Political Analyst: In Cuba, "Socialism Was Never the Goal... but the Means to Retain Power"

On Friday, political analyst José Manuel González Rubines published an article on CubaxCuba that delves into the core contradiction within the Cuban regime: as it dismantles its socialist economic model piece by piece, it maintains a firm grip on political power, a line it refuses to cross.

The article begins with the reforms passed by the National Assembly at the end of July and presents a thesis that challenges six decades of official rhetoric: "socialism was never the ultimate aim of the system, but rather the chosen tool to retain power."

The measures prompting this analysis are significant. With the repeal of Decree 107 and the implementation of Decree 160 on August 4, the government removed 46 of the 125 activities previously prohibited to the private sector and eased restrictions on 35 others, within a total package of 176 changes grouped into 23 areas.

The Economic Liberalization and Its Limits

Among the reforms are the opening of pharmacies and elderly care services to micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) and cooperatives, the liberalization of wholesale trade, and the allowance for private import of electric vehicles. Prime Minister Manuel Marrero also announced the first private currency exchange, the first joint venture between foreign capital and an MSME, and a completely foreign investment zone for health tourism.

González Rubines points out that these measures dismantle the state's economic monopoly, the backbone of the model designed by Fidel Castro. The same state that once imprisoned people for possessing foreign currency now transfers family care system dining services to private hands, impacting support for the most vulnerable sectors.

A Hybrid System with Political Control

Despite these changes, President Miguel Díaz-Canel insists that "we are not going to establish a predatory capitalism or a massive privatization of national assets." For the analyst, this denial "smells like an admission": the outcome is not a shift towards a free-market democracy but a hybrid model where economic liberalization remains subordinate to political monopoly. "The worst of Latin American capitalism has been grafted onto the trunk of Cuban totalitarianism," he writes.

The economic opening, however, has a clear and deliberate boundary. Non-state actors are still prohibited from publishing newspapers, books, and magazines; running news agencies; independent journalism; television programming; and formal non-state education. Nothing that could build an independent public sphere is liberalized.

Constitutional Conflicts and Human Costs

This consistency is no accident, argues González Rubines: it is precisely what ensures the retention of power. The reforms also clash with the Cuban constitution itself: Article 4 declares the socialist system irrevocable, Article 16 forbids negotiation under coercion, and Article 229 makes both unchangeable and irreformable.

The backdrop is the human cost of the crisis. Marrero admitted that 73% of hotel facilities remain closed and 25,000 tourism workers lost their jobs, with 876,522 people identified as "most vulnerable." The Cuban Observatory for Human Rights estimates that over 89% of the population—more than eight and a half million Cubans—live in extreme poverty.

Faced with this scenario, González Rubines questions what remains of anti-imperialism when the regime is willing to let "even Mr. Trump could invest" in Cuba if it ensures the system's survival. He poses the most uncomfortable question: "The truly questionable and even painful thing is that if these measures were possible and are now presented as a lifeline, why were they denied for decades?"

According to the analyst, the loyalty that persists among regime defenders can no longer be explained as a defense of socialism, popular welfare, or sovereignty. "The Revolution functions more as a symbol than as a political project susceptible to being evaluated by its consequences," he writes. The one thing that remains non-negotiable is the monopoly on power: evidence, according to González Rubines, that socialism was always the means, never the end.