Castro’s grandson’s role in talks with the U.S. divides government supporters in Cuba
Cubans who self-describe as revolutionaries have been turning to social media to question the rapid ascent of Raúl Castro’s grandson and his role in negotiations with the Trump administration, in an unusual sign of divisions among core government supporters.
Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro has no formal government position but, as a direct channel to his grandfather and a powerful figure of his own overseeing the family interests in GAESA — the military conglomerate that controls about 40% of the island’s economy — he has been in contact with Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s team since early this year. He was also present during a meeting with CIA director John Ratcliffe when the U.S. intelligence chief visited Havana in May.
Miami Herald sources who have met him in Havana have come out of meetings with little doubt that Rodríguez Castro holds a powerful position on the island, can greenlight economic deals — such as the failed bid by Coral Gables-based Vanguard to expand fuel sales to the island — and makes day-to-day national decisions in consultation with his nonagenarian grandfather.
His role in the negotiations with the Trump administration had already sparked ire among Cuban exiles, who had trouble coming to terms with Rubio’s contacts with a member of the Castro family. Now, Cuban government supporters had a similar reaction after Rodriguez Castro confirmed in his own words to USA Today what U.S. media have been reporting for a while: that he has been leading the U.S. talks on the Cuban side.
“I can negotiate with anyone designated by the U.S.,” Rodríguez Castro told USA Today. “If given the opportunity, of course, with Trump.”
Those and other comments struck a nerve with retired Cuban diplomat and pundit Carlos Alzugaray, who, in a publication on Facebook, called them “imprudent.”
“Relations and conversations with various U.S. administrations have been far too sensitive for the Cuban leadership to allow such brazenness,” said Alzugaray, who lives in Cuba. “I find it hard to believe that any level of the Cuban leadership authorized something so crude and clumsy regarding such a sensitive matter.”
Comments from Alzugaray’s Facebook followers were divided between those voicing similar indignation and those questioning his naivete for overlooking the country’s political dynamics, noting that the Castro family has been the center of power for decades.
In a longer article for La Joven Cuba, a blog usually aligned with the government, Alzugaray doubled down on his criticism of Castro’s grandson.
“I reaffirm that, as a Cuban citizen, I am astonished, saddened, and dismayed by the image of this Cuban military officer’s behavior,” he said. “Entrusting the role of interlocutor to someone lacking experience—and possessing a rather frivolous attitude toward the lives of Cubans—can have serious consequences.”
Other critics of Castro’s grandson also took aim at his wealthy lifestyle, far removed from that of average Cubans, especially at a moment of severe economic crisis.
The Herald had previously reported on Rodriguez Castro’s penchant for a luxurious lifestyle filled with yachts, VIP parties and designer goods. USA Today reported on a dinner at a private restaurant, where he wore a Dolce & Gabbana T-shirt and matching designer sneakers. It also published a photo of him wearing a Hugo Boss T-shirt and a thick gold chain.
“It pains me that many people can’t live the way I do. It weighs on me how people struggle. And I’m working every day to change that situation,” Rodriguez Castro said in the interview.
Israel Rojas, a singer-songwriter in Cuba with the band Buena Fe, which regularly performs at government rallies, posted a furious comment on Facebook, saying that “in the revolution I knew (or the one I thought I knew—who knows the extent of my anachronism) guys like the ones in that gringo article—Raúl Guillermo—always met a bad end.
“No one had ever dared to go that far before,” he said, adding that Rodriguez Castro’s lifestyle was “incompatible with the austerity and revolutionary morality. No amount of familiarity or joviality on the part of a revolutionary leader can excuse bypassing the country’s institutional framework, not even symbolically.”
In hundreds of online comments about Rodríguez Castro this week, many posters urged the government to reject his statements. Others questioned why Cuban authorities had not publicly disclosed his role. Many more said he was unqualified and lacked a formal title for such a position.
Critics of the government, in turn, noted that government officials, and especially members of the Castro family, had always enjoyed a life of luxury behind a veneer of revolutionary austerity, which has become more evident in the social media era.
The controversy is important because it reveals cracks within the group of core government supporters and suggests that a future bid by Rodríguez Castro for a formal leadership position would not be without challenges. He told USA Today that he was not interested in politics, “but if at some point the revolution needs me to step up, I will do it.”
It also reveals that the discontent with the current situation and the way the Cuban government is dealing with it is so high that even its supporters are willing to publicly attack Raúl Castro’s powerful grandson, a gesture unthinkable in the past.
The Communist Party took note. Elier Ramírez Cañedo, the deputy chief of the party’s ideological department and member of its Central Committee, published a statement on Facebook confirming that Rodriguez Castro had been designated as the “interlocutor” in back-channel talks with the U.S., and called for unity.
Ramírez Cañedo said that in the past, the Cuban government had tapped non-diplomats to lead secret talks with the United States. (He didn’t mention it, but Rodriguez Castro’s uncle, Gen. Alejandro Castro Espín, negotiated a warming of relations with the Obama administration). The difference this time, he said, is that the Trump administration has been “unserious” and has leaked information.
“We also observe a media campaign originating in the United States aimed at fostering a narrative of a rift within our country’s leadership—a campaign involving character assassination,” he said. “The manipulations, lies, and sensationalist journalism surrounding Raúl Guillermo—who serves as a Cuban-side interlocutor by decision of the country’s top leadership—are all designed to further this objective.
“We Cubans are well aware of the value of the Revolution’s leadership remaining unshakeably united—a unity that bridges the historic generation and the new leadership guiding the country alongside the people,” he said, insisting that “preserving this unity is essential.”
Ana Teresa Badía, a Cuban state-media journalist and university professor, went so far as to question whether the controversy revealed divisions in Cuba’s leadership, a question state media journalists had not been able to ask in the past without facing severe consequences.
“Why did Raúl Guillermo manage to shake up the political chessboard in Cuba with a single interview? What sentiments drive the reactions? Do certain publications and comments reveal a power struggle? Is there unity or a rift within Cuban politics?” she asked.
She said she didn't like that the USA Today story mentioned “brands and that stuff” because the majority of the Cuban people “are practically dying.” But she welcomed talks with the United States if they could alleviate the “intense Cuban humanitarian crisis and of access to human rights.
“And if Raúl Guillermo can help so that I can have electricity, then let him participate in the dialogue.”
By Thursday evening, the country’s prime minister, Manuel Marrero, had chimed in.
“The team assembled for this strategic responsibility has the confidence, support, and mandate of the Army General and of the First Secretary of the Party Central Committee and President of the Republic” Miguel Díaz-Canel, Marrero said on X.
“Character assassinations, manipulations, and calls for disunity and division are part of a well-designed plan to generate uncertainty and mistrust. Every step taken at this decisive historical moment is in defense of the Revolution and our sovereignty,” he added.
He did not mention Castro’s grandson by name.