Cuban economist laments Díaz-Canel’s refusal to admit responsibility for economic ‘catastrophe’

Cuban economist Juan Triana Cordovaprofessor at the university Center for the Study of the Cuban Economy on University of Havanacriticized the economic actions taken by the government Miguel Diaz-Canel and considered it “regrettable” that he did not acknowledge his “responsibility” for their failure.

Triana Cordoví expressed her views in a post published on the singer-songwriter’s blog Silvio Rodriguez (Second city). In it, an economist who is associated with the regime and closely associated with Ministry of Internal Affairs (MININT)criticized the president’s speech delivered during the third regular session of the 10th Legislature National Assembly of People’s Power (ANPP).

“The president has been describing the catastrophe for some time now, at least twice a year. However, I believe that he has not delved into the causes, and that, in my opinion, is regrettable,” Triana Cordoví said in a blog post titled “Economists’ Opinions by Mail.”

Investment mistakes and lack of responsibility

The economist stressed that “for the past eight years, the Cuban government has concentrated its investments in hotels (35% of the total), while neglecting investments in agriculture, fishing, the sugar industry, the food industry and energy.”

“The president’s inability to acknowledge his personal responsibility and the government’s responsibility for this decision is deeply regrettable,” said Triana Cordoví.

He went further, noting: “For nine years we have been saying that foreign investment must be more flexible, but the same problems still exist. All the ‘barriers’ have been identified and measures have been proposed (a working group was even set up, and these measures were mentioned in the speech Rodrigo Malmierca when he was Minister of Foreign Trade) but nothing was done.”

“Proposals to make state-owned enterprises more flexible could fill drawers with paper, but today our state-owned enterprises are in worse shape,” the economist noted. He also criticized the failure of Cuban exports “due to the high degree of centralization and the lack of incentives for companies and their workers.”

He cited Cuban coffee exports as an example. “Three years ago, among the 63 measures (for the development of the agricultural sector) was the decision to select 100 coffee producers for direct export. But to this day, it is still just ink on paper.”

Centralization and economic control

“In my opinion, it would be a mistake (and I think tragic) to return to a process of greater centralization, because it is already quite high. In Cuba, no company decides on its own where to invest, except GAESA. All decisions regarding investments and resource allocation are taken at the highest levels of government, starting with foreign currency,” stressed Triana Cordoví.

The economist also expressed concern over price caps imposed on products imported and sold by micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (Mipymes), as well as the regime’s announced crusade to “organise” the sector by increasing pressure, orders, controls and sanctions against “new economic entrants”.

“I believe it is a grave mistake to divide instead of add, and to make enemies of those who decided to stake their lot in Cuba, even if they were not guided by extremely altruistic values ​​in doing so,” he said.

Supported by the Silvio Rodriguez program and praised by other economists and figures of the historical regime, such as Humberto Perez Gonzalez (serving, among other things, as president of the Central Planning Council from 1976 to June 1985), Triana Cordoví dealt further blows to the Díaz-Canel government.

Criticism of government policy

“For me, it is a disgrace that year after year, the president and his ministers go to the Assembly to tell about the disasters caused by their wrong policies and ask the people to make more sacrifices. But it is even more disgraceful that the People’s Deputies (because they are our deputies) continue to accept this situation,” he said.

His deep criticism was directed at the Cuban economic model, which he said, quoting Fidel Castro“no longer works for us” and has led to the greatest economic and human decapitalization in Cuba’s history, a particular expression of which is the mass exodus in recent years.

“I say this with great pain, which I believe is shared by many, because I have seen my classrooms empty of students, and the faculties of our universities empty of professors, hospitals without trained doctors thanks to the sacrifices of the people (not the state or its leaders), our fields without farmers, while there is less and less food and more and more agricultural managers with “yipetas”, and because, like all Cubans, every day we hear of another family broken by emigration.”

Reaffirming his attachment to the old revolutionary ideals and confessing his “pain and anger”, Triana Cordoví concluded: “A country without people is just a piece of land. A nation is not the sum of houses and roads. If we want to be socialists, we must first have a nation; it is not the other way around.”

Key Issues of the Economic Crisis in Cuba

In light of Juan Triana Cordoví’s criticism of the Cuban government’s economic policies, here are some important questions and answers to help you better understand the situation.

What are the main allegations against Juan Triana Cordoví regarding Cuba’s investment strategies?

Triana Cordoví criticizes the Cuban government for concentrating 35% of its investment in hotels over the past eight years, neglecting key sectors such as agriculture, fishing, sugar, food and energy.

Why does Triana Cordoví think that more centralization would be a mistake?

Triana Cordoví argues that greater centralization would be a tragic mistake because it would further limit the decision-making power of companies and exacerbate existing problems, since all decisions regarding investment and resource allocation are already made at the highest levels of government.

What does Triana Cordoví say about the impact of the Cuban economic model on society?

He argues that the current economic model has led to significant economic and human decapitalisation, citing a mass exodus of professionals and a decline in demand for basic services such as education and healthcare.