump and Marco Rubio," he stated, adding that journalists relied on "misinformed sources who know nothing about what is happening."
The article in question argued that Washington would be willing to accept a limited change in the Cuban power structure, focused on the departure of Díaz-Canel, without demanding deeper structural transformations. This possibility sparked an intense debate, especially among the Cuban diaspora and within the Island.
One of the most controversial points of the report was that no actions were contemplated against the Castro family, which is the real core of power in the country. For many, this would imply merely a symbolic change, without altering the political and military mechanisms that sustain the system.
In fact, a significant portion of the reactions indicated that Díaz-Canel does not represent the center of decision-making, but rather a subordinate figure within a structure where Raúl Castro's influence remains decisive.
From this perspective, any change that does not affect that core would be perceived as superficial, incapable of bringing real improvements to the lives of Cubans.
Bessent's statements, in this context, introduce a relevant nuance: the idea that change may not come from an abrupt break, but rather from a gradual wear of the system, influenced by both internal factors and international dynamics.
Beyond Cuba, the Secretary of the Treasury also addressed other global scenarios.
He referred to Iran as a "horrible sponsor of global terrorism" and asserted that its ability to project power is weakened.
He also expressed optimism regarding the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, stating that "at some point, the situation between Russia and Ukraine will be resolved. I believe that gas and energy prices will be lower than they have been in a long time."
Overall, their statements reflect a strategic vision in which political changes are not always immediate, but rather long, complex processes influenced by multiple factors.
In the case of Cuba, the "slow motion" that Bessent refers to could signify an uncertain transition, where the true extent of change will depend on whether or not the core power that has governed the island for decades is transformed.
Filed under: