I am proud that Mexico will have its first female president. I am even more proud of the fact that she comes from the Mexican Jewish minority, a community that numbers a mere 58,876 citizens.
My Mexico is a country of racial diversity, where members of any minority should be able to aspire to the highest offices in the land, and I am glad that our future president reflects that.
However, as a firm believer in both economic and political freedoms afforded by liberal democracy, as well as a staunch advocate for strong and independent institutions, I am worried by her party’s legislative agenda.
As of 1997, Mexico built what became the most sophisticated electoral system in the world, which gave the country free (if not always fair) elections, for nearly thirty years. I think we run the risk of losing those very real democratic gains.
I also think that we run the risk of squandering the immense opportunities afforded by the nearshoring phenomenon. Simply put, if Mexico were to liberalize its energy industry and quickly shore up at least some of its serious public security issues, the country could join the ranks of the developed world within a decade.
With a much stronger economy and some political will, the rule of law would be within reach and Mexico could finally fulfill the dreams of so many of its people in ways that it hasn’t been able to until now. As an added benefit, this would also mean that Mexico would no longer export its people, meaning that one of the main drivers of the dangerous radicalization of the U.S. electorate would be gone. It is no stretch to say that a prosperous Mexico would improve the chances of a prosperous and more peaceful world.
But it looks like this is not to be; at least not in the short term. Instead, Mexico joins in the worldwide zeitgeist, entering a period of — you guessed it — increased uncertainty.
What used to be shared values of equality of opportunity in the context of economic and political freedom are no longer in vogue for majority voting blocs around the world and Mexico is no exception.
In what is proving to be an uncanny repeat of the 1930s, xenophobic authoritarianism is on the march pretty much everywhere, even in those countries where freedom and democracy were formerly a given. Whether you believe in the theory of 80-year historical cycles and the overproduction of elites, or in the powers of the planets to mold our fate, this is a world that has stopped making sense. Particularly for people who, like me, came of age during what was supposed to be “the end of history.” Our optimism regarding markets, democracy and enlightened self-interest, the pillars of Pax Americana which were to lead us into a new Golden Age, is over.
For those of us who care about Mexico’s future, this leads to a number of recommendations. The first is to love Mexico for what it is, and not for what we want it to be. As the son of a Mexican diplomat who grew up in several countries (including Switzerland), I have heard versions of Mexico’s obituary for as long as I can remember. And, yet, the country remains one of the most attractive places in the world to invest and to live in, hosting (by far) the largest community of U.S. expatriates in the world.
While it is true that we could well be seeing the end of an independent judiciary, the basic ingredients that make living in Mexico attractive, its destinations, culture, people — and its food — look to endure. In fact, if the latest international rankings are to be believed, there is even an argument to be made that they will improve.
Second, it’s important not to have expectations based on our biases. Mexico is guaranteed to break your heart, but it will also make you fall in love with it. Sometimes these two things will happen on the same day. Just like everywhere else, this country has important challenges, but the world doesn’t need more Mexico catastrophizing. Observations and constructive criticisms are welcome, but no one benefits by propagating the old “Mexico is doomed” trope.
That goes double for expatriate Mexicans who, despite owing their family and fortune to Mexico, speak ill of their country from their perch in the Woodlands, or Miami. Harmful words are never a good look.
As the world enters a period of increased volatility, perspective is more important than ever. Europeans peer over Poland’s eastern border (which is also the border of NATO and the European Union) and see war being waged by an expansionist Russia. In Asia, China is also engaged in a frenzy of saber-rattling hostility.
Here in North America, we have many challenges, including a dangerous concentration of political power and organized crime in Mexico, as well as alarming political polarization in the United States. Add to that, the “polycrisis,” which is a bizarre metastasis of existential threats that include, but are not limited to, nuclear war, bioweapons, accelerated global warming and artificial intelligence.
In this context, the results of Mexico’s election, for good, or ill, are a footnote. I do not believe that the basic ingredients of what makes Mexico one of the top international destinations will change. And for those of us who want to contribute, we can always do so as individuals, through being positive and productive members of our communities.
In sum, it behooves us to appreciate everything that Mexico offers, even if circumstances are forcing us to also be mindful of a world that is more dangerous and less predictable than it should be.
Agustín Barrios Gómez is the founder of International Capital Partners, a former Mexican Congressman, and a member of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI).
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Mexico News Daily, its owner or its employees.
“the most sophisticated electoral system in the world” and “an independent judiciary” In theory, but previous presidents put their own people in those independent positions, so they are not independent at all. Reform is needed.
The substantial fall in the peso along with requests from US officials for transparency with regard to “reforms” of the legal system, especially the election of the judiciary by citizens, is likely a disaster for democracy (ironically) and investment in Mexico as the rule of law with particular regard to enforcement of contracts and legally binding agreements are essentially discarded by people put in place for political purposes
Why do expats and the U.S. seem to think they can run Mexico better than the Mexican citizen?
Thanks Hendrik. Well said! You too, Stegowhite.
All excellent comments above. The Barrios Gómez article voices many legitimate concerns, some excellent advice for Mexican and U.S. citizens alike, along with a list of aspirations that I feel assured we’d all like to see come to fruition both in Mexico and in the United States, countries whose destinies are intertwined and whose governments should focus much more energy on improving their relationship.
Some of the world’s most notorious dictatorships were born during violent social upheaval, like Cuba in 1959 or Iran in 1979. But many others became police states when elected leaders used their popularity to demolish the rights of political minorities and eliminate institutional checks designed to limit executive power. Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua are in this category.
Knowing this history, Mexicans who want to live in a pluralistic and free republic are on edge about September.
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s Morena party candidate, Claudia Sheinbaum, won the presidential election on June 2. Morena also won majorities in both chambers of Congress. But while the new legislators will take their oath of office on Sept. 1, Ms. Sheinbaum won’t be sworn in until Oct. 1.
This may give Mr. López Obrador, over the course of 30 days, power that he hasn’t enjoyed thus far in his presidency. If the National Electoral Institute rules on Aug. 23 that Morena and its allies won a supermajority in the lower house, the electoral tribunal upholds that ruling, and the president can “negotiate” the few votes he’s short of a Morena supermajority in the Senate, he plans to pass a set of radical constitutional amendments.
How radical? Let’s put it this way: If AMLO, as the president is known, relies on the hard-left Ms. Sheinbaum to tackle them once in office, they may not get done according to his plan. She wants to succeed, and annihilating legal certainty and the separation of powers—as Mr. López Obrador’s reforms would do—may not be on her immediate to-do list.
AMLO, on the other hand, is term-limited and vengeful about how independent institutions stopped him from centralizing power. As he exits, he’s making one last try to stick it to the “neoliberals” who believe in the rule of law. His close intellectual ally, sociologist Armando Bartra, says the package of reforms is similar to constitutional changes Hugo Chávez promoted in Venezuela.
If he succeeds, Mexico will return to a one-party state, such as it was during the most repressive days of the 71-year rule of the Institutional Revolutionary Party—only worse. Things could get a whole lot uglier considering the power of Mexican cartels.
Mexico’s diversified manufacturing economy makes it very different from Venezuela. But it isn’t impervious to a power grab. Mr. López Obrador already has given the army brass key roles in operations and customs at ports and airports and in infrastructure projects, inviting corruption. He also granted the armed forces federal policing responsibility, effectively militarizing law enforcement.
Among the most pernicious of the president’s 20 proposed constitutional amendments is the overhaul of the judiciary. It would remove all 7,293 sitting jurists in the country: 11 Supreme Court justices and all circuit court, federal district and state judges.
To replace the Supreme Court, the Morena-controlled legislature and the executive branch would nominate a list of candidates. You don’t have to be a conspiracy nut to surmise that there will be a political litmus test to qualify. Or that academic credentials, writing for scholarly journals and judicial experience would be secondary considerations, at best. Lawyers and judges who view the job on the nation’s highest court as an obligation to uphold the law are unlikely to present themselves for consideration. AMLO says that any lawyer in the country can self-nominate for lower court vacancies.
Nominees from the Supreme Court on down would then be elected by popular vote. Most voters, having little knowledge of jurisprudence or the resources to study the qualifications of the many candidates on the ballot, will be hard-pressed to make informed decisions. Turnout is likely to be low and the vote controlled by single-issue groups or lobbyists, be they organized crime, government officials or even entrepreneurs. Mexico’s bench will be employed by special interests. An amendment to allow the government to jail citizens suspected of tax fraud would do away with due process.
Another of AMLO’s initiatives would get rid of the 200 seats in the lower house of Congress (out of 500) and the 64 seats in the Senate (out of 128) that are filled using proportional representation. That would silence minority parties, which currently have a voice because with at least one-third of votes, they can challenge the constitutionality of laws. There would be no more re-election, removing incentives for responsible stewardship.
The reforms would abolish the autonomy of the country’s election watchdog. It would be put under the executive, as would the government agencies that regulate competition in telecom, energy and the wider market. This would violate Mexico’s obligations under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement and scare away capital.
If the reforms go forward, a nation that relies on greater integration with the global economy will go backward. And with it, Mexican hopes of living in peace, freedom and prosperity. as written by May Anastasia O’Grady telling inconvemient truths that eco just what Agustin is also addressing in this brilliant piece