“We have lived through difficult times, these in particular are very difficult, but we will overcome them together” 

The First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Party and President of the Republic, comrade Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, responding to requests from various media outlets in recent hours, has decided to devote part of his busy schedule to answering your questions.
I don't know, Mr. President, if you would like to introduce the dialogue.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  I would just like to reiterate my greetings and thank you all for your interest in this meeting at such a complex time for our country.
We are aware that there are concerns among the population about everything that has been happening, as well as about the intense media campaign of slander, hatred, and psychological warfare that is being imposed at this time.
This meeting with you gives us the opportunity to explain a whole range of issues, including our projections, the ways in which we are seeking to get out of this situation as quickly as possible and, above all, our disposition, our will, and our efforts.
Arleen Rodríguez: When you arrived, you told us that you had just had an important meeting.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel: That also meant that we had to set a series of priorities.  We had to make a series of assessments in the Political Bureau, in the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers, in the National Defense Council, and now we have just had a meeting in the Council of Ministers to update a plan.
In particular, what we were looking at in the Council of Ministers were the government's directives for dealing with an acute fuel shortage. And you will understand precisely why we are talking about this issue.
Arleen Rodríguez: I give the floor to my colleagues.
I will start with Oliver Zamora, who had also asked us to talk about the situation after January 3.
Oliver Zamora, representing RT, Russia Today.
Oliver Zamora: Greetings, President.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  Greetings, Oliver.
Oliver Zamora.-  I would like to ask you about two issues. First, the rhetoric of collapse that has begun to strengthen from the U.S. government, from President Donald Trump, of course, repeated by media outlets sympathetic to this government after the events of January 3.
I would like, if possible, to delve a little deeper into the actual level of dependence that existed between the two governments, and what can be expected in bilateral relations between Cuba and Venezuela now.
And a second issue, the wave of solidarity that Cuba has received. To know if that solidarity, which so far has been at the level of discourse, could also become more practical solidarity, despite the threats from the United States.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  All right, Oliver.
I believe that the theory of collapse and the insistence on collapse is closely related to the theory of the failed state and to a whole set of constructs that the U.S. government has used to characterize the situation in Cuba.
Precisely, this theory of collapse is associated with one of the currents or one of the directions in which the United States government is striving to overthrow the Cuban Revolution.
I say that there are two fundamental directions: economic suffocation, which dates back to the 1960s with the Mallory Memorandum, and military aggression.  This is very well summarized in one of the recent statements by the President of the United States, when in the first part of a sentence he said that they had applied all possible pressure against Cuba, acknowledging that there is no failed state, but rather a state that has had to face with great resistance the maximum pressure, not from just anyone, but the maximum pressure for economic suffocation from the world's leading power.  Moreover, this power has an imperial foundation and a hegemonic purpose of domination.
On the other hand, there is military aggression, when the second part of that sentence says that there was nothing else to do but take the place and raze it, occupy the place and raze it.
I believe that we have in our history, in the 67 years of the Revolution, with the emergence of the blockade, this theory of economic suffocation, this purpose of economic suffocation.  I always say that all generations of Cubans who were born in the early years of the Revolution, even the most recent ones, our grandchildren, our children, were born and live under the blockade, and we were born under the signs of that economic suffocation. We have always had shortages, we have always had complex difficulties, we have always had to function amid vicissitudes and impositions and pressures that are not imposed on anyone else in the world, much less in such a prolonged manner. And there are examples of the things we have experienced.
What happens is that I believe that collapse, and it is in the mentality, it is in the imperial philosophy, but it is not in the mentality of Cubans, collapse cannot be associated only with the pressures and intentions of an imperial government.  In our vision of collapse, there is the concept of resistance, of creative resistance, which has to do with defending the ideas we believe in, defending the convictions we believe in, with a conviction of victory that we also believe in.
I am not an idealist. I know that we are going to experience difficult times. We have experienced difficult times, and these in particular are very difficult, but we are going to overcome them together, with creative resistance, with the effort and talent of all Cubans, of the majority of Cuban women and men.
The relationship with Venezuela cannot be classified as one of dependency. Many try to see it as a relationship of dependency between two countries, and in doing so, they restrict it, reducing it to an exchange of goods and services, and that is not the reality of the relationship we have had with the Bolivarian Revolution.
Since Chávez led the Bolivarian Revolution, a whole relationship of cooperation and collaboration has been woven, based on principles of solidarity, above all, of integration and complementarity: how two brotherly countries, friends, could take advantage of each other's potential in terms of that integration, that complementarity. That is why the Comprehensive Collaboration Agreement between Cuba and Venezuela came about more than 25 years ago.
And why comprehensive? Because it covers many areas, including energy, food sovereignty, education, higher education, literacy, cadre training, and human resources training.  There are also issues related to industry, mining, telecommunications, cultural exchange, and political exchange. And that transcended the relations between Cuba and Venezuela.
In that relationship and in that agreement, remember that four years later ALBA-TCP emerged, which was to take the concepts of that relationship to a group of countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. 
Subsequently, ALBA-TCP also supported Petrocaribe, which was a group of projects also focused on energy, but with an emphasis on social issues, social justice, equity, opportunities, and the benefit and development of the peoples, not only of Venezuela and Cuba, but of Latin America and the Caribbean.

This reflects the concept of integration, the integration that Martí dreamed of, that Bolívar dreamed of, and that Fidel and Chávez defended, and to which we are all committed, because there are thousands of Cubans who have participated in missions carried out in the context of this agreement, of this collaboration.
On other occasions I have explained, and it is because I feel it, right? That there is no regional integration bloc that has achieved in such a short time the social successes achieved by ALBA-TCP, which was born as part of that close relationship between Cuba and Venezuela.
Remember that there is something very significant, I would say very heartfelt, which was the Milagro Mission, which restored sight to more than 3.5 million Latin Americans who had lost their vision due to diseases that could be treated with other approaches, not with a commercial approach, not with an approach based on wealth, but with an approach based on social justice, with an approach based on equity.
With a Cuban method, Yo sí puedo (Yes, I can), for literacy, in that context of integration, four countries managed to overcome illiteracy and declared themselves territories free of illiteracy. You may say to me, "But, well, that is a social achievement to which everyone aspires." Yes, but it has not yet been achieved in the world.
Consider that in Latin America and the Caribbean, since Cuba declared itself the first territory free of illiteracy in Latin America and the Caribbean, how many years passed, how many decades passed before four other countries were able to achieve it?  And they were able to achieve it precisely with that concept of complementarity and integration in a system of relations not based on selfishness, but based precisely on these concepts, which are more humanistic concepts, which are concepts of an approach of leaving no one behind.

Of course, very important economic and commercial relations and collaborative projects were woven here. One of those projects, especially in energy, for the provision of medical services, compensated for a significant part of the fuel needs, not all, but a significant part, especially in more recent times; at another time they did cover all of our country's fuel needs, but in these times they no longer covered everything, because let us remember that Venezuela has been subject to sanctions, Venezuela has been subject to coercive measures, to pressure, and that has also affected this exchange, which has been maintained to a very large extent, but which has not always reached the levels of another time.
Now it is very affected when the energy blockade began, the naval blockade of Venezuela, which has prevented Venezuelan ships or ships from other countries carrying Venezuelan fuel from reaching Cuba. The situation has worsened even further with the recent Executive Order issued by the United States Government, which is manipulating countries that supply oil by threatening them with tariffs. It is practically this pretext that has turned it into an energy blockade of our country.
The future of Venezuela's relations lies in how we are able to build that future from the present situation of a Venezuela that has been attacked, whose president and his wife were illegally kidnapped and are being held in a prison in the United States.
When it comes to collaboration, we do not impose collaboration. We offer collaboration, we share collaboration, we share solidarity when governments, peoples, or nations ask us to.  And under that concept, we have maintained that collaboration with Venezuela over the years.
Everyone knows Martí's phrase about his commitment to Venezuela, which we have all taken on. Therefore, we also have commitments to that Bolivarian land, we have very intense feelings. And as long as the Venezuelan government promotes and defends collaboration, Cuba will be willing to collaborate.
The other question has to do with support. I believe that there has been immediate support at the international level. There are various opinions from spokespersons, foreign ministries, international leaders, and movements that bring countries together.
I had a report here, a chronology since February 1st of how many signs of support have been received: the Morena Movement; the spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, who has appeared several times in recent days; the Russian ambassador to the United Nations; Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, of Palestinian origin and representative for Michigan; Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun; the Venezuelan government; the Belgian Minister of Mobility, Climate, and Environmental Transition, who spoke in this regard in his country's House of Representatives; MEPs Irene Montero of Spain and Marc Botenga of Belgium; the Secretary General of South Africa's ruling party, the African National Congress; President Claudia Sheinbaum, who in practically all her morning press conferences answers questions related to Mexico's position and its support for Cuba; the Mexican Foreign Ministry; the Chinese Embassy in Washington; Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov; our friend Zyuganov, leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation; the Russian Ambassador to Venezuela; the Cuba-Philippines Friendship Association; Democratic Representative Gregory Meeks, from the New York district; and President Putin.
Today we learned of a statement by the Non-Aligned Movement and another statement by the member states of the Group of Friends in Defense of the United Nations Charter.
We also know that today there were telephone conversations between the President and Secretary General of the Chinese Communist Party, Xi Jinping, and the President of the Russian Federation, Putin, in which they also expressed their support, commitment, and decision to continue collaboration and cooperation with Venezuela and Cuba. That is what we could say in general terms has happened in terms of support and speeches.
But behind those speeches there is more, things that we cannot openly explain today, because the enemy is persecuting every avenue that could be opened to Cuba, every path that could be opened to Cuba, but I can assure you with all sense of responsibility that Cuba is not alone, and that at a time like this there are many people: governments, countries, institutions, companies that are willing to work with Cuba and that have already sent us channels, mechanisms, intentions of how we can do it.
The energy persecution, the financial persecution, the intensification of these coercive measures is such that we know we have to work very hard, very creatively, very intelligently to overcome all these obstacles; but there is courage in a group of institutions, people, and governments around the world to support us. And that is what we can say or explain today for obvious reasons.
Arleen Rodríguez: Thank you, President.
Claudia, representing the People's Republic of China's Xinhua news agency, had asked to speak along with Oliver. And Esther Liliam, please get ready.
Claudia Fonseca: Greetings, President.
In response to this Executive Order, there have been demonstrations, as you mentioned, rejecting this reinforcement of the energy blockade. I would like you to comment on what the countries of the Global South could do to support Cuba specifically in this regard.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel: Every time one observes what is happening, the lessons we have been able to learn in recent days from what happened in Venezuela and the reaction of the United States government towards Cuba and others after Venezuela, one thinks about what the world could do, because I believe that the world cannot allow itself to be subjugated, the world cannot allow itself to be humiliated, the world cannot allow force to crush multilateralism.  I think and believe that on issues like this, the first thing is that we must understand, countries must understand, peoples must understand what is happening.
They have to understand that we are all facing, without exception, a war that is political, that is ideological, a war that also has a cultural component and a war that has a communications component, a media component. And it is the concept of an unconventional war, a fourth-generation war that combines all these elements and others.
Why is it an ideological war? Because they are trying to impose the hegemonic thinking of the world's leading imperialist power.
Why is it a cultural war? Because in order for that power to prevail globally, they have to break the ties with the cultural roots of the peoples.  They have to do everything possible to make peoples see their culture and history as obsolete. I am talking about culture in the broadest possible sense, so that people renounce their identity, so that people are ashamed of their history, so that they can then assimilate and have imposed on them the paradigms and patterns of that hegemonic philosophy, of that imperial philosophy.
And it is a media war, because you have seen that all the phases of the aggression against Venezuela were designed first, and the cross-cutting factor was always the way in which public opinion was managed, the way in which international public opinion was manipulated, the way in which the media acted, the way in which social networks acted. A very important psychological war is being waged against Cuba today, with pressure to fracture unity, to create mistrust, to promote uncertainty, and these are elements that demonstrate the perversity.
So I think the first thing that the peoples, the governments, the countries, the nations, the Global South have to understand is this: they have to understand what is at stake, what are the scenarios in which this dispute is taking place, what are they offering us as a future from this brutal present, and then seek articulation, seek unity.

Seek unity that cannot be just rhetoric, that must also be unity in action, in constant denunciation, in seeking all possible integration into blocs or fronts defending ideas, also seeking economic, commercial, cooperative, and collaborative actions that defend multilateralism.
I believe that there are blocs that are currently taking the lead in this regard, such as the BRICS, which offers different perspectives for the Global South; China's own relations, and those of powers such as China and Russia, with the countries of the South are different; the Eurasian Union and other blocs; the Non-Aligned Movement has to play a fundamental role in this, the Group of 77.  It is about achieving an anti-hegemonic mobilization with a characteristic that must distinguish us because it is in the postulates of this hegemony, which is an anti-fascist articulation.
They are acting like Hitler's hordes when they attack a country, when they subjugate the world, when they kidnap a president, or when they commit criminal acts against ships and people in an extrajudicial manner, without any element of legality.
I would not dare to say specifically what actions I think could be taken, because that would compromise others too much, but there are ways, I am sure there are ways. The thing is that in order to take those paths and achieve that integration, all of us in the Global South must show courage and bravery.
Esther L. González (Canal Caribe). Greetings, President, to you and everyone joining us.
President, on several occasions you have referred to the opportunity, as well as the willingness, to engage in dialogue with the United States. I would like to know specifically if you would be willing to talk with the United States, under what principles you would do so, and what the points on that agenda would be.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.- It must be said that in the history of relations between Cuba and the United States after the triumph of the Revolution, which have been characterized by an asymmetry that we all know, and above all, that asymmetry is marked by the imposition of an economic, commercial, and financial blockade for so many years, sustained and intensified at the present time, there has always been a group of people within the United States and also at the international level, a group of organizations that have always been promoting routes, bridges, spaces for dialogue, or channels of communication, and many times this has been achieved, and when it has been achieved, it has allowed us to speak as equals on issues on which we may even share different views, but which are issues that we must address together because we are in the same geographical area, we are very close neighbors.  There are migration issues, security issues, issues related to the fight against drug trafficking and terrorism, and environmental issues that also have to do with all the seas and everything around the Gulf of Mexico, the ocean currents. But there are also other issues that have to do with scientific collaboration and academic exchanges. There is a long list of issues that can be addressed.  And there has always been a historical position of Cuba, a position that was defined and defended by Commander-in-Chief Fidel Castro, continued by Army General Raúl, and which, in my view, is unalterable and unchanging at the present time. Cuba is open to dialogue with the United States on any of the issues that they wish to discuss or debate.
Under what conditions? Without pressure, because dialogue is not possible under pressure; without preconditions; on an equal footing; in a position of respect for our sovereignty, our independence, our self-determination; without addressing issues that are hurtful and that we may understand as interference in our internal affairs, and that from such a dialogue a civilized relationship between neighbors can be built, which could bring mutual benefit to our peoples, to the peoples of both nations.
Cubans do not hate the American people; we recognize the values of the American people, the values of their history, the values of their culture.
When we have had the opportunity for our peoples to meet in different sectors, in the scientific sector, in the sports sector, in the religious sector, in the cultural sector, in the health sector, and even in political dialogues, we have found that there are many things we can work on together, without prejudice, that can contribute a great deal.
Seen from another perspective, how many things are we depriving both peoples of because of this decadent policy, this arrogant policy, this criminal policy of blockade and the persistence of that blockade, to the point of having intensified it at the present time and continuing to intensify it, continuing to tighten the screws of that blockade. And the agenda could be about all these issues we have discussed.
That is our position. It is also a position of continuity, and I believe it is possible.
Arleen Rodríguez: Thank you, President.

Raciel Guanche, from the newspaper Juventud Rebelde, has asked to speak.
Raciel Guanche (Juventud Rebelde).— Following the official statement recently published on the stages and approval of plans and measures for the transition to a state of war, there was also concern among the population. And we wanted to know at what stage of defense preparations the country is today.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  Okay. 
I think there may undoubtedly be concern among the population, but I think there is less concern because the population is participating in this.  The concern is on the part of others, of that swarm of annexationists we have out there, of those who are beginning to falter, of those who are beginning to show themselves to be cowards or weak in the face of the pressure and psychological warfare they are waging against us, in the face of announcements of possible military aggression or of continuing to tighten the blockade against Cuba with the consequences that this may have for our people.
The reality is that Cuba is a peaceful country. Our country's defense doctrine or military doctrine is based on the concept of the War of the Whole People, which is a concept of defending the sovereignty and independence of the country. It does not contemplate, at any time, in any section, in any concept, aggression against another country. We are not a threat to the United States.
Now, the one who is constantly talking about aggression, and above all has raised the insulting rhetoric about possible aggression against Cuba, is the United States government at this time.
We revolutionaries know what it means to defend a revolution, and that the revolution, as Fidel has explained, as Raúl has explained, a revolution that does not know how to defend itself and does not strengthen its defense is very unlikely to survive certain circumstances.  And it is our sovereign duty in the face of the danger of aggression to prepare ourselves for defense.
Therefore, when we analyzed everything that was happening: the events of January 3 in Venezuela, the implications for Latin America and the Caribbean, the threats in the region and the threats to Cuba, one of the priorities we established was to deploy a defense preparedness plan in the interest of the War of the Whole People, which includes the preparation of our country's territorial defense system in all its links, from the defense zone, the municipality, the province, to the National Defense Council; the regular units of the FAR and the Minint; the production and defense brigades; the Territorial Troop Militias, and also the structures in the defense zones and special groups, in order to raise our levels of defense preparedness.  This is legitimate and is even contemplated in our Constitution.
We have declared Saturdays to be national defense days, and so, gradually and systematically, all components of our territorial defense system are preparing. We are participating in that preparation.
At this time, there have been two preparatory activities by the National Defense Council. One in which we updated all the plans to deal with an aggression by the working bodies of the National Defense Council; we updated them, we included details that have to do with the experiences we have gained from recent international conflicts.
In another meeting of the National Defense Council, we updated the Plan for the Transition to a State of War, if necessary. And that was published, because we are not hiding it, we are not hiding it!
The note from the Defense Council that was published said exactly this: "In compliance with the activities planned for Defense Day and with the aim of increasing and improving the level of preparedness and cohesion of the leadership and personnel, the National Defense Council met this Saturday to analyze and approve the plans and measures for the transition to a state of war, as part of the country's preparation under the strategic concept of the War of the Whole People."  It is not saying that we are entering a state of war; it is saying that we are preparing for the possibility of entering a state of war at some point.
Therefore, this is the reality, and everything else is manipulation, which was immediately taken up by the entire system of media intoxication that exists to defend the interests of the United States government.
And our people are participating. I have visited military units where we have conducted exercises, I have spent time with university students who have also been involved in defense tasks in municipal defense zones, and we will continue to participate systematically in this type of activity.
Arleen Rodríguez: Let's move on to the news agencies.
I wanted to add some additional information that I did not give you earlier, which is that of the media outlets that requested this appearance, the representatives of the foreign media are here, and we have already heard from them. Television, as is logical, had also requested space, and here are the news agencies Prensa Latina, Jorge Legañoa, its president, and Norland Rosendo, the director of the Cuban News Agency, who is getting ready.
Jorge Legañoa (Latin American News Agency Prensa Latina). Greetings, President.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel. Greetings, a hug.
Jorge Legañoa. First of all, thank you for this opportunity to bring up questions that our people are asking and that we have also received.
I would like to return for a moment to last week's Executive Order, because it is interesting how the issue of national emergency is invoked, which is not the first time it has been invoked. I would like to ask you several related questions and I would ask you to answer them one by one.
Are we a country that sponsors international terrorism? This is a recurring question, and I think it is important to ask it.
The U.S. narrative speaks of protecting terrorists in our country. Do we protect terrorists in Cuba? Related to this, are there military or intelligence forces from other nations on Cuban soil? Or are there ongoing talks with some nations, some countries, to install intelligence bases in Cuba or military bases in Cuba, beyond the one that has historically existed?
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel: You are asking me a question that you have answered thousands of times and that we have seen you speak about on these issues; but, as you said, it is a current issue and it is also an issue that is on the public agenda for debate in our country.
When we review the history of the Cuban Revolution, we can see how systematically, intensely, and perversely the United States government has acted to promote terrorist acts against the Revolution.
There are more than 600 known attempts on the life of our Commander-in-Chief, a whole series of historical acts of terrorism. To recall some of those that took place in the provinces I led: Boca de Samá, in Holguín; the fight against bandits in the Escambray, in Villa Clara, Cienfuegos, and Sancti Spíritus, who executed and murdered peasants and revolutionaries, including a young man like Manuel Ascunce, who was teaching peasants to read and write so that they could have the light of knowledge.
It must be said that something common to all these events, to all these expressions of terrorism, is that they have been organized, financed, and supported by successive U.S. administrations.
One of the most memorable events in the country, because of its connotation and the stirring words of our Commander in Chief on that occasion, was the crime against the Barbados plane, in which 73 people perished.
During a visit we made to the Caribbean a few years ago, we had the opportunity to pay tribute to those who died in that crime, sharing with one of the children of one of the victims of the attack on the Cubana de Aviación plane, with Tin Cremata, the director of La Colmenita.  I remember that meeting in that place, one afternoon, in the presence of the Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, was very emotional and heartfelt for the Cubans who were there, and in particular for Tin, who also recounted in his words all the pain he suffered as a child alongside his family due to the loss of his father.
I would tell you more, but today we know of plans for terrorist acts that are being supported, financed, and prepared in the United States to attack Cuba at a time like this, and when the time comes, we will provide the information and make the denunciation that it deserves.
How can you talk about terrorism in Cuba, a country that has been the victim of terrorism by the very person who is accusing us? It is brazen, it is immoral, it is manipulation, it is a lie, it is slander; but we have very recent facts, and we have seen the dishonesty with which the US governments have shifted the focus of terrorism by blaming Cuba. 
Let us remember that, just a few days before the US presidential handover, the current US president included us on the list of countries that allegedly support terrorism, and we all know that this is one of the actions that has most contributed to the intensification of the blockade in recent times, because of the damage it causes us from a financial point of view and in terms of the ability of a whole group of entities and companies to work with Cuba, and because it is a totally coercive measure and a means of exerting pressure on others.  And they labeled us, defined us, classified us, and included us on that spurious list without any evidence.

Biden maintained that position during his term in office, and in the last days of his term he removed us from the list of countries that allegedly support terrorism; therefore, he was acknowledging that there was no evidence to include us on that list.  Then Trump returned to the presidency and within a few days he put us back on the list. 
Does the list really reflect a fair assessment, an assessment based on evidence that a country is a terrorist state, or is it also a political manipulation that serves the interests of the US administrations?
Cuba is not a terrorist country. Cuba is also not a threat to the security of the United States. Cuba has never carried out, proposed, or armed any aggressive action that endangers the territorial integrity, security, or stability of the United States government.
We do not protect terrorists. There are no military forces from other nations or other groups in Cuba.  There are no military bases from other countries in Cuba. We have military cooperation and military cooperation agreements with friendly countries, with allies, but that does not mean that there are military bases in Cuba.
In Cuba, as Legañoa said, there is a military base, an illegal military base, and whose is it? It is an illegal US base on the soil of the Cuban province of Guantanamo, against the will of the Cuban people.
Who are the ones with military bases all over the world? Who are known for supporting state terrorism around the world? Or was the aggression against Venezuela and the kidnapping of a president not an act of state terrorism?  Or is the United States' support for the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza not an act of terrorism? Or is shooting and sinking boats and ships carrying people who have not been proven to be linked to drug trafficking in an extrajudicial manner, without any investigation or evidence, not an act of terrorism?
So, where does the truth lie in this world? Which is the main state in the world that is a danger to world security, to world peace? The United States. That is my view on this issue, Legañoa.
Norland Rosendo (Cuban News Agency). Greetings, President.
President, the current situation in Cuba is very complex in terms of electricity generation due to problems accessing international fuels, now exacerbated by the Executive Order that threatens to further impede our access to them.
Cuba has proposed on several occasions, in various national forums, a long-term strategy to change the country's energy matrix, with the goal of reaching approximately 100 percent renewable energy sources by 2050. 
In light of current events, has there been any update to that strategy? If so, what are the elements that support it and what will the priorities be?
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel: That is a very interesting question, and I think it has a lot to do with what people are concerned about, with what people want to know.
We have dedicated the month of January to plenary sessions, to strategies in the territories and to national strategies, and one of the priorities has been the country's energy program, which covers electricity and other energy issues related to fuel and fuel use, and we have updated that strategy.  The thing is that, as you yourself point out, a strategy had already been in place for approximately two years, with the fundamental objective of energy transition, that is, moving towards renewable energy sources and becoming more independent from the use of fossil fuels.
The way in which a series of coercive measures by the United States government, in the midst of this situation, has been aimed at blocking the country's energy supply, confirms the importance of maintaining this priority in the country's energy transition towards renewable energy sources. 
Perhaps in order to answer your question, I need to talk about the results we achieved from the implementation of this strategy last year and what the ratification and updating of this strategy consists of at the present time, in light of recent events.
The situation was so complex last year that the modest results, so to speak, although one of them is not modest at all, and I will explain why, did not allow us to see the magnitude of the impact of what was achieved last year, which was one of the years in which we faced the most harassment, had the least financial resources, and had the least fuel. 
Last year, we recovered more than 900 megawatts in the country's distributed generation source. Why has this impact not been seen? Because it has coincided with an increase in generation capacity or the recovery of distributed generation capacity, but we have not had, for all the reasons we know, the fuel for that... 
For example, we have been at zero distributed generation for four weeks, meaning that we cannot use more than 1,300 or 1,400 megawatts of installed power in distributed generation during peak hours to compensate for deficits.  Do the math yourselves: if during peak hours we have been moving between 1,600, 1,800, and 1,900 megawatts of deficit in these first days of the year, in the first month and so far in February, sometimes reaching 2,000; if we had had 1,200, 1,300, 1,400 megawatts of distributed generation incorporated and operating during those hours, the peak would have been minimized to 500 or 400 at a very particular moment of the peak, and we would have been able to close most nights after the peak and in the early morning hours.  But it was a result that we have not been able to take full advantage of due to fuel problems, but it is there, it is there!
We also recovered thermal generation capacities, which has to do with the entire process that has been enhanced in terms of repair and maintenance of the country's main thermoelectric power plants.  The impact has not been seen because we have had deficits, very large deficits. But note that we have maintained a deficit, for example, at the peak we are talking about, with only the thermoelectric plants operating during that peak period, without distributed generation.  The peak deficits have remained more or less the same as at other times when we could have had a portion of distributed generation, but we did not have what we had recovered in thermal generation, and that has also prevented the impact from being seen.
And the third area we are working on, and where I believe there is a notable result, which may not be perceived either, is in the investments we made in renewable energy sources during that very bad year in terms of the economic and financial situation. 
Last year, we made an investment and installed more than 1,000 megawatts of electricity generation with photovoltaic parks: we installed around 49 photovoltaic parks in the country.  Therefore, before 2025, the penetration, or let's say, the percentage contributed by renewable energy sources in the country's electricity generation was only 3%, and with that investment in that year, in a single year, we jumped from 3% to 10% of generation, which means we grew by 7%.
And you may ask me, or the population may ask, where is that energy? Well, imagine that if during the day we have not had distributed generation and if during the day we have only been able to rely on thermoelectric plants, some of which are under repair or maintenance, why have we not had the peak deficits during the day that we have at night?  Well, simply because those 1,000 megawatts of photovoltaic parks are generating, on average, daily, during the hours of the day when they are operating, 38% of the energy that the country consumes at those times, and they have been able to maintain a controllable, manageable level of deficit during the day. 
Let's look at it another way. If we hadn't had those 1,000 megawatts that day, we would have had less than 1,000 megawatts of generation, we would have been generating around nine hundred and something megawatts that day; and an electrical energy system like ours, with 900 megawatts of generation, with more than 1,200, 1,300 megawatts of sustained deficit during the day... because, you see, today we have a difference in the deficit between day and night.  If we hadn't had those photovoltaic parks, the deficit we have today at night would have been throughout the day.  What would have happened? The country would have been living systematically from blackout to blackout. In other words, the system would have been constantly unstable, there would have been a total blackout, we would have recovered, and in two or three days we would have returned to instability, and that did not happen.
Now, Arleen asked me the other day, why is there a perception, especially in Havana, that blackouts have increased during the day? There are times when they have increased, and there are times when more problems converge, such as fuel shortages, breakdowns, and weaker sunlight, which complicate things for us.
When you analyze the deficits we have had during the day, before January and in January and February, the deficits during the day are more or less the same.  The thing is that until 2025 we worked with the concept of prioritizing daytime electricity generation for the population, but we had the economy at a standstill, we had industries, agricultural activities, and irrigation at a standstill; we had the main factories, the main export centers, and the main centers of production of goods for the population at a standstill. 
Also, making a realistic analysis of the country's conditions, we said: we have to put a little energy into the economy during the day this year. Knowing that it is at the expense of affecting the population, but the fact is that the population also receives what we produce in the economy, and if the economy does not produce, then we complicate things further and the impact of energy problems is greater in the lives of Cubans. 
So, with that concept, the deficit has remained the same, we have been able to sustain it from that investment, but we are dedicating part of that energy to the economy, and thus we have managed to prioritize electrical irrigation during the day; the irrigation, for example, of the hectares of rice we are planting, because this year we want to achieve 200,000 hectares of rice, which would mean a production with which we would begin to cover around 30% to 40% of the rice we consume in the regulated basket and which is currently imported, and it would be a first step towards achieving self-sufficiency in rice with domestic production in two or three years and not having to import rice into the country.
We have been able to energize a group of entities that generate exports; we have been able to energize entities that substitute imports; we have been able to give the energy needed by tobacco, which is a very important export item today, for irrigation and for the investments that have been made. 
Now, since all provinces had to make adjustments to balance this out across the country, where is this felt most? In Havana, the capital, because it had the greatest capacity to give up a portion, to ask for a portion of that energy in order to boost the economy. And that is why there may be—there is, in fact—a perception that there is a greater deficit.  Not a deficit, what happens is that there is more of a deficit among the population because we have prioritized the economy.
I say, are we wrong in that concept, or is it also a way to be able to devote part of all that investment effort to advancing the economy? And we have been working with that concept.  
So, up to this point, I have talked to you about last year's results and what they have meant for the current electricity situation. 
Now, what we have proposed, not only for electricity, but as a concept for the country's energy situation, because of these pressures, of this situation we are experiencing, and I do so from a non-idealistic approach, I do so from a rational, optimistic, but also realistic approach, we must take advantage of this as an opportunity and finally understand that the country must be able to sustain itself energetically with the energy sources we have: with our heavy national crude oil; with renewable energy sources: we have air, we have water, we have sun, we have biomass, we can generate biogas, and then apply that concept to electricity generation.  And that is a concept that updates what we are proposing in the energy plan, particularly in relation to electricity.
Of course, it is not achieved exactly, but imagine if we had not had the 1,000 megawatts. If we had 1,000 megawatts last year and we aspire to have a figure close to that this year, then we would already be reaching levels above 15% or close to 20% of electricity generation from renewable sources.  And the country's 2030 Economic and Social Model proposed reaching 25% by 2030; we would be reaching that before 2030.
Now, what are we doing, what other actions are being considered in this updated program?  The continuity of the program and the maintenance of thermoelectric power plants, because we cannot immediately do without the thermoelectric base, because, in addition, in that thermoelectric base we can generate with national crude oil, without dependence on fuel imports.
Continue the program to increase renewable energy sources.  By the end of February, we will have 98 megawatts more in installed photovoltaic parks; by the end of March, we will have added 58 megawatts more, and so we will continue every month of the year, adding more megawatts as we did last year. 
We are making investments that not only increase generation from renewable energy sources, but also include renewable energy sources with storage.  By moving towards renewable energy sources with storage, we are ensuring stability in the frequency of the system and, on the other hand, we are creating the capacity to use the photovoltaic energy stored during the day to generate power at night, which makes us totally independent from the use of fossil fuels. 
We are installing 5,000 photovoltaic systems, let's say, domestic, family systems, in homes, each with a capacity of 2 kilowatts, in homes that were not electrified because they were isolated and where bringing electricity would require a tremendous investment in cables, transformers, and poles in places that are difficult to access.  When we achieve this, we will have completed the electrification of 100 percent of the country, that is, the possibility of everyone having electricity. The rest depends on what we generate, but those homes that did not have electricity will begin to have stable electricity because they also have storage and will be able to enjoy what they have never been able to enjoy before.
And we have enough for the homes we were missing and also for a group of homes that were on systems where the energy supplied to them was only available for a few hours a day because they depended on fuel plants, power plants, or hydroelectric plants that depended on the water flow available or on certain very poor connections. Therefore, we are improving 5,000 homes in this regard.
On the other hand, we are already installing 5,000 more photovoltaic modules in vital centers to provide services to the population.  Look, we are doing all this in the midst of these circumstances, in the midst of this moment, and it contributes to that energy transition.
For example, 161 maternal homes in the country will benefit from these modules.  The power may go out in those places, but the maternal homes will have energy.  Modules of this type have been installed for children—referred to as dependent children—who have illnesses that require them to have energy in their homes all day long. Last year, we installed them for 161 children, and this year we are going to install them for 121 more.
I mentioned 161 maternity homes; 156 nursing homes; 305 homes for the elderly; 556 polyclinics, where at least the emergency room and a significant part of the facility will have these systems; 336 bank branches.  You know that one of the problems the population faces today when there is a blackout is that they cannot carry out banking transactions, and the economy does not function from a financial point of view either. This solves that problem; 349 commercial offices of the UNE and other agencies where people have to carry out procedures. 
Here we have talked about nursing homes, polyclinics, and branches. All of this is spread across the 168 municipalities of our country. In other words, we are going with that concept and we are not stopping there; we aspire to more.
Now, there are 10,000 more photovoltaic systems. Look, we have talked about 5,000 and 5,000, which is 10,000. That is already 10,000 homes or 10,000 institutions that do not need to connect to the national power grid.
There are 10,000 photovoltaic systems that are being delivered on a priority basis to people who work in the education and health systems: doctors, teachers, professors, health workers, education workers, higher education workers, which are two sectors that contribute a lot to society, which are two sectors where people work in very complex conditions. With payment facilities, with loans, long-term payments.  That's 10,000 more people, or 10,000 more homes, which is multiplied by three or four family members who benefit from this.
We have proposed incentives for people who buy systems and want to cogenerate and contribute to the national electricity system, or who want to cogenerate and contribute to a community or a block or a group of homes.
We have also created incentives so that in terms of tariffs, prices, and payment methods, anyone who can purchase a domestic photovoltaic system to install in their home can do so in the most viable and expeditious way possible.
This year, we also plan to recover wind power generation and transmission capacities in some of the wind farms we already have in the country, but which were experiencing certain technical problems, and there are new investments in wind power being developed, especially in the La Herradura area in Las Tunas. 
This is a whole group of actions that are included in this program, which is being updated and which shows us the path we want to take and the road we want to travel.
And here, as I explained just now, there is another group of things that are being done, of aid that we are going to receive, of projects that are being managed, which, as we get responses, will enable us to expand everything we have planned.
Now, last year the country acquired training capacity in the forces that build, operate, and install photovoltaic park technology. When we started the first parks, it took us about three months to build them, but we were able to build the last parks in 45 days. In other words, we now have trained personnel to continue these investments in Cuba, and even to provide services to other countries that need collaboration in this area.
New technologies have been incorporated, technology transfers have been made, and developments are underway. A group of scientists, led primarily by Dr. Lídice from the University of Havana, has been closely monitoring how these investments should be made, meaning that this entire program has had a focus on science and innovation. It was a topic that was brought up and discussed at the National Innovation Council last year, and today it is a reality, and it has had the impact and effect that I have explained to you.
Did I miss anything regarding electricity?
Arleen Rodríguez: Oscarito had passed us a note asking us to talk about that topic, but in another dimension. 
Oscar Figueredo, from Cubadebate.
Oscar Figueredo (Cubadebate and IDEAS Multimedios): Greetings, President.
You referred to the large investments that have been made in energy, despite the current situation in the country, and there is one important element that was confirmed, which is the need to continue exploiting the internal sources we have, namely oil. Some were skeptical because they said: Cuban oil is useless, it is too heavy. 
I believe that right now the need for our own thermoelectric plants to use this fuel is being confirmed. Do you think that under these conditions we can continue to increase the exploitation of this natural resource and also of the accompanying gas?
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  I agree.
This question allows me to respond and then complement the energy approach, that is, what we are doing energetically, what we propose to do to address the current situation. I always point out that we have all this that is achievable, but that it cannot be resolved overnight.
Now, before I answer, what I do want to say is that we currently have a complex energy situation from a fuel perspective. Remember that the naval blockade of Venezuela began in December, so since then, this country has not been receiving fuel.
Therefore, today we have problems with the availability of fuel to guarantee not only electricity generation, but also basic activities, especially those that directly affect the population. That is why the Council of Ministers met today, to complement these government directives to address the acute fuel shortage.
And here we have taken as a reference the instructions of the Commander-in-Chief for the Special Period. Do you remember the directives of the Commander-in-Chief for the Special Period, what we call Option Zero? They are also included, updated, because there are other different situations in these directives.
I am going to give, let's say, a general overview based on the question you asked me, but in the coming days, based on the discussion we began in the Council of Ministers and on what has been worked on, a group of deputy prime ministers and ministers will inform the population in more detail about the content of all these measures, and the population, I believe that in a week, will have all the information about the situation and how we are going to deal with it.
A second concept I want to clarify: even if there is an energy blockade, we are not giving up on receiving fuel in our country. That is a right we have, and we will do everything we can, and we are doing everything we can, so that the country can once again have fuel income and fuel supplies.  So what I want to explain with this is that you have the guarantee that the Party, the Government, and the institutions involved in energy decisions are working to minimize the impact on our population, our country, our economy, and our economic and social development, under difficult conditions, because there is an energy blockade by the United States.
And there is a lot of fear, there is a lot of psychological impact on shipowners, on shipping companies, on countries that can supply us with fuel; but we are not giving up, that is sovereign, that is a sovereign decision of this country. I think it is very reprehensible that a power, with the size of the United States as a power, should adopt such an aggressive and criminal policy towards a small nation.
Because what does it mean to not allow a drop of fuel to reach a country? It means affecting food transportation, food production, public transportation, the functioning of hospitals, institutions of all kinds, schools, economic production, and tourism.
How do we keep children in school without fuel? How do our vital systems function without fuel? How do we distribute food? How do we plant? How do we plow? How do we prepare the land? How do we harvest the crops? How do we get around?
Therefore, we are going to take measures that, although they will not be permanent, will have to take into account the availability of fuel at any given time; these will be measures that will require effort. I know that people will say: But sacrifice again? Well, if we don't sacrifice ourselves and if we don't resist, what are we going to do, give up?
We have shared that surrender is not an option for Cuba. There is much to defend, there are many dignified Cubans who gave their lives for this country, for the independence of this country throughout history. And the most recent are the 32 comrades who fell in Venezuela, whose death outraged our people, and that wound is still there, that wound has not healed.
And why did they act that way? Because they had conviction; they knew what they were defending. It wasn't just a president, it wasn't just a sister nation; it was dignity, it was sovereignty, it was Cuba, it was the Revolution, it was Latin America and the Caribbean, it is the Global South.  And they did it the only way they could, with an attitude consistent with a moment like that: with courage, with bravery, there is no other way to describe it.  And tomorrow, when we can tell the whole story, we will see the true contribution of the attitude of those 32 Cubans, and what they mean as a lesson for those who are hot-headed with their threats and attempts to attack Cuba.
What right does a nation have to prevent fuel from reaching another country? With this, they are not only acting against Cuba and the Cuban people, but they are also preventing many others from having normal trade relations with Cuba, harming many companies and entities. Isn't this a violation of international law and the United Nations Charter?  Does this not go against the free trade that capitalism and imperialism defend?
Furthermore, who do they think they are to impose this on us? Can anyone in the world celebrate this, that they do this to a country? Is there any hint of humanism, decency, sensitivity, or decorum in someone who acts like this? This is completely suffocating us.
And so that they don't suffocate us, there is a strategy, there is a program that we have also updated, as I told you, in recent days. And there are new measures that we were looking at today in the Council of Ministers, some of which are restrictive, but we have to adjust consumption, we have to promote savings. There are things that we have to stop, postpone, in order to continue functioning in the fundamental sense, and to continue weighing up and facing this situation.
I know that when I talk about saving, sometimes people see it as a bit distant and say, "But what else are you going to save?" There is a lot that can be saved. Even those who have more energy for more hours of the day because they are associated with circuits that need to be protected should be more responsible in their use of that energy that others lack.
I believe that by talking, discussing, and explaining these things, we can raise awareness, and even though some may see it as distant, we can all contribute to what we need to face this situation.
So, here is a concept that I have already raised, which is fundamental: we have to learn to live using our energy sources, as you pointed out to me.
First, there are several actions to be taken.  In the midst of this situation, with all the shortages of resources, we are increasing our fuel storage capacities.  Remember that we lost storage capacity when the Supertankers burned down, but we are recovering that and in other parts of the country. Why? Because, as I told you, we are not giving up on the fact that we can have fuel, and if we create more capacity, we can have more fuel, and one of the things we are going to promote is having more fuel on consignment in the country. 
There is the increase in storage capacity.
There is the increase, as you rightly pointed out, in domestic crude oil production, which I prefer to call "oil equivalent." Because, as you said, we are increasing the extraction of crude oil and associated gas.  Remember that we use part of that gas for electricity generation, which is a highly efficient process, as is Energas, and in recent months, because we have had more gas available, we have increased electricity generation with Energas.
Part of that associated gas is supplied to several areas of the capital for cooking, as manufactured gas. And as part of what we are doing and the increase in associated gas production, this year we are going to increase the number of consumers of manufactured gas in Havana by 20,000. It is part of that program, and we are going to do it this year.
Increasing oil equivalent production allows us to have more crude oil coverage to also operate with electricity generation in our thermoelectric plants that can consume that crude oil.
But we are also studying—and in fact we bought an engine—engines that help us generate electricity or that work for other applications, that use this Cuban crude oil.  This is another of the projects and actions we are developing.
And we are not stopping at increasing the production of crude oil and associated gas. We have already given our scientists a task, and we have been able to dust off a group of research projects that the Petroleum Research Institute in the country has been working on for years, to refine Cuban crude oil and improve its quality.  So, we will not only use Cuban crude oil directly in thermoelectric power plants, but we will also refine it to obtain derivatives such as gasoline, fuel oil, and diesel. At the end of the year, we conducted a small test of national crude oil refining, and the prospects are promising. 
Look, I am explaining the strategy and the things we can do; I repeat, none of this solves the problems overnight, but it does provide solutions, it gives us insights, these are different things from what we have been doing or depending on, and they give us sovereignty.
We have also proposed taking advantage of energy, not only electricity generation and renewable energy sources; solar cookers can be made, and solar energy can also be used in wood dryers and food dryers.  The same goes for hydraulic energy, wind energy, and biomass. But biogas transforms waste into energy, and with biogas plants you can cook, and with biogas plants you can have lamps that run on gas and provide lighting.  There are also engines that run on biogas combustion. By connecting an electric generator to this engine, you have a gas generator, and with that biogas, you are generating electricity.
"In order for municipalities to produce for themselves, take advantage of their endogenous capacities, and develop their territorial and local development strategies, they must first and foremost have robust local production systems." Photo: José Llamos Camejo
The things we are trying to do now, in the midst of this situation, must be sustainable, and we must not forget these hard times. That is why I say, let's see this as an opportunity to develop, to achieve sustainable development, to become more energy sovereign, and to be less dependent. 
There will be other measures that will have to be implemented as fuel availability evolves, for better or for worse. 

I can also assure you, based on the expressions of support we have received during these turbulent days, that there are many people and entities in the world who reject pressure, who reject blackmail, who reject and oppose the economic blockade against Cuba, and who are willing to take risks to work with Cuba.
I believe that the world, the international community, must also decide whether it will allow a crime such as this, which is being committed today against Cuba and could be committed against any other nation in the world, to be the future for humanity, or whether we will truly decide that what must be done is to lead a struggle for solidarity, for cooperation, for sovereignty, for multilateralism, and for respect for the rights of everyone in the world. That is something that the international community must speak out about and define.
Arleen Rodríguez: President, Dilbert Reyes, editor of the Granma newspaper, is also here.
I want to note that the Presidency's communications team is also with us, but since they accompany you on a daily basis...
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  They ask me that every day.
Dilbert Reyes (Granma).-  Greetings, President.
Two questions: in conditions of extreme blockade, I believe that the word "survive" is neither exaggerated nor pessimistic; I believe it is an objective word that implies, first and foremost, thinking about basic necessities of life: food, water, and essential services such as electricity, communications, health, and education. How do you think the country should move forward to address these priorities that are essential for survival? 
How urgent do you think it is to mobilize all that local potential, which you have emphasized so many times, to produce food there in the community, to produce consumer goods there in the community, because we are going to have mobility limitations?  Even replicating local experiences mimically, experiences that have proven to be successful.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel: Inspiring, as we say.
Dilbert Reyes: In conditions of scarcity, they proved to be successful, that's one thing.
Second, you have presided over Party plenary sessions in all provinces, and many of these concepts have been repeated over and over again; however, we cannot deny that there is a perception that sometimes that sense of urgency stays in the meeting, stays in the concept, and is difficult to translate into people's lives.  How do you think the Party's leadership style should change so that all of this, which should be urgent, yields results and is done quickly?
Thank you very much.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.- You have been very astute in your characterization of the situation, and you are absolutely right.
To answer both questions, I think I have to refer to the plenary sessions we have just held at the provincial level and which will now continue at the municipal level. Not because we are talking about just another meeting, but because I believe they have been spaces for debate, but also spaces for building consensus.
And it is in that building of consensus that I believe the potential for power lies, those things we have reiterated, truly turning them into results.  Above all, because there is now a new variable, or a variable with greater weight in the equation of the lives of Cubans, which is the urgency of the moment, and that we cannot waste time and that there are things we must do now or never. I believe that this has also encouraged thinking, encouraged the promotion and understanding of a group of ideas.
The provincial plenary sessions gave us initial confirmation of this. What the provinces presented as their strategy for this year in their programs and plans has been far superior to anything we had addressed, even in the conception of the National Plan. It is clear that there is a willingness not only to resist, but also to create and overcome, and that there are many things that are also beginning to become widespread.
I think that also has to do with the fact that we have been discussing very complex issues in very adverse situations, and where there were ideas that now one can say: "Well, why are they going to come out now?" Because they needed to mature, you had to believe in those things, people had to see spaces, scenarios where many of those ideas were successfully materialized.  Also because there are people, sometimes, and I say this with a boast of wisdom, who give you a notion that covers only one variable in that complex equation of the lives of Cubans, and it may even be a brilliant idea.  We follow all those ideas and take them into account; but the thing is that here all the variables are correlated, all the variables are part of an equation, a very complex equation, a very complex equation!  So that's where you see that things take time to achieve.
And so we start from the contribution made by the 11th Plenary Session of the Party's Central Committee. I think it was a heart-wrenching plenary session that opened up the discussion on fundamental issues, on dissatisfactions, with a view to the emergency, with a view to how we can respond to the population in the shortest possible time.  But it also shed light, it also shared, I would say, concepts for ideological work, concepts for facing the economic battle, priorities and, above all, a construction of all the things we have proposed in this Government Program—I always carry it with me, discussing and checking—which we took to a popular consultation and which will now have a strengthened and expanded version based on the contribution of that popular consultation, of all these things, what are the fundamental transformations that define us today that we have to make in the Economic and Social Model in order to advance more quickly.  I am going to talk to you about that to answer the two questions you asked me.
In a situation like this, where on the one hand they want to suffocate us economically and on the other hand there is the possibility of military aggression, what have we defined as priorities?
First, we have to improve the functioning of the Party, the Government, the State, the institutions, the armed forces, the mass organizations, the social organizations, and the entire system of the country. 
To defend ourselves against aggression and prepare for an attempted attack, as I mentioned when you asked me about defense, we need a plan to increase the readiness and preparedness for defense in the interest of the war of the entire people, on the part of our entire population.
A plan for political mobilization: how we constantly demonstrate, how we constantly discuss, debate, share, and propose. I believe that an important point in that plan for political mobilization was the funeral honors and tribute we paid to our fallen comrades in Venezuela.
The first people in the world to take to the streets en masse on January 3 to express their repudiation were the Cuban people. Remember that it was in the early hours of January 3, at 8 a.m., that we were calling on the people to gather at 10 a.m. at the Anti-Imperialist Tribune, and when we arrived at the Tribune at 9:30 a.m., it was completely full.  We had to wait to begin the protest because there had not been time to set up the event and the people were already there, and it was the same in all the provinces. Then there was a succession of events and expressions of support from the people in all the provinces and municipalities.
And the event when the remains arrived, the March of the Fighting People, the way the people participated and the way the people turned out in each of the places, I think that was the high point of that political mobilization, which must continue, in relation to Cuba and in relation to the defense of Venezuela, in relation to the defense of Maduro and his wife, in relation to integration, in relation to denouncing the excesses committed by the empire against the world.
There is also, as an economic response, how we can implement in the shortest possible time the fundamental elements, the fundamental transformations contained in the Government Program to solve the structural problems of the economy and strengthen it.
The updated Energy Plan that we have discussed on two occasions, from the point of view of electricity and from the point of view of fuel.
The international coordination that we are promoting among leftist forces and social movements, because we must all coordinate to denounce, to find answers, to combat this imperialist offensive.
And there is, and this is one of the things that sometimes causes us the most dissatisfaction, the way in which we have to develop political communication, social communication, institutional communication that has to respond to wartime communication, crisis communication, communication that confronts this imperial media offensive that is poisoning all communication spaces in the world, that is trying to assassinate the reputations of peoples, leaders, individuals, that is trying to throw a smokescreen around what is happening, that tries to justify everything the empire proposes.
Remember that they are not talking about the kidnapping of a president, they are talking about a capture.  Everything is ambiguous. Or "extraction," which is also a reprehensible term. Who gives you the right to extract the president of one country and take him to another? Full of lies, slander, hatred, promoting divisions, promoting confusion, it is not decent, it is vulgar, it is vulgar!
Associated with these priorities, then, is a group of concepts, especially for the work of the Party, which they asked me about: how to improve the work of the Party.  A first concept, which is basic, and although we repeat it, it is necessary, is unity, which gives us strength.  And in the Plenary Session, I made some comments, first, based on the concepts of unity and the calls that the Commander-in-Chief and the Army General have made at different moments of the Revolution, but also proposing two essential elements or components of unity: We are going to discuss vigorously and we are going to march together.
Discuss in order to improve, be critical, debate, contribute. That does not divide, it unites, especially if afterwards, based on those reflections, those contributions to the discussion, we march together, we defend everything together. Now, when there is apathy, when someone keeps quiet about what they think, when someone is not honest or sincere, that does create fragmentation in unity.
The other element of unity is participation. When we all participate, when we all share, when we all fight, when we all achieve results and victories, there is more identity, more commitment, more self-esteem, and more strength in everything we do. 
There is the connection with the population. We have to be working. I always tell my colleagues in the Party: the best time you can spend is with the people, with the collectives in the settings where the main ideological, economic, or social events are taking place.  Because when you spend more time at the grassroots level or in direct contact, when you go to meetings where decisions are made, you go with a vision and knowledge of what is happening there, of the obstacles, the problems, the aspirations, and the criteria of the people.  Then, when you contribute to the decision, the decision will be more realistic, it will be more in line with the needs and aspirations, and we have to cultivate that.
When we talk about connection, which people often confuse with visiting, connection is not just visiting, it is about transforming, it is about acting; it is not about "clocking in," as they say colloquially.  It's not that I can say I went to every municipality in the country; yes, you went to every municipality in the country, but what happened in each municipality when you went, what did I help to promote, what did I explain, what did I argue, what did I clarify, or what idea did I take away as a contributor so that I could multiply it?  That is another element that was worked on at the 11th Plenary Session and that we have discussed so that it can also be implemented in provincial and municipal strategies.
Democracy in the Party, and Army General Raúl has spoken about this several times. If, for historical reasons, we are the only Party that is constitutionally recognized, we are not only the Party of the communist militants of Cuba, we are the Party of the Cuban nation.  So, I say that the most natural moment of the Party's work, which is the meeting of the grassroots organization, cannot be just a meeting of militants; we must call on young people, we must call on non-militant workers to also contribute, to discuss the problems with us, to support us in finding solutions.
In the history of the Revolution, we know how to do this very well and defend it very well for the big things. An issue as complicated as approving the Family Code, due to the prejudices that existed because of the diversity of opinion, was taken to two democratic exercises of popular participation: a popular consultation and a referendum. We did the same with the Constitution.  We did the same thing now, in a popular consultation to enrich the Government Program for the economy. But in everyday life, in what needs to be done on a daily basis, sometimes we don't do that, and we don't succeed.
Popular participation and control. Everything must have an outlet for participation. Everything we set out to do must be supported by the work and participation of everyone, especially young people. And as part of that popular participation, there must be popular control by the population in everything we do. That also involves control and accountability. 
You know that I have always defended three pillars for the work of the Party and the Government, which are political, social, and institutional communication; digital transformation and the application of artificial intelligence in all our processes; and science and innovation to seek solutions to the problems we face from a scientific perspective.
First, the problems are so complex that they cannot be solved with a single alternative, and Fidel always taught us that we had to work with many alternatives for the same problem. Science provides us with solutions, and when we apply them and achieve results, they are in innovation. That is another thing we have to promote.
Tackling corruption is extremely important in order to support all processes.
So, answering the second question, what do we need to work on more quickly and make decisions and announce decisions more quickly in order to achieve results with the urgency that is needed at this time? That is what I call the necessary transformations at this time.
There is quite a consensus on this, and when we analyze the debate that took place for the Government Program, it coincides very much with the proposals that had the most weight among the population.
First, we must move toward a refinement, an updating of the economic management system, where there is an adequate relationship between centralization and decentralization, and an adequate relationship between what needs to be seen from the planning perspective and what needs to be addressed with certain market signals.  This is a principle that defends socialist construction in our conditions, since in some of these areas, decisions have been made that will evolve systematically and gradually, such as a new system for allocating foreign currency for economic activity.
A second necessary transformation is the restructuring that we have to carry out of the entire state apparatus, of the government, of the Party, and of institutions. We are a small country with an aging population, with a population that is experiencing negative growth in its demographic dynamics, and we have a number of institutions that duplicate functions, a number of people in the non-productive sphere that need to be restructured.  In addition, we need to reduce state budget expenditures in all these areas and become more efficient in management processes, budgeting processes, and planning processes. Progress has already been made in this area, but it is a necessary transformation.
We have to move towards definitive autonomy for state-owned companies. We have also been working on this; in the first weeks of January, we discussed the issue and there are quite a few definitions. Now, we are going to play with true state autonomy for companies.
First, companies have been given a set of powers that not all of them are taking advantage of yet, and we see this being implemented at different levels; but when I give you full business autonomy, don't expect to have autonomy for some things and for me to have to provide you with raw materials and fuels from the Central Fund or from central planning.
The country, centralization, whatever needs to be decentralized in planning is for priorities.  The other thing is that a company that has autonomy has to export, has to seek foreign exchange earnings and buy the fuel it needs, buy inputs and buy raw materials.  In fact, we are approving schemes for state and non-state entities that export, that produce for import substitution, that are creating mechanisms in this regard.  Always with the concept that what they do is to reproduce widely and contribute more and more to the needs of the country and more and more to what they serve, to their social mission and to the development of their production and services.
This autonomy of state-owned enterprises must be accompanied by a resizing and restructuring of state-owned enterprises, especially at the municipal level, because the other important transformation that we are going to promote and that we have already been working on in recent days is the autonomy of municipalities.  Autonomy does not break with unity in socialist construction, nor is it a lack of discipline in planning and in the interests of the state. What autonomy guarantees is that the municipality is closer and has the autonomy and powers to solve the problems that are closest to the citizens in their municipality.
I say that we cannot aspire for the country to develop and then for the provinces and municipalities to develop based on the country's development; that is absurd.  We have to ensure that the municipality develops, and if the municipalities develop, the provinces develop, and if the provinces develop, the country develops.
Why did I mention that the autonomy of state-owned enterprises is closely linked to the powers of municipalities? Because in order for municipalities to produce for themselves, take advantage of their endogenous capacities, and develop their territorial and local development strategies, they must first and foremost have robust local production systems.
Today, if you ask a municipality, "How many business entities of different types and classifications are there in your municipality?  Some municipalities might say 20, 30, or 40. And you ask them: How many are subordinate to the municipality? And they say: two. Generally, a municipal agro-industrial enterprise, which we achieved last year in all municipalities, some of which were provincial or national dependencies, and a commercial enterprise.
So how is the municipality going to develop with an agro-industrial company and a trading company? And all the other things subordinate to national or provincial entities, all contributing income to national and provincial structures when the processes take place in that municipality.
I am not saying that all companies have to be municipal, because there are companies that, due to their characteristics, because they produce something unique or because they are of a certain size, even if they are in a municipality, have to be subordinate to the national or provincial government; but what cannot happen is that the majority are of that type of subordination, so why are we going to give autonomy to the municipality if they have no one to support them?
Therefore, in order for municipalities to be able to generate their local production systems, we are defending, as a concept, that we are going to eat what is produced in each place.  Now more than ever, if there is less fuel, food will not be able to leave one municipality for another.
We have said that we are going to change the concept of the basket. Until now, our basket has depended on imports and a centralized decision. What the country can import, and that is what we distribute equally.  We try to guarantee everyone 7 pounds of rice per month at subsidized prices, whether you are a worker in a state-owned company that is developing, earning more than 25,000 pesos; or you are from a non-state MSME earning 60,000 pesos; or you are a retiree who may be in a vulnerable situation, to everyone, we cannot do that.  Or we take rice to the municipality that produces rice and sell subsidized rice to the rice producer. That is egalitarianism, that is not equity.
Equity is when we give more to those who have less, we redistribute so that they can catch up and the gaps are broken, without violating a principle of socialist distribution, which is that of contribution, but without leaving anyone behind.  But if you have people at this level and people at that level and you give everyone the same, that's what adds up, but the gap remains, the gap remains!
So, we have to do that work, with the autonomy of the state-owned company within the framework of the municipality and in conjunction with the powers of the municipalities.
What we aspire to is for a municipality to export and generate its exports; to import, generate income from exports, and have a scheme to be able to invest in the municipality's affairs. That will unleash the productive forces.
In this concept of the basket, if we are going to eat what the municipality produces, then what the country can buy is for more; but it is not the people waiting for what we can import, it is the people seeking, producing.
So, look, if there is now a group of entities that, like the basket, is centralized and based on imports at the central level, who is participating in solving the food problem?  A few.  When we do it that way, those few don't stop doing it, but now we are adding more people, and so we are going to add more to the whole productive dynamic and the whole social dynamic of the territories.
This is realistic; let's not think that progress will be the same everywhere, let's not think that everything will work out for us right away everywhere; but we are creating the culture, we are demonstrating the results, we are moving forward, we are correcting, we are stimulating, and we are also compensating, with central redistribution, for any differences that may remain and for those who may be at a disadvantage.  This will also lead to a change in the import-oriented mindset.
There are other elements that we are working on: renegotiating our external debt; establishing appropriate relations between the state sector and the non-state sector; taking advantage of what we have now approved, which is that economic partnerships can be formed between the state sector and the non-state sector; ensuring that both the state sector and the non-state sector are included in local and territorial development strategies, that they form part of the plan for what we want to achieve.
Similarly, we must take advantage of all the flexibility we have given to foreign direct investment, as announced by the Minister of Foreign Trade and Deputy Prime Minister at the Havana International Fair.
Within these concepts is how we promote and create facilities and encourage the participation of Cubans living abroad with projects that contribute to the economic and social development of the country. That is another element, another transformation that we have to work on.
We have arrived at these reflections, we have arrived at these convictions because we have seen people who have proposed them, have done them, and have achieved them.  Here there are rice companies that did not have the technological packages to produce rice, and that began to export, for example, charcoal, or habanero peppers, or other agricultural products, and we made a plan for them, and with part of their income, they have purchased the inputs and fuel to produce rice, and they have become independent, achieved autonomy, and are developing productively and contributing more. And in those places where this is achieved, in those municipalities, rice is cheaper.
We have to manage to produce nationally everything we can produce in the country, and if we are going to import something, import inputs to boost national production, and only import products that we cannot make in the country.
There is the priority of energy transformation, the energy transition, which we have already explained here.
We must never forget that we have to work to care for the vulnerable and that in every decision we make, in everything we implement, we have to see who is disadvantaged and how we compensate those who are disadvantaged.
We will have to continue to refine our tax policy, monetary policy, financial restructuring, and the banking and financial system, which must be updated and modernized to support everything we intend to do from an economic standpoint.
Once again, I insist on priorities, I insist on transformations; moving to other levels in science and innovation, in digital transformation and artificial intelligence, in political, institutional, and social communication; and also beginning to develop the concept of the knowledge economy, which is the economy generated as part of the contribution of science and innovation, of knowledge, and for which the country has enormous potential.
I spoke about the Party's priorities, about transformations, and about how we can move these things forward. The experience of the Plenary Sessions gives us the certainty that we can move forward in a different way.
Arleen Rodríguez: Mr. President, I would like to give the floor back to the youngest member of this group of journalists because he had no idea that he could ask two questions in one, and it seems to me that, as the youngest member of the team, his question is related to the future, which is something I can see. Go ahead, Raciel Guanche.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.-  Furthermore, he is a young man who, during a visit we shared with his media outlet's collective, we realized has leadership qualities and is proposing innovative ideas.
Raciel Guanche: President, in the context we have been discussing since the beginning of the conference, I would like to know your assessment of the attitude taken by the people, and within that, of course, by young people, in the midst of so many complexities that we have also experienced.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.- I believe that every time we talk about the people and every time we talk about young people, as the popular saying goes, "we must take our hats off to them." 
The heroism of this people is astonishing, and even though we are in this daily adversity, facing difficult things, when you see the responses, the creativity, the resistance—and I insist, the resistance of the Cuban people is not a resistance of endurance, it is a resistance of creation, it is resisting, but I overcome; I resist, I move forward; I resist, I grow. I always illustrated this at another time with what we had achieved with COVID-19, with science and vaccines; that is, it was not just about getting through COVID-19, it was about getting through COVID-19, but overcoming it with our own creativity, as was the impact of our vaccines—one cannot have any doubts or any other feelings towards the attitude of our people and towards the attitude of our young people; although many speak trying to denigrate the people and many speak trying to denigrate our youth.
One has a vision for young people, perhaps it has to do with my years as a university student, with my years as a student leader, but I have said it before: for me, young people must be treated as the important people they are in our society. When we talk about unity, there is no unity if young people are not part of that unity. When we talk about continuity, there is no continuity without young people. That is why, in this concept of popular participation, I always say: everything must have an outlet for popular participation, and within that popular participation, everything must have an outlet for how we convene and how young people participate.
There are everyday examples of the responses young people give: their outrage over what is happening in Venezuela; their participation in the tribute to our fallen heroes, in the March of the Fighting People, and later in the Torch March.  These young people are living through the complex situations of these times, the shortages of these times, and sometimes their life plans are not yet what they aspire to, but they continue to have confidence because they know that those life plans are more possible here than anywhere else.
This generation we have is more open-minded, although some people sometimes say, "No, they don't know that much, they don't read that much." And when you talk to them, you are amazed at how knowledgeable they are, at the depth of their judgment, at the way they can distinguish content, at their intelligence; but also, when you call on them to do difficult things, they do them.
I remember, and I've explained this many times, when we were busy devising a strategy to deal with COVID-19, when it first started to appear, we hadn't yet realized that we had to call on young people, and when we went to do so, young people were already in the Red Zone.  They mobilized on their own because they understood that they could contribute to the country, that who better than them. And young people from all sectors did so.
I tell you, every time I have had a meeting with young people, every time I have participated in a debate with young people, I have always learned and been enriched by their experiences and perspectives.   Listening to young people, you can also see things differently, I would say in a more up-to-date, more contemporary, more daring way, and that daring that our young people can contribute, that restlessness with commitment, is very good for the nation and for everything we want to do.
And we couldn't think otherwise, because in our history, young people have always played a fundamental role. 
Young people today are no different in that respect; young people today also have that heritage, they share that legacy, that patrimony. Who were the mambises? And there are paradigmatic examples: the young Céspedes, the young Agramonte, the young Maceo, our great thinkers; the young Martí, at 16 years of age in a Presidio Modelo, unjustly imprisoned for defending his convictions. 
Every year, when the Torch March ends, we go there and pay tribute at the quarry, and every time I see the poem to his mother, I am moved. That this was written by a 16-year-old!
And our scientists, and those who led the Revolution of '33, the Centennial Generation, the Revolution. The generation of young people who in the 1960s faced the aggression at Girón, carried out the Literacy Campaign, and then lived through the days of the October Crisis. The generations of us who were young when we lived through the Special Period, when the socialist camp fell. And the young people of today.
Could we have the unity and resistance that the Cuban people are showing today in the midst of this situation if young people were not participating?
The thing is, there are some who only talk about those who have left, those who have tried their luck in other countries, but most of them have not broken with the Revolution; on the contrary, many are committed to it. In these times of threats, how many have returned, how many are concerned, how many are demonstrating against the aggression?
So, we trust those young people.
And what better example? What sums up the values of all those young people at the present time? The thirty-two. That is our youth. And they are the present and future of the nation, they are the present and future of the homeland, and we must take great care of them.
Arleen Rodríguez: President, if you have nothing else to add, let us stick with the commitment, because surely there are other journalists who are interested and the moment, as you say, demands a lot of communication.
Miguel M. Díaz-Canel.- In the coming days, the continuity of many things that I have explained here, which I have not gone into detail about, can be explained by following up with other colleagues in the Government and the Party, especially with regard to the issues we discussed today on the subject of energy, which I know is one of the things that most concerns the population at the moment, because it has a significant impact on everyone's daily life. 
And to you, I would like to thank you for the meeting, your time, and your patience (Applause).