MEXICO’S UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS: POSSIBILITIES FOR CHANGE
ANDRES MANUEL LOPEZ OBRADOR’S SHIFTS AND WHAT’S
BEHIND THEM
By Steve
Ellner
A revised version of this article was published
in “NACLA: Report on the Americas” (Volume 50, Issue 2) Summer, 2018, pages 119-123.
The tactics
used to discredit Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the frontrunner for Mexico’s presidential
elections slated for July 1, differ somewhat from those employed by the
political establishment and commercial media in his first bid for the post in
2006. At that time, López Obrador (or AMLO as he’s commonly referred to) was
dubbed a proxy for Venezuela’s leftist Hugo Chavez, a depiction that may have
cost him the presidency.
Just as in
the past, the pro-establishment candidates and media have gained up on AMLO,
but their line has slightly changed. One of the main presidential candidates,
Ricardo Anaya, warns of AMLO’s “destructive and messianic populism.”[1]
Although seemingly far-fetched, others are comparing AMLO’s populism to that of
both Nicolás Maduro and Donald Trump. In January, Politico ran an article titled “Mexico’s Trumpian Populist,”[2] which
alleged that AMLO sometimes sounds “like a Mexican Donald Trump.” Indeed, both
AMLO and Trump have been accused of being anti-globalization for harshly
criticizing NAFTA, although they do so from different perspectives.
Another
article published in January in the Washington
Post assures that the Kremlin is supporting AMLO’s candidacy. The
allegation is buttressed by a Cold War-like statement made by former U.S.
national security advisor H. R. McMaster that the NSA has detected “signals” of
Russia’s “sophisticated campaign of subversion and disinformation and
propaganda” in Mexico’s upcoming elections.
McMaster’s warning made its way to the Mexican electoral arena where
several presidential candidates accused AMLO of receiving Russian aid.[3]
AMLO and
his party the Movimiento Regeneración Nacional (MORENA) owe their lead going
into the July general elections largely to the unpopularity of President
Enrique Peña Nieto as well that of the two previous governments of Vicente Fox
and Felipe Calderón. Peña Nieto’s approval ratings sank below 20 per cent last
year. While Peña Nieto belongs to the Partido Revolucionario Institucional
(PRI), Fox and Calderón were members of Mexico’s other main establishment
party, the Christian democratic Partido Acción Nacional (PAN). Both parties
have reacted to their low ratings by launching extra-party type candidacies.
PRI nominated technocrat José Antonio Meade, who occupied top ministerial
positions in both PRI and PAN administrations.
PAN’s contender Anaya packages himself as the candidate of a broad
coalition taking in two center-left leaning parties, the Partido de la
Revolución Democrática (PRD) and the Movimiento Ciudadano.
MORENA Moves Away from the Hard Left
AMLO claims
that his adversaries have over the recent past made less use of the Chavista
label because it “no longer functions for them” thanks in large part to social
networking which allows people to see the truth for themselves.
But there
are more credible reasons for the opposition’s modified narrative. Most
important, the thesis that links AMLO with the leftist Venezuelan government is
less plausible due to the fact that he has come to assume more moderate
positions. The messianic label may be more convincing than that of a firebrand
leftist. As a three-time presidential candidate and the supreme leader of his
party who lashes out at the political class (including former allies) as a
“mafia in power” (mafia de poder),
AMLO is open to the accusation of having a messianic complex and upholding a
Manichean vision, considered by some to be a trademark of populism. The same
narrative characterizes him as “sectarian” and “arrogant.”
Some of
AMLO’s critics on both sides of the political spectrum claim he has abandoned
the leftist camp altogether. The allegation was made in an article titled “The
Rightwing Drift of AMLO on the Route to the 2018 Elections,” published in Huffington Post’s Mexican edition.[4]
The article makes reference to the viewpoints of Roger Bartra, a renowned
Mexican scholar and former leftist, who wrote in Spain’s El País “López Obrador has ceased to be on the left and now has
begun a return to positions resembling those of the old PRI.”[5]
Greenpeace
has also rebuked AMLO for abandoning progressive stands. The organization
objects to AMLO’s selection of Victor Villalobos—who promoted genetically
modified crops while serving in two PAN governments—as his future agricultural
secretary. Greenpeace pointed to the decision’s “incongruence” considering
AMLO’s 2012 platform, which called for a ban on GMOs.
AMLO’s strategy of cementing ties with non-leftists
has met criticism from within his movement. MORENA’s electoral pact with the
Evangelical party Encuentro Social (Social Encounter Party, PES) has been most
controversial. At a December 2017 meeting when AMLO announced his cabinet
appointments—consisting of eight women and eight men—renowned Mexican writer
and faithful AMLO supporter Elena Poniatowska held up a cardboard sign that
read “NO TO THE PES.” AMLO denies major differences between the two
organizations, even though PES is generally characterized as conservative.
A number of
politicians belonging to PRI, PRD and other parties have jumped on the
bandwagon. MORENA stalwarts consider the newcomers opportunists and
pejoratively call them “chapulines”
(grasshoppers). Some of the contests for nomination as MORENA candidates in the
July local, state and national elections pit chapulines against founding party members.
In his
third presidential bid, AMLO has maintained a balance between the pragmatism
that lay behind his encouragement of the chapulines
and the principled stands he has assumed. The centerpiece of his campaign is
his pledge to guarantee accountability and combat corruption. Among his
“Proposals for the Rebirth of Mexico” are the elimination of special
prerogatives (known as fueros) for
all officials including the president; the possibility of holding a
presidential recall election; and his commitment to travel on commercial
flights as president—Mexico’s presidential airplane is one of the world’s most
expensive.
AMLO links
the issue of corruption to what may be the most critical issue facing Mexico:
privatization of the oil industry. Peña Nieto’s “Energy Reform” – which
required a PRI-PAN pact to enact a constitutional reform that stripped the
state oil company PEMEX of its monopoly – opened the petroleum industry to
private capital. AMLO – in sharp contrast to the conservative narrative – argues
that privatization and state downsizing is conducive to corruption. Thus, for
instance, he claims that the neoliberal government’s reliance on gasoline
imports as opposed to investments to boost PEMEX’s productive capacity (which accounts
for only 22 percent of the internal market) facilitates shady deals involving
commercial interests. “The business of gasoline imports,” he says, “is managed
by the mafia in power.”
AMLO has also
pointed out that dependence on gasoline imports forced President Peña Nieto to
renege on his pledge to not raise gasoline prices. Consequently, Mexican gas prices
are higher than in the United States and even oil-bereft Guatemala. Gasoline
hikes in January 2017 set off mass protests throughout the nation that led to
looting and at least four deaths and over a thousand arrests. AMLO has pledged to
build two new oil refineries and modernize six existing ones in the first three
years of his presidency. In doing so, he adds, Mexico will achieve 100%
self-sufficiency.
For
these elections, AMLO has softened his stand on oil policy. In 2014, AMLO took
a “patriotic oath” in which he pledged to “struggle without rest” against oil
privatization. Now, however, he has ruled out an “authoritarian” approach based
on decreeing the expulsion of foreign companies from the industry. Instead, he
promises to respect existing contracts and submit the issue of
re-nationalization to a national referendum. In case of approval, the will of
the majority would be incorporated in a constitutional reform that would
require two-thirds congressional approval. Mustering such
overwhelming support in Congress appears to be nothing short of a pipe dream. In
another modification, José Luis Beato, commonly referred to as AMLO’s liaison
with the private sector, indicated that Peña Nieto’s Reform package contains
“positive aspects,” although he failed to name any specifics.
AMLO also shows
a degree of restraint in his statements about relations with Washington, notwithstanding
Trump’s offensive remarks about Mexico. In most of his declarations, AMLO
stresses the need for mutual respect. He assures that under his government relations
will be based on “friendship and cooperation, but not subordination.” He
reserves his sharpest criticism for Peña Nieto who, in the face of Trump’s
affronts, “has failed to act with decorum in defense of the Mexican people.”
Similarly,
AMLO’s position on NAFTA is more flexible than those of his two previous
presidential bids. His 2018-2024 governing program surprisingly praises NAFTA as “a well-demonstrated, useful
instrument for the development of economic relations with the U.S. and Canada.”
AMLO’s platform recognizes that NAFTA has been beneficial for Mexico’s electronic
and car industries, but detrimental to small producers.
AMLO envisions a government based on state intervention in the economy
and the promotion of a welfare state, which would break from the policies of a
string of six neoliberal Mexican presidents beginning with Miguel de la Madrid
in the 1980s. However, AMLO’s ambitious electoral platform may not be entirely feasible.
Large state expenditures are at odds with AMLO’s promise to avoid tax hikes and
an increase of the public debt and to maintain the autonomy of Mexico’s Central
Bank. AMLO has assured that needed resources could come from eliminating
bureaucratic waste and corruption and slashing the president’s salary in half.
These measures, however, would not appear to provide the state with sufficient
revenue to implement his ambitious programs.
AMLO’s
shifts have led some on the left to question his credentials as a progressive.
Lorenzo Peraza, a well-known activist and victim of government repression, told
me: “López Obrador toned down his message in his 2012 campaign with respect to that
of 2006 and now even more so—so much so that there is only a fine line
separating him and social democrats.”[6]
Locating AMLO on the Political
Spectrum
MORENA, originally
founded as a “movement” in 2012 after breaking from the PRD, now sees itself as
“a party of a new type,” in the words of its Human Rights National Secretary
Carlos Figueroa Ibarra.[7] MORENA
militants are keenly aware that their party needs to avoid the practices that
characterized the two parties that it emerged from, the PRI and PRD. At a party
meeting, the renowned writer Paco Ignacio Taibo II pointed out that MORENA has
not removed the word “movement” from its name because its members “associate the
word political party with vertical structures.” He added: “we want to be a
horizontal movement whose leaders are chosen from the rank and file…and which learns
from the errors of traditional parties.”[8]
Unlike many
traditional parties, MORENA respects the autonomy of social movements. Reinaldo
Mancebo, a MORENA leader in the southeastern city of Mérida, told me: “we have participated
in large numbers in the protests against the murder of the 43 students in Ayotzinapa,
and all the other protests in Mexico, but not in the name of the party. We
don’t want to give the enemy the opportunity to politicize and discredit these
actions.”[9] Indeed,
MORENA’s unequivocal support for the Ayotzinapa protests and those last year in
opposition to gasoline price increases clearly places the party on the Left.
Nevertheless, MORENA’s more cautious strategy toward mobilizations contrasts
with AMLO’s direct participation in the movement opposing oil privatization at
the time of the party’s founding.
In
spite of AMLO’s moderation and the resultant criticism he has received from
leftists in and outside of MORENA, he remains a towering figure on the Mexican
left. In a recent interview, Mexican Marxist economist Jorge Veraza referred to
AMLO’s candidacy as “somewhat paradoxical.” On the one hand AMLO has followed
an increasingly pragmatic strategy, but on the other he is widely viewed as a
man of unbending principles. Given these apparent contradictions, “the only way
you can explain López Obrador’s popularity and lead at the polls is on the
basis of the complete discredit of Mexico’s political class” and the perception
that he is “Mexico’s last hope.”[10]
AMLO’s credibility is bolstered by his past history of steadfast resistance to
the allegedly fraudulent elections of 2006, and subsequently his breaking with
the PRD over its alliance with the PAN, considered by many to be self-serving.
AMLO’s candidacy
is Mexico’s only real leftist option in July. The logic behind his decision to
moderate his stance is easy to understand. AMLO is not likely to receive an
absolute majority of the popular vote and it’s even more unlikely that MORENA
will gain control of congress. More moderate positions will facilitate
congressional agreements with either smaller parties slightly to the left of
center or one of the major ones, depending on the outcome in July. Furthermore,
given the change in the correlation of forces in Latin America over the recent
past, an AMLO presidency will face an unfriendly environment at the continental
level.
In addition,
forging understanding with prominent non-leftists will reduce the possibility
of electoral fraud, which is foremost on the minds of all MORENA militants and
is a topic of discussion in virtually all party meetings. In a recent Jacobin post, New Politics co-editor Dan La Botz reviewed the span of Mexican
history over the last century as well as the hostile statements of
pro-establishment publications in the U.S. and concluded that electoral fraud
and even an attempt on AMLO’s life are serious possibilities. [11]
AMLO cannot be dismissed as an ex-leftist. None
of his rivals in the presidential race offer anything that comes close to a
comprehensive critique of Peña Nieto’s neoliberal policies, in spite of Anaya's
efforts to position himself to the left of PAN's historical location on the
right. In contrast, AMLO questions the advisability of the government’s
neoliberal oil, labor, education and fiscal “reforms,” even while his
alternative proposals appear to be on the mild side.
Any evaluation
of AMLO’s candidacy from a progressive perspective needs to place it in a broad
context. In recent years, conservative and reactionary parties have come to
power in major European nations (Germany, Britain, Spain, France) and in the
United States. The same has happened in Latin America (Brazil, Argentina,
Colombia, Peru, Chile), while the right-wing pushback has been strongly felt in
Venezuela and Ecuador. The rightist narrative points to these developments and
then harps on Venezuela's pressing economic problems in order to question the
viability of socialism and other leftist proposals for Latin America. It is
precisely for this reason that so much is at stake on July 1.
[1]
http://www.proceso.com.mx/484436/ricardo-anaya-llama-a-la-unidad-panista-senala-a-amlo-principal-adversario
[2] Sabrina Rodríguez, “Mexico’s Trumpian Populist Could
Mean Trouble for Donald Trump,” Politico,
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/07/mexico-trump-populism-209089
[3] Frida Ghitis, “A Mexican Presidential Candidate is
Getting an Unexpected Boost from Trump – and Putin,” Washington Post, January
11, 2018.
[4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/2017/12/29/amlo-recibe-mayor-cobertura-mediatica-pero-negativa-frente-a-meade-y-anaya_a_23319823/
[6] Lorenzo Peraza, author interview, Mérida, January 26,
2018.
[7] Carlos Figueroa Ibarra, author interview, Puebla,
September 7, 2017.
[10] Veraza, author
interview, Caracas, May 4, 2018.
[11] La Botz, “The Plot
against López Obrador,” Jacobin. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/05/lopez-obrador-mexico-elections-amlo-repression.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home