Cuban Deputy Prime Minister Oscar Pérez-Oliva Fraga candidly acknowledged that Miguel Díaz-Canel's administration cannot publicly disclose all details regarding the current fuel crisis, relying on a tradition of secrecy that has characterized the Cuban regime since its inception.
The great-nephew of dictators Fidel and Raúl Castro noted that the Cuban regime is under "constant surveillance," with every shipment of oil to the island being closely monitored by external actors.
Speaking on the Mesa Redonda program, Pérez-Oliva, who also serves as the Minister of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, stated that "some things can't be explained publicly" because "every drop of fuel that arrives in Cuba, every ship, is on social media and in publications."
This statement, far from breaking new ground, fits into a historical pattern of Cuban power rooted in opacity, information control, and the perpetual construction of an "external enemy" as a justification for a lack of accountability to the public.
Pérez-Oliva Fraga explained that in February, several factors converged, compelling the government to implement a series of decisions to tackle a "complex situation," with the stated aim of ensuring the "country's vitality" and essential services, while allegedly not abandoning economic development.
However, he avoided providing concrete details about the actual scope of the crisis, the timelines for the measures, their areas of application, their potential impact on the living standards of Cubans, or recovery prospects.
"We are not here to make excuses; we are here to fulfill our duty to inform our people," the official asserted.
Nonetheless, the supposed information exercise on the Friday television program occurred under clearly defined limits set by the regime itself, deciding what to disclose, what to omit, and what to present as secret for "security" reasons, drawing from the recurring opacity manual used throughout over six decades of governance.
Once again, despite the "novelty" of the recent appointment of the Castro descendant, the official discourse leaned on the notion of a besieged "revolution," where transparency is deemed a risk rather than a citizen's right.
Since the early years of Fidel Castro's dictatorship, the regime has used external surveillance, the U.S. embargo, and the constant threat of the "enemy" as arguments to centralize decisions, restrict information, and demand sacrifices from the population without offering complete explanations or mechanisms for public oversight.
This Friday, Pérez-Oliva Fraga insisted that the aim of the measures is to "minimize the impact of the crisis on the Cuban population," yet he continued to display a condescending and paternalistic attitude towards citizens by maintaining governmental secrecy, highlighting the regime's disregard and lack of commitment to its governed.
Cubans have seen their lives severely deteriorate due to prolonged blackouts, transportation limitations, food shortages, and the collapse of basic services. However, to the regime, this harsh reality seems less important than the need to maintain secrecy over government plans that ostensibly aim to alleviate their suffering.
Simultaneously, the new star of the Castro family clan shifted some of the responsibility to the territories, urging resources to be bolstered in provinces and municipalities—a common tactic in official discourse to diffuse accountability during crises.
However, this collective call comes without real access to information or decision-making power. State paternalism reappears as the norm: the government decides, manages scarcity, and communicates only what's strictly necessary, while demanding understanding, discipline, and sacrifice from its citizens.
Although Pérez-Oliva Fraga acknowledged internal shortcomings and claimed they do not seek to justify themselves solely with the embargo, his rhetoric preserved the regime's narrative pillars: the external threat, perpetual exceptionalism, and the legitimization of secrecy as a governing tool.
In a country where the State controls resources, data, and the narrative, the lack of transparency remains a deliberate choice, not an unavoidable circumstance.
Pérez-Oliva Fraga's statements confirm that, amid the most critical period in recent years, the Cuban totalitarian regime once again opts for secrecy, defensive discourse, and the management of silence as a means of power.
Insights into Cuba's Fuel Crisis and Government Secrecy
Why can't the Cuban government publicly disclose details about the fuel crisis?
The Cuban government claims that due to constant external surveillance, disclosing details publicly could compromise security and is therefore not feasible.
How does the Cuban regime justify the lack of transparency?
The regime justifies the lack of transparency by citing external threats and surveillance, positioning transparency as a security risk rather than a right of the citizens.
What are the implications of government secrecy for Cuban citizens?
Government secrecy leads to a lack of accountability and public oversight, resulting in citizens being left in the dark about policies affecting their daily lives and being asked to endure hardships without clear explanations or timelines.