Monday, December 11, 2006

 

Mexico: A Model Foe of the Bolivarian Revolution

 

By Patrick Corcoran

 

It is tempting to call the reelection of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, on December 3, the fitting capstone in a busy electoral year in Latin America, one in which the political shade shifted to a redder shade of purple.

 

Chavez’s drubbing of opponent Manuel Rosales followed recent wins by Washington’s nemesis Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and left-wing economist Rafael Correa in Ecuador. The electoral whirlwind — 12 elections of heads of state in 12 months — started with Evo Morales’ stunning win in Bolivia about a year ago, which kicked off the drift to the left.

 

The truth, not surprisingly, is slightly more complicated. Yes the year started and finished well for the anti-American left. But in between, Chavez and his ilk suffered sundry disappointments.

 

For starters, Chavez allies Ollanta Humala and Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador both lost after seeming invincible in Peru and Mexico, respectively. Moreover, both campaigns fell to pieces in large part because of the candidate’s alleged connection to Chavez. Instead of Lopez Obrador and Humala, Mexico and Peru are now headed by Felipe Calderon and Alan Garcia, free traders both (albeit of varying degrees). The defeated leftists, on the other hand, both find themselves sliding toward irrelevance.

 

In Brazil, moderate leftist Luiz Inacio da Silva, or Lula, won an easy reelection. Although there is some ideological similarity between Lula and Chavez, there remains a large gap between them in both their goals and tone. Many Brazilians are expecting Lula, once he distances himself from the myriad of scandals that have dogged him in recent months, to reassert his country's place at the head of the region. While he will never walk in lockstep with the United States, a Lula-led South America would present a softer-spoken counterweight to Chavez’s regional dominance.

 

Another sign that Chavez is no longer ascendant was Venezuela’s failure to win the two-year term on the United Nations Security Council that he coveted. Chavez trotted around the globe, tossing out oil-financed goodies like candy, in order to build support for Venezuela (countries are selected by a secret ballot of the UN General Assembly). He ridiculed his Guatemalan opponents as nothing more than a mouthpiece for the “North American Empire.”

 

Chavez seemed to think he was in the driver's seat in mid-September, as he swaggered before the UN General Assembly in New York to deliver his now infamous speech. He drew laughs for calling George Bush the devil, and although doubtless many countries admired his chutzpa, more than a few nations objected to his lack of manners and had reservations about giving his government the pulpit from which to repeat the performance. After both Venezuela and Guatemala failed the following month to earn the 122 votes needed to secure the position on the Security Council, Panama won the Latin American seat as a compromise candidate.

 

Chavez has his set of friends in Latin America, but they are unlikely to join the Venezuelan in triggering a hemispheric surge of radicalism. Venezuela's most stalwart allies in the years to come — Ecuador, Bolivia, and Nicaragua — represent only about 27 million of Latin America’s 550 million or so inhabitants. Furthermore, none of the nations' leaders have anything close to Chavez's grip on power.

 

Ortega regained the Nicaraguan presidency thanks to his nation's convoluted electoral rules; he won less than 40 percent of the vote, and although president he remains Nicaragua's most disliked politician.

 

Morales swept to power in Bolivia in December 2005 with a surprisingly easy win, but his approval ratings have fallen dramatically in the year since. He faces a secession movement in moneyed Santa Cruz province, as well as complaints from within his own coalition that he is not doing enough to address the inequalities that plague his nation, especially the Indian majority that forms his base.

 

In Ecuador, for now Correa enjoys a solid mandate after November's runoff victory, but the political situation in Ecuador remains as volatile as any in the region.

 

And none of the three can be guaranteed to finish their terms. In fact they seem far from it.

 

In any case, each of the three leaders has had to, or will have to, confront the overriding flaw in Chavez’s ideology. It is impossible to shut a country off entirely from the world market, led by the United States, without leaving something like North Korea in its place. Without Chavez’s petrodollars, Correa, Ortega, and Morales will all fail spectacularly if they try to turn anti-trade, anti-American campaign rhetoric into the basis of government policy.

 

Mexico's turbulent electoral campaign is perhaps the best reflection of the region's political balance. In the campaign that culminated in July’s election, there was a justifiably strong emphasis on social issues, but the electorate rejected class warfare. Voters avoided Lopez Obrador largely due to his supposed association with Chavez, and worries over his messianic tendencies.

 

Winner Felipe Calderon derived much of his support — including the margin of victory — from his promises of jobs and improved quality of life for middle class Mexicans. After losing by a hair, Lopez Obrador proved the worries about his radical side well founded, by refusing to accept the verdict and encouraging his followers to shut down large swaths of Mexico City in protest.

 

At that point much of Lopez Obrador's support vanished. This point is key. Lopez Obrador's supporters — and presumably all of the pragmatic voters who’ve been tilting left around the region — do not want revolution, Bolivarian or any other kind. The overwhelming majority of them want what smart politicians like Calderon promise: employment and an improved standard of living. They supported Lopez Obrador because, rightly or wrongly, they believed he was more likely to deliver on his promises. But when it became clear that he was more likely to deliver bloodshed they abandoned him.

 

Elections in Mexico and elsewhere brought needed attention to a wide variety of concerns, none more important than the rampant poverty and abhorrent inequality that plagues the region. It remains to be seen how certain countries will attack these problems, but a hemispheric Bolivarian Revolution is not in the offing.

 

——————————

Patrick Corcoran, a MexiData.info guest columnist, is a writer who resides in Torreón, Coahuila.  He can be reached at corcoran25@hotmail.com.