Mexico’s continued supply of petroleum to Cuba is generating political friction both domestically and internationally, placing President Claudia Sheinbaum in a difficult position. The issue stems from a longstanding, though historically fluctuating, relationship with Havana, and has been brought to the forefront by heightened tensions with the United States.
A History of Complex Relations
The roots of the current controversy trace back to 2002, when then-Mexican President Vicente Fox requested that Cuban leader Fidel Castro avoid a meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush during a conference in Monterrey. This request, summarized by the phrase “Comes y te vas” (“Come and go”), signaled a period of strained relations. Following the arrival of Morena in power in 2018, Mexico resumed a closer relationship with Cuba, offering support to the island nation. Now, that support—in the form of petroleum—is under intense scrutiny.
The current administration’s petroleum shipments to Cuba have drawn criticism from opposition parties – PAN, PRI, and MC – who argue that Mexico should not be “subsidizing dictatorships.” Concerns have even surfaced within Morena itself, with some members suggesting a halt to the oil deliveries. The situation is further complicated by ongoing negotiations surrounding the USMCA trade agreement and perceived threats from the United States to dismantle it.
Economic and Political Stakes
Ildefonso Guajardo, a former Secretary of Economy, highlighted the risks, stating that failing to understand the challenges facing Mexico in a “tremendous continental situation” would be “irresponsible.” He also pointed to the financial difficulties of Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), which is currently operating at a loss, arguing that “it is irresponsible to add to the crisis of Pemex by giving oil to any country.”
Adding to the pressure, Senator Ricardo Sheffield of Morena has suggested revisiting the petroleum supply agreements to avoid jeopardizing relations with the Trump administration. Meanwhile, questions regarding the transparency of the agreements themselves have been raised, with President Sheinbaum avoiding direct answers about the terms and conditions of the oil shipments.
The issue has even attracted attention in the U.S. House of Representatives, with Republican Congressman Carlos A. Giménez accusing President Sheinbaum of “lying” about the oil deliveries and betraying the United States by providing “free oil to the Cuban dictatorship.”
What’s Next?
President Sheinbaum has defended the petroleum shipments as humanitarian aid, citing a historical pattern of Mexican support for Cuba in the face of the U.S. embargo. She maintains that the current volume of shipments is not significantly different from previous levels. However, she will ultimately be the one to decide whether to continue the deliveries.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the significance of the phrase “Comes y te vas”?
The phrase “Comes y te vas” was the summation of a request made by then-Mexican President Vicente Fox to Cuban leader Fidel Castro in 2002, asking Castro to avoid a meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush.
What is the current status of Pemex?
Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) is currently facing a financial crisis, operating at a loss and representing a burden on Mexico’s public finances.
What is the position of the Mexican Senate on the oil shipments?
The President of the Senate, Laura Itzel Castillo, has stated that Mexico is free to sell oil to whomever it chooses, but has deferred the final decision on whether to suspend shipments to Cuba to President Sheinbaum.
Given the escalating criticism and international scrutiny, will President Sheinbaum maintain the current course, seek to renegotiate the terms of the oil supply, or ultimately halt shipments to Cuba?
Worth a look