GAESA: The Economic Powerhouse of Cuba's Regime Targeted by Washington

The business conglomerate known as GAESA, under the control of the Cuban Armed Forces, is emerging as a pivotal factor in any potential transition on the island. It is also a primary focus in the United States' strategic approach, as highlighted in a recent article by The Atlantic.

GAESA, or the Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A., is not just another entity in Cuba's state-run economic framework. It serves as the economic core that underpins much of the regime's actual power. The conglomerate oversees critical sectors such as tourism, foreign currency commerce, ports, remittances, telecommunications, and numerous financial operations.

Estimates suggest GAESA's influence spans between 40% and 70% of the Cuban economy, particularly in hard currency revenue. Effectively, GAESA operates as the financial backbone of the system, supplying the resources necessary to sustain both the political apparatus and internal control mechanisms.

Washington's Focus on GAESA's Role

Consequently, a growing consensus exists in Washington: any genuine attempt at transformation in Cuba must inevitably address the role of this conglomerate. The Atlantic notes that key figures from President Donald Trump's administration, alongside political allies, have spotlighted structures like GAESA as part of a broader strategy toward the island.

Beyond Díaz-Canel: Uncovering the Real Power Structure

The emphasis on GAESA also reflects an increasingly common understanding: power in Cuba does not solely reside with visible figures like Miguel Díaz-Canel. Instead, it lies within a much deeper, opaque institutional and economic framework closely tied to the military and networks established over decades by the Castro regime.

In this context, a leadership change without altering GAESA's control might have limited impact. The structure that concentrates revenue, manages strategic sectors, and integrates the foreign currency economy would remain intact.

Strategic Parallels with Venezuela

The approach being considered for Cuba draws parallels with the recent U.S. strategy in Venezuela. There, the pressure extended beyond the political realm to undermine the regime's primary income source: oil.

This strategy's logic was straightforward. As long as a system retains control over its main economic resources, it also maintains its power apparatus.

In Cuba's case, the parallel is clear.

If Venezuela aimed for a chavismo without oil, the equivalent target in Cuba is GAESA.

The military conglomerate not only concentrates income but directly links the economy to political control, making it a critical element for any system reconfiguration attempt.

Negotiation, Pressure, and Potential Outcomes

Amid this context, ongoing conversations between Washington and Havana take on more complexity.

The agenda includes topics like economic opening, structural changes, and compensation for confiscated properties. However, implicitly, it also concerns the future of the structures that support the regime's economic power.

Nonetheless, signals from Cuba point to a clear resistance on fundamental issues. Regime authorities have reiterated that the political system is non-negotiable and have avoided including sensitive topics, such as political prisoners, in bilateral dialogues.

This mix of limited openness and firm red lines increases the risk that negotiations might not succeed.

The Turning Point: What If Talks Fail?

In this scenario, GAESA's role becomes crucial. According to The Atlantic, the Trump administration is not solely considering the negotiation route but has also prepared more forceful alternatives if talks do not yield results.

The Venezuela precedent remains key. There, the failure of negotiations was followed by a strategy shift that included more aggressive actions to weaken the regime.

Applied to Cuba, the reasoning is straightforward: if discussions do not advance on essential issues—including a potential reconfiguration of economic control—Washington might escalate from political pressure to broader measures.

In this context, the inevitable question arises: if oil was the vulnerability of the chavismo, can there be real change in Cuba without impacting GAESA's control?

The answer will not only determine the outcome of current negotiations but also the type of scenario that could unfold for the island in the coming months.