Related videos:
The withdrawal of Sherritt International from Cuba following the new sanctions from Donald Trump has not only raised alarms about the future of foreign investment on the Island. It also poses a question that until recently seemed unlikely: could Spanish hotel companies try to redefine their relationship with Washington to survive the new scenario?
The possibility is gaining traction among analysts and financial sectors following the formal designation of GAESA by the United States under Executive Order 14404.
The measure turns the Cuban military conglomerate into the center of the economic offensive of the Trump administration and significantly increases the risks for foreign companies involved in Cuban tourism.
Until now, chains like Meliá, Iberostar, or Barceló had endured decades of political tensions, U.S. sanctions, and lawsuits under the Helms-Burton Act. But Sherritt's exit changed the perception of risk.
The Canadian mining company concluded that continuing operations in Cuba could jeopardize its relationship with international banks and compromise access to the global financial system.
For Spanish hoteliers, whose activities rely even more on international payments, booking platforms, insurance companies, and banking correspondences, the message was clear.
In that context, an intermediate scenario begins to emerge between staying or leaving Cuba: increasing collaboration and transparency with Washington to attempt to reduce sanction exposure.
The strategy would involve clarifying the actual scope of their contracts with Cuban entities, ensuring transparency in financial flows, and demonstrating operational separation from structures directly controlled by GAESA.
The problem is that for years, foreign tourism operations in Cuba have operated under a strong institutional opacity. The details of contracts, management mechanisms, revenue distribution, and corporate structures remain practically outside of public scrutiny and even far from independent audits.
That lack of transparency has been one of the most criticized points by activists, human rights organizations, and financial experts, especially regarding the labor model controlled by the Cuban state, where foreign companies pay salaries in foreign currency to state agencies, and workers only receive a minimal part in Cuban pesos.
The new sanctions could alter part of that dynamic.
If Washington maintains pressure on GAESA and increases surveillance over financial operations linked to Cuban tourism, some foreign chains may be forced to demand greater legal and accounting guarantees to protect their access to the international banking system.
However, that scenario would also place the Cuban regime in a delicate dilemma. Fully opening the accounts and contracts of the tourism sector would involve exposing the internal workings of one of the most sensitive economic pillars controlled by the military apparatus.
For now, no Spanish network has publicly hinted at such a move. However, following Sherritt's departure, the discussion no longer seems impossible.
The fundamental question is whether the Cuban tourism model, built over decades on opacity and state control, can adapt to a scenario where the financial survival of foreign partners depends precisely on revealing what has remained hidden until now.
Filed under: