By Horizonte Cubano News
For decades, one sentence has appeared again and again in American political discussions about Cuba:
“The United States stands with the Cuban people.”
Republican administrations have said it.
Democratic administrations have said it.
Members of Congress have said it.
Cuban-American politicians have said it.
It is a powerful statement.
But after more than six decades of confrontation between Washington and Havana, perhaps it is time to ask a more difficult question:
What does standing with the Cuban people actually mean?
Because solidarity cannot exist only in speeches.
Eventually, it must become policy.
The Cuban People Are Not the Cuban Government
This distinction should be obvious.
Yet American policy has struggled with it for decades.
The Cuban government is one thing.
The Cuban population is another.
A farmer in Matanzas is not the Cuban government.
A mechanic in Havana is not the Communist Party.
A mother trying to feed her children is not the Ministry of the Interior.
A private restaurant owner is not the Cuban military.
An electrician trying to build a small business is not GAESA.
If American policy says it opposes the Cuban government’s conduct while supporting the Cuban people, then its policies should increasingly demonstrate that distinction.
That is where the real test begins.
What Does America Want the Cuban Family to Do?
Washington regularly tells Havana what it wants.
Release political prisoners.
Respect human rights.
Allow greater economic freedom.
Reduce state control.
Permit independent enterprise.
Those demands can be debated.
But consider the issue from the perspective of an ordinary Cuban family.
What is Washington asking them to do?
Wait?
Protest?
Leave Cuba?
Survive another economic crisis?
Depend on relatives in Miami?
Open a small business but struggle to obtain financing, equipment and supplies?
What is the economic proposition being offered directly to that family?
That question deserves an answer.
A Country Is Ultimately Sustained by Its People
Governments exercise political power.
But societies are sustained by people.
Cubans grow food.
Cubans repair electrical systems.
Cubans drive buses.
Cubans operate restaurants.
Cubans teach children.
Cubans maintain buildings.
Cubans care for elderly parents.
Cubans work in hospitals.
Cubans repair cars.
Cubans keep railways functioning.
Cubans create businesses.
Whatever political system exists in Havana, Cuba continues functioning every morning because millions of ordinary people get out of bed and keep the country alive.
That reality should matter enormously to American policymakers.
Because if Washington truly wants a different Cuba, those same people will eventually have to build it.
Change Cannot Mean Economic Destruction
There is a dangerous assumption that sometimes appears in discussions about authoritarian governments:
Make economic conditions sufficiently difficult and eventually the political system will collapse.
History demonstrates that societies do not always work that way.
Economic desperation can produce political change.
But it can also produce migration.
It can produce black markets.
It can produce social fragmentation.
It can produce crime.
It can produce dependency.
And it can produce enormous human suffering without producing the political outcome policymakers expected.
Cuba’s geographic location makes this especially important for the United States.
When economic conditions collapse in Cuba, Washington does not experience the consequences from thousands of miles away.
Florida is roughly 90 miles away.
A failed Cuba policy can become an American immigration problem very quickly.
Give Cubans a Reason to Stay in Cuba
This should become an important objective of American policy.
For decades, many of Cuba’s most ambitious citizens have concluded that their best economic opportunity is to leave.
That represents an enormous loss for Cuba.
Doctors leave.
Engineers leave.
Mechanics leave.
Entrepreneurs leave.
Young people leave.
Families separate.
Communities lose productive citizens.
Then Washington confronts another migration crisis.
There is another possible strategy:
Help create conditions in which Cubans have an economic reason to remain in Cuba.
That does not mean financing the Cuban government.
It means expanding legitimate opportunities for Cuban citizens.
Support Independence, Not Dependency
The objective should be economic independence.
A Cuban entrepreneur should not have to depend permanently on the Cuban government.
But that entrepreneur should not have to depend permanently on remittances from Miami either.
The goal should be a functioning business capable of generating its own revenue.
A farmer should be able to produce food and sell it profitably.
A transportation company should be able to purchase equipment and provide services.
A construction company should be able to employ workers and rebuild housing.
A technology company should be able to sell services internationally.
A restaurant should be able to purchase supplies through transparent commercial channels.
A family should be able to accumulate legitimate savings.
That is what economic independence looks like.
Washington Has Already Recognized the Private Sector
American policy already contains an important foundation.
U.S. regulations distinguish certain independent Cuban private-sector entrepreneurs from prohibited Cuban government and Communist Party officials.
That distinction matters.
It means Washington has already accepted the principle that economic relationships with independent Cubans can serve American policy objectives.
The next question is how far that principle should go.
Could legitimate Cuban private businesses eventually obtain broader access to American suppliers?
Could qualifying entrepreneurs receive financing under carefully regulated conditions?
Could American companies provide equipment and technology?
Could agricultural producers access machinery?
Could private transportation businesses obtain parts?
Could Cuban businesses receive professional training in accounting, compliance and international commerce?
These are the kinds of questions Washington should be debating.
Target the Powerful More Precisely
If American policymakers believe particular Cuban officials are responsible for repression, sanction those officials.
If military-controlled companies present national-security concerns, restrict those companies.
If individuals participate in corruption, investigate and target them according to law.
If an entity secretly operates for sanctioned interests, prohibit the transaction.
But increasingly sophisticated sanctions should become more precise, not simply broader.
The objective should be simple:
Make it difficult for sanctioned power structures to benefit while making it easier for legitimate independent economic activity to develop.
That requires serious compliance.
Beneficial-ownership checks.
Financial transparency.
End-use verification.
Auditable transactions.
And enforcement.
It is more complicated than simply prohibiting everything.
But serious foreign policy is complicated.
Havana Cannot Demand Benefits Without Reform
The Cuban government also needs to understand something.
Washington cannot reasonably be expected to expand economic opportunities while Havana refuses meaningful economic freedom.
If Cuba wants access to greater international commerce, it must allow its citizens to participate genuinely in that commerce.
Private ownership must mean something.
Contracts must mean something.
Investment protections must mean something.
Entrepreneurs must be able to grow without surrendering control of their companies.
The rules cannot change every time an independent business becomes successful.
And private enterprise cannot merely become another mechanism through which politically connected interests enrich themselves.
Havana has responsibilities too.
The Cuban Family Should Become the Measure
Perhaps American Cuba policy needs a new measurement.
Instead of asking only:
Is the Cuban government weaker?
Ask:
Is the Cuban citizen stronger?
Can a Cuban family earn more independently?
Can it purchase food?
Can it obtain medicine?
Can it start a business?
Can it access information?
Can it accumulate savings?
Can its children imagine a future inside Cuba instead of immediately planning to leave?
Those are measurable outcomes.
And they may ultimately tell us more about Cuba’s future than another round of political declarations.
Standing With the Cuban People Must Mean Something
Words matter.
But after six decades, words are not enough.
If Washington says it stands with the Cuban people, then Washington should define what that solidarity means economically, politically and practically.
Not unconditional aid.
Not financing the Cuban state.
Not abandoning legitimate human-rights concerns.
Not ignoring American national-security interests.
Something more intelligent:
Create opportunities for Cubans to become less dependent on government power.
Help legitimate private enterprise connect with the international economy.
Target sanctions where responsibility actually lies.
Demand reforms from Havana.
Reward measurable progress.
Protect American interests.
And measure success by whether ordinary Cubans become more capable of controlling their own economic lives.
Because ultimately there is one question Washington should ask whenever it designs another Cuba policy:
Does this make the Cuban government more accountable — or does it simply make the Cuban family poorer?
Those are not the same thing.
And if the United States truly stands with the Cuban people, it should never stop examining the difference.
Horizonte Cubano News — Analysis and commentary on Cuba, the United States, and the future of the hemisphere.