Elections in Mexico. Was AMLO the last strongman president?

By: Ricardo Israel - 03/06/2024

It always seemed to me that Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) was the last of a lineage, that his way of understanding power was representative of what the Institutional Revolutionary Party was in its moment of greatest prominence, the traditional and historical PRI, founded in 1929 by Plutarco Elías Calles under another name.

That party that Mario Vargas Llosa described as the “perfect dictatorship” and that began to change, at the end of the 80s, with the split that gave rise to the Party of the Democratic Revolution and the journey towards a more democratic society, not only for the reforms made by the government, but also and more importantly, for Mexican society as a whole.

Although he began his political career in the PRI, AMLO left that party decades ago. However, I have always thought that his career was explained by his nostalgia for the disappearance of that style of doing politics, and that, ultimately, this influenced him to compete several times for the presidency and the founding of his current conglomerate, the National Regeneration Movement, MORENA.

AMLO added his taste for confrontation and moral superiority to the position, and his legacy will be to leave his heir in the presidency, but that is as far as he will go, so I believe that historians of the future, when looking back They will see him for what he was, the last caudillo president, others will come, neither better nor worse, but without his characteristics, precisely because of the type of changes that Mexican society has had, despite AMLO himself.

This June 2 there were not only presidential elections, but also the renewal of Congress with 128 senators and 500 federal deputies, in addition to 8 governorships and the head of government of Mexico City. A total of 20,000 positions, since, in terms of local elections, in 31 of the 32 federal entities the state congress is renewed and in 30 of the 32, the municipal government or mayors' offices.

Five states concentrate 38% of the voters and there was never a doubt that a female president would be elected for the first time. Of the greatest importance is the fact that today there are no questions about the electoral system that abound in other countries, which is safe and reliable, much better than what is assumed abroad, both in terms of voting facilities, scrutiny and delivery. of results, and has been since its creation, despite the questions that AMLO raised in the past.

With the wave of murders of candidates, violence was present, since at least 37 people who aspired to office were murdered, in addition to family members and party activists, with clear intentions to influence at different levels, by the cartels. .

In the major issues that have been present, there are some that, without being new, acquired a strong prominence, such as the water crisis, mainly in the capital, but the majority have been in existence for a long time and have appeared in all the last elections, apparently without solution for those who not only compete, but have also been a government. Nor did any reasonable solution proposals appear in this campaign, at least nothing convincing.

I name at least six, democracy, drug trafficking, organized crime, cartels, relations with the United States, corruption, and for reasons of space, I will focus on only two, relations with the United States and democracy.

1) In relations with the United States, the link will probably continue to be tied to the issues that predominate today and that are of most interest to the power, such as drugs and illegal immigration, although north of the Rio Grande there is little awareness of how Mexico is affected by the problems that the United States creates, for example, in the transit of immigrants who have no interest in staying, and in the case of drugs, such as the consumption of narcotics and the cartels' fight for that market, it creates situations of acute violence, which Mexico has no possibility of resolving.

Another factor is that the collaboration provided is not always valued in the construction of images that is done at the political and journalistic level in the United States. In this regard, for some time now, Mexico has replaced Colombia in the role that the South American country represented in the 1980s as the “perfect storm” on the subject. It is true that it is a corridor for traditional drugs such as coca and more recently for fentanyl to the United States, and that Washington's attitude has collaborated so that the cartels are reigning on the southern border, but my argument is that, without that demand, the problem of violence and loss of authority in Mexico would not exist to the same degree or level, as it is also real that it contributes to the scourge of corruption.

Likewise, and this is a crucial factor in the power of the cartels, the weapons with which people kill in Mexican streets come from the United States, by the way, all aggravated by AMLO's policy of “hugs instead of bullets.” ”.

In the case of illegal immigration, despite its political cost, the US has not been able to stop it. But it is not only an issue for Washington, since, on its way to the border, security problems and pressure on social services are created for Mexico. In addition, it increases the political rhetoric, from the threat of using special tariffs on imports if what is requested is not granted, to exaggerated, happily marginal, proclamations of resorting to nothing less than US troops to act in Mexico against the cartels.

For its part, the drug case continues to prove that there is an unsolved issue and it is who controls its distribution from the border to the cities, that is, the main markets. Here, everything indicates, from police information to common sense, that they are criminal groups that include those made up of North American citizens, whether they speak Spanish, English or are bilingual.

The fact that even the FBI highlights Mexican identities over local ones, gives an idea of the power of the American equivalents of the Sinaloa Cartel and who is Chapo Guzmán or was previously the North American Pablo Escobar, since this does seem to be a strong demonstration, since, in this line of crimes, the greatest power is expressed in being invisible to public opinion.

The underlying issue is that not only with Mexico, but with all of Latin America, the link with the United States is going through a particularly deficient moment, without there seeming to be a joint direction or purpose, with obvious responsibilities of both, as well as without mutual policies. State to be followed by one government after another, but are subject to many variations, each time the authorities change.

2) Regarding democracy, as it is difficult for the result of the elections to impact or have important consequences for most of the six factors mentioned, I believe that this is the issue where the vote can make the difference in this electoral process.

And I think that here the fact of seeing AMLO as the last exponent of that lineage that emerged with the historic PRI in the last century does have an influence, and I think that being the last caudillo president fits him better than the name of authoritarian or populist that effectively It is, but the other predominates, since it is a mixture of what some PRI presidents were, including their desire to use the finger to install their successor.

For this reason, when Claudia Sheinbaum takes office, she can produce a change that generates a new stage, at least modifying the automatic support that has been given to the Castro-Chavista dictatorships. If this scenario occurs, my question is whether we are experiencing a change of era in Mexico or just a time of change.

Personally, I believe that there is continuity and change, so I only warn of the possibility of change in the political cycle, where what is vital for the conservation of Mexican democracy, imperfect but perfectible, is that AMLO does not succeed in recreating the PRI historic in the 21st century, that is, that the modification in the leadership of the country opens a stage of opening and negotiation, to strengthen the existing democracy.

In other words, continuing AMLO's line of permanent confrontation would be condemning Mexicans to what is known as fatal arrogance, that is, the idea that policies and projects that have always failed, not only in Mexico but also throughout the world , now they could be successful, simply because they would insist on the ground paid by the government that is leaving.

For Mexico, continuing the system without AMLO and his morning preachings, rather than deepening democracy, would be exactly the opposite, a setback that would continue to distance the country from the possibility of having quality democracy in terms of public policies.

There is a way out and it is to do something different, taking advantage of the opportunity when the last dinosaur leaves the stage. It is not a definitive solution, but it would help avoid this setback, and I believe that there is only one path, a pact, not that of Peña Nieto, but of the main forces, the traditional ones and also some new and different ones that have emerged, nationally and locally in this campaign, although, of course, with the possibility of precipitating divisions in the conglomerates.

I am convinced that without López Obrador dominating the stage, a new cycle could be opened, without the arrogance present in so many unrealizable announcements, which is why I believe that a better way out for Mexico is to advance in just two points, concrete and achievable, to move towards the economic development and the search for quality democracy in the political sphere, which has not been achieved by any country in the region, none.

The best of democracy would be aimed at, which is dialogue to find a consensus for the peaceful solution of differences and overcoming conflict.

Consensus and agreements were impossible under AMLO. It is the opportunity that can be opened if the will exists, since solving problems such as drugs or violence exceeds what an election can achieve. However, the possibility may arise to advance in limited, specific objectives, without epic, but also without enemies.

Only obstacles to overcome. It's not much, but it's not little either.

@israelzipper

Ph.D. in Political Science (Essex), Law Degree (Barcelona), Lawyer (U. de Chile), former presidential candidate (Chile, 2013)

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».