The leader Miguel Díaz-Canel defended the single-party system currently in place in Cuba and dismissed the notion that political pluralism is a prerequisite for a country to be considered democratic.
His statements were made in an interview with journalist Mónica Bergamo published this weekend by the Brazilian newspaper Folha de São Paulo.
"Don't be fooled by the idea that multipartyism is the expression of democracy," the leader asserted while attempting to justify the Cuban political model, in which the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC) has held power for more than six decades and there is no electoral competition.
The discussion arose when Bergamo questioned the system by which the president is elected on the island. Díaz-Canel responded that Cuba is not the only country where the head of state is elected by the Parliament and attempted to compare the Cuban mechanism with existing systems in Europe.
"Cuba is not the only country where a president is elected by the Parliament's vote. This happens in France and in other European countries. Why are you so concerned about Cuba?" he questioned.
The journalist then pointed out a fundamental difference: the existence of a diversity of parties.
"Do you believe that story in Brazil that having many parties means more democracy?" Díaz-Canel responded.
The ruler then went on to advocate for a definition of democracy based on social rights.
"There is democracy when the majority has the right to life, when there is equality, equity, the right to health and education, regardless of whether there is one party or twenty," he stated.
According to Díaz-Canel, associating democracy with political pluralism would be "another construct" imposed on the world by "capitalist thinking" and "neoliberal thinking."
Its argument avoids a central issue of the Cuban political system. On the island, citizens cannot choose between organized political projects that compete to govern the country. The PCC constitutionally maintains its status as the leading political force in society and the State.
"There is only one party here, but it aims to represent all the interests of the Cuban people," said Díaz-Canel. He further justified the party's monopoly by citing "historical reasons" and stated that Cuba would not accept an organization that, in his view, represented the interests of the United States.
"We would not accept a party that represents the interests of the United States in Cuba for historical reasons," he said.
The argument reduces the debate on political pluralism to the possibility that a potential opposition force could represent foreign interests, without addressing the possibility that Cuban critics of the socialist system might organize independent parties to defend their own political proposals and present them for a popular vote.
Díaz-Canel asserts that the president is indeed elected by the people
During the interview, Díaz-Canel insisted that international criticisms of the Cuban electoral system are "misrepresented." He explained that to become president, one must first be elected as a deputy in the National Assembly and then receive the support of the Parliament.
"All of Cuba does not vote for you as president, but part of Cuba in your electoral district does vote so you can become a deputy," he stated. He also emphasized that the candidates are proposed by "the people" and by "the organizations of Cuban civil society," not by political parties.
However, the Cuban presidential election does not allow voters to choose directly among multiple candidates for the head of state or to decide between competing political programs.
Díaz-Canel also attacked the U.S. system and argued that the Republican and Democratic nominations are determined by “elites” and conditioned by campaign financing. “It’s a lie. It is not an election based on merit in front of the population,” he asserted.
He later recalled that in the United States, the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide does not necessarily win the Presidency due to the Electoral College system.
The ruler used those criticisms to question whether the American model can be presented as superior to the Cuban one.
«Where is there more democracy? In the United States or in Cuba?» asked Díaz-Canel.
The statements coincide with an increase in strong international scrutiny over the lack of pluralism and political representation, as well as the limited transparency in the operations of the Communist Party, which maintains control over all state institutions.
Díaz-Canel himself clearly defined that relationship: "The PCC is a party to lead the Revolution, but it is not an electoral party."
Filed under: