The question was posed by an audience member at the end of a weekly discussion: "What will you do, as a Cuban, the day after the dictatorship?" The response from the three participants —Sayde Chaling-Chong, Manuel Milanés, and Alejandra Franganillo— revealed different perspectives on what a free Cuba should look like, but also a common starting point: the reconstruction will not be solely material.
Chaling-Chong, president of the Ibero-American and European Alliance Against Communism and a Cuban opposition figure exiled in Spain, was the most emphatic in his response. "What we are going to do starting tomorrow, when the murderous dictatorship of the Communist Party, which has the Cuban people starving and dying, comes to an end, is to prepare ourselves to rebuild—morally, materially, spiritually, and in every way," he stated.
For Chaling-Chong, moral reconstruction is both the most urgent and the most challenging, as the regime has normalized behaviors that are destroying the social fabric.
"Cuba needs a moral reconstruction. Cubans have a set of words and concepts in their minds such as stealing — they justify stealing, deceit, lies... all those values," he pointed out.
The opposition member also flatly dismissed any agreement with the regime. "I do not agree with any kind of concession. These people do not deserve any concessions."
His main argument is that communism does not yield to negotiation. “You cannot talk to communism. You cannot make concessions to communism. They do not understand negotiations, they do not comprehend any terms. They want to impose their ideology no matter what.”
Manuel Milanés, for his part, stated in the prior debate that the only path not taken in 67 years is the use of force, citing the precedents of Panama, Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela as examples of effective U.S. intervention.
"Communism has never ended peacefully. It has never ended peacefully and has always been violent," argued Milanés, who was included by the regime in its national list of terrorists sent to Interpol.
Franganillo, who was an associate researcher at the Cuba Study Group and a former fellow in Marco Rubio's office during his time as a senator, contributed the most measured perspective of the group.
He supports direct and targeted sanctions against high-ranking officials of the regime, but draws a clear line against the more extreme option: "A complete and absolute naval blockade of Cuba, I believe that would be irresponsible on the part of the United States."
Her proposal for the day after is clear. "If there is going to be an intervention in Cuba, then it should be a humanitarian intervention assisted by military forces, and that it should involve receiving aid, rebuilding, restoring, and providing assistance."
The debate arises as the Trump administration accumulates over 240 restrictive measures against the regime since January 2026, including direct sanctions against GAESA, Díaz-Canel, Lis Cuesta, and Alejandro Castro Espín.
At the same time, civil society organizations in exile have made progress on concrete plans for the transition: the FNCA presented its "Cuba Roadmap" with 13 pillars, the Centro de Estudios Convivencia published a catalog of 20 thematic areas, and the coalition Pasos de Cambio ratified the Liberation Agreement in Madrid with four phases: liberation, stabilization, reconstruction, and democratization.
Chaling-Chong had already expressed his conviction in May: "The Cuban regime has already lost."
Filed under: