Mexico

A New Year’s Resolution for Mexico

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “A New Year’s Resolution for Mexico” http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/2075

 Date published: Jan 5th, 2011 I hope you find it interesting. Please feel free to comment.

Here’s a copy of it:

____________________

Mexico is the second most corrupt country in Latin America. That’s not an award countries usually strive for but it is, according to UNAM’s Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales (the National Univeristy’s Social Research Institute, or IIS), the disgraceful situation Mexico finds itself in at the start of 2011.

On January 3, UNAM released a press package in which they declared that according to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index and the Latinbarómetro indicators, Mexico is only led by Haiti as the most corrupt nation in the region. IIS’s Corruption and Transparency Research Coordinator Irma Eréndira Sandoval Ballesteros explained that throughout Latin America “Mexicans are considered extremely corrupt in terms of public and private practices.”

TI’s 2010 Corruption Perception Index report explains that 75 percent of people believe that Mexico’s corruption has increased in the last three years. Political parties, police, Congress, and the judiciary top the list of corrupt institutions in our country (considered extremely corrupt), followed by media, businesses, organized religion and NGOs.

Sandoval Ballesteros reported that while the 2003 creation and further strengthening of IFAI (Instituto Federal de Acceso a la Información y Protección de Datos, Federal Institute for Information Access and Data Protection) has been a significant progress in terms to access to information, transparency has done little in battling corruption and has been marginally useful in creating a public conscience. In her own words, “if Mexico is not a leading nation in political and economic terms, it is because corruption has not allowed it and has become an obstacle to possible progress.”

According to Transparency International, 50 percent of the people surveyed in their 2010 report worldwide consider that anticorruption policies put forth by government are and will be ineffective. This number is rather conservative for Mexico if you look back at recent history and try to identify one big successful case of combating corruption by our government (hint: there are none). This leaves us with an unavoidable truth: lowering corruption levels cannot be left up to the government. Each and every one of us—as members of Mexican society—has to play a part. We should not forget that while political institutions show the worst cases of corruption, businesses, churches and NGOs aren’t in the clear either.

As with many cases, our hope for the future lies in education. And in this case, I don’t mean building better schools, but better educating our children so that they are less likely to be what we are collectively: a corrupt generation which frustrated by the system, turned to its loopholes to try to navigate through it instead of changing and uprooting it.

Now you can tell a child not to be corrupt but this is a lesson we need to teach by example. For this reason, I propose that instead of (or ideally in addition to) losing five pounds, reading more and smiling, all Mexicans declare that our new year’s resolution for 2011 will be to not exercise in any form of corruption. I propose that we no longer bribe public officials to avoid a speeding ticket. No more tax evasion even though we know how badly the government manages its collections (creating one problem does not solve another). No more paying $2 to a street peddler for a pirate DVD movie or a copied music CD (who by the way will give part of his profits to organized crime and drug cartels). No more negligence in our duty to monitor and demand effectiveness from our local congressmen and women, especially in terms of how they allocate funds and determine contracts for public construction. No more questionable practices in the companies we work for (I invite businesspeople to take and abide by the Thunderbid Oath).

Keeping this resolution will cost time and energy of each and every one of us, but we have to believe that our kids will thank us for it. Most corrupt nation, second only to Haiti? This has to be a wakeup call. This has to lead us to action. As Mohandas Gandhi is famously quoted for saying, we need to “be the change we want to see in the world.”

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

Why Mexicans don’t care about wikileaks

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “Why Mexicans don’t care about wikileaks”

http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/2072
Date published: Jan 4th, 2011 I hope you find it interesting. Please feel free to comment.

Here is a copy of it:

____________________

In November, Americans turned on their computers, fired up their Internet connections and gravitated to wikileaks.org. The nation was appalled at coverage by virtually all national media telling the tale of a series of diplomatic cables leaked from different U.S. embassies in the world. 

Immediately questions were raised about the U.S. military’s excessive use of force, national security, foreign relations, and a number of other matters included in the first wave of cables reaching the public eye.  Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the State Department (with the help of Interpol) set out to try to silence Assagne.

But the response was starkly different in Mexico. Two days after the first WikiLeaks came out communications were released on U.S.-Mexico relations, the violence problem in Mexico and our armed forces’ internal debacles, as well as President Hugo Chávez’ involvement in supporting former presidential candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador in the 2006 elections.

Some U.S. colleagues immediately contacted me commenting on “the hard hit” Mexico was taking from Assange’s open communication and free speech antics. However, Mexicans did not start tweeting or commenting on facebook and other social media sites about this. The usual suspect bloggers were mildly impressed and Mexico’s government reaction to the leaks was as agitated as a couple of turtles taking a nap.

The reason for this difference in general reaction between U.S. and Mexico’s society is both simple and strikingly depressing: we’ve lost hope and trust in our political system and its players. We’ve lost the capacity to be amazed by our own state’s inadequacies.

When they leaked that the government was in danger of losing control of some regions of Mexico to organized crime; when they told us that Venezuela’s Head of State was involved in the leftist movement in Mexico; when we read that U.S. consular officers were concerned with President Felipe Calderón’s ability to lead, all Mexicans could say was “tell me something I didn’t already know.” Corruption and inefficient government unfortunately are no longer a surprise to us. In a world where perception is reality, the fact that WikiLeaks told us these things maybe made them more official, but it wasn’t something we didn’t already feel and had been talking about for decades.

So to all Americans I say this: enjoy and value the fact that you can still be amazed when Assange tells you about disappointing activities going on behind the scenes in your political system and institutions. When this becomes a norm and it actually gets boring to hear about it for the nth time, that’s a sign for you to be really concerned.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

Mexican heroes we shouldn’t have

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “Mexican Heroes we shouldn’t have”
http://americasquarterly.org/node/2026
Date published: December 8th, 2010

I hope you find it interesting.

Here is a copy of it:

_________________________

On November 13a group of drug dealers approached Don Alejo Garza Tamez in his ranch on the outskirts of Ciudad Victoria, in the troubled border state of Tamaulipas. They threatened Don Alejo and demanded that he hand over his land, which given its strategic location would have been used to harbor narcotic trafficking operations. They told him he had 24 hours to vacate the premises on his own free will or they would take the ranch using deadly force.

After the criminal group left, the 77-year-old businessman rounded up all ranch workers and asked them to go home for a couple of days, assuring them that nothing bad would happen. A hunter by trade, Don Alejo spent the rest of the day cleaning his guns and rifles and transforming the ranch into a trench.

When the drug dealers came back the next day expecting Don Alejo to give up at the sight of their heavy artillery, they faced a fierce combatant who gunned down at least four of them before taking a deadly hit. The criminals who survived the exchange escaped in their trucks leaving a dirt trail and the bodies of their friends behind.

What is most relevant of this story is not the fact in itself, but what it inspired and what it symbolizes for a tired and disenfranchised nation. The story of Don Alejo made the headlines of all major national newspapers. Respected journalists like Denise Maerker and Ciro Gomez Leyva were quick to hail him as a folk hero. In just a couple of days, stories about him hit the usual social media websites and today the letters “don a” are enough to bring up his full name as the first hit in Google Mexico’s instant search bar. Norteño music bands have already dedicated at least three songs to him and his story has spurred up a national debate about the right to carry weapons for self-defense.

Don Alejo was undoubtedly a brave and principled man. He most likely knew how his story would end and he faced death with his head held high. He didn’t call his family to warn or worry them and he made the decision of not placing his workers in danger. He faced what has become the largest threat to all of the nation’s livelihood and well-being and gave his aggressors a lesson many in this country would wish they had the courage to administer.

The problem is that Don Alejo is a hero we should not have to have. If Mexico continues to claim that it is not a failed or failing state, we (not just the government but society as a whole) have to prove that we can fix our law enforcement so that people like Don Alejo have an alternative to picking up a hunting rifle and using it to defend their property. We have to clean up our police force and they have to regain the trust of the citizenry. We need to contain and establish boundaries with regards to what (if anything) we are willing to tolerate from criminal organizations.

Don Alejo is a people’s symbol but he should also serve as a warning to government in order for them to get their act together and protect their constituents. He should be a wake-up call to all of us in order to demand more and actively participate in strengthening our institutions in order to rescue our country. An eye for an eye and a gun for each of us cannot be the answer. The organization “La familia Michoacana” was born under the ideal of taking justice in their own hands and they are now one of the most dangerous groups of criminals in the country. When people find that tallion law is more effective than rule of law, structured society is at a fragile state.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

The Need for Reform in Mexico’s Congress

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “The Need for Reform in Mexico’s Congress”, published on October 6th, 2010
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1858

Here’s a copy of it:

__________________________

Pedro Ferriz de Con (one of the most influential voices in Mexico’s radio airwaves) and I rarely see eye-to-eye on a number of issues. However, the dire need for a more efficient Mexican Congress seems to place us on somewhat common paths. 

For about a year now, Ferriz de Con has been rallying support for his “intellectual revolution,” a movement mostly focused on eliminating party-list proportional representation in the Mexican Congress.  His plight gained public support in late 2009 and early 2010 when the Juanitas scandal was unveiled. 

For those who have forgotten or did not hear about this, the Juanitas scandal refers to a series of women who ran for Congress last year (through direct and proportional election) only to fill gender equality quotas and then cede their seats to their husbands, siblings and other contacts (all male) soon after. They were called Juanitas as a reference to Rafael Acosta Ángeles “Juanito,” another pseudo politician who ran for representation of the Iztapalapa delegation in Mexico City under the promise that he would give this position to Clara Brugada after the elections.  The difference was that the Juanitas did not make their intentions to resign public until after the elections.

The Juanito and the Juanitas incidents were embarrassing moments in our political history. For a moment, civil society protested by supporting Ferriz de Con’s intentions to oppose proportional representation and inefficient government.  But soon after, people went back to their daily obligations and forgot about these diputada replacements who nobody voted for and who shamefully continue to legislate in today’s Congress.

On September 23, the intellectual revolution got a second boost when Julio Godoy Toscano, a PRD party member wanted by federal authorities for suspected close ties with organized crime, was sworn in as a diputado thanks to a legal technicality (amparo) and the collusion of the PRI and PRD in the Lower House. Presumably, Godoy Toscano hid inside the trunk of a car to get past security at the legislature and take the oath, thus receiving  fuero constitucional—a twisted legal resource that makes diputados, senadores and other publicly elected figures exempt from prosecution. 

Godoy being sworn in is yet another mockery of our political system. Clearly, our congresistas have lost sight of the supposed mission of representing the interests of those who elected them.  Protecting and harboring a suspected criminal by making him a congressman is simply beyond belief, even for Mexico. 

The day after Godoy took the oath, Ferriz turned on the microphone in his 6:45 am show and once again called civil society to join his cause.  He clearly had reasons to keep pushing. Due to popular frustration over Godoy’s antics, the intellectual revolution now has around 3 million supporters nationwide (this number will surely continue to grow).

I agree with Ferriz de Con that at one point in time Congress lost sight of why civil society created it. I also believe that there are too many diputados and senadores and they could do as bad a job as they do now with a Congress half its size. 

But the main problem with Congress is not the proportional electoral system. The real issue has more to do with accountability. There is no real punishment for missing congressional sessions.  No one limits the salary raises they give themselves. Nobody forces congresistas to read (let alone understand) the legislation they vote on. There is no obligatory legal training for diputados or senadores under the excuse that the Congress represents all people (not just the educated elite or the legal profession).

In fact, congresistas don’t even have to hire a legal advisor to help them understand the legal implications of the laws they pass.  This of course, results in a backlog at the Supreme Court of Justice. Justices spend most of their time rendering congressionally-passed laws unconstitutional. This creates a legal system filled with holes for criminals and deviants to navigate through.  Unfortunately there is no failing grade for faulty or useless legislation.

And as long as we cling on to the “effective suffrage, no re-election” ideal from 100-year-old revolution, there is no real incentive for our legislators to change the system and make their role more efficient and useful.

My suggestion for Ferriz: besides trying to get rid of the plurinominales, add these more serious and more relevant challenges to your effort to improve congress and you’ll have one more follower for your intellectual revolution.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

Ciudad Juárez’ Silent Cry of Dolores

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “Ciudad Juárez’ Silent Cry of Dolores”, published on September 21st, 2010
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1827

Here’s a copy of it:

___________________________

Mexico celebrated its Bicentennial Independence Day last week by honoring the Grito de Dolores (Cry of Dolores)—Miguel Hidalgo’s call for the people to join him in arms that is re-created across the country every Independence Day.  

On the morning of September 16, 1810, Hidalgo rang out the Dolores bell and after a motivating speech yelled, “¡Viva la Virgen de Guadalupe! ¡Abajo el mal gobierno, ¡Viva Fernando VII!” (Long live the Virgin of Guadalupe! Down with bad government! Long live Fernando VII!).  This act, referred to as el grito, is recognized as the beginning of the struggle for autonomy and independence in Mexico.

In present day, the tradition is that at 11:00 pm the President, governors and city mayors each step out to a balcony in a public square, ring out a replica bell and honor the heroes of our independence through a modification of the Cry of Dolores.  Each chant for every hero mentioned is followed by a loud retort from the amassed people in the squares, yelling “Viva!”  In the major cities, these festivities are accompanied by popular concerts, pyrotechnic shows and gatherings of up to millions of people.  

El grito is a manifestation of freedom and joy, and the Bicentennial was geared up to be a huge celebration nationwide.  Though security measures were heightened in access points to public squares and during the ceremonies, most of the country was able to honor this important occasion regally.  However, nine cities in the border state of Chihuahua fell hostage to fear from organized crime and drug cartels and were forced to cancel their celebrations.  The harshest case was Ciudad Juárez, a city in which rule of law has become as plausible as the tooth fairy.  

Known as the most violent city in Mexico, Ciudad Juárez (estimated population 1.4 million) became a ghost town as citizens refrained from public parties and gatherings, too afraid to go out late at night.  In past years ¡Viva Mexico! chants had been yelled in unison by as many as 35,000 congregated in the town square.  Yet escalated violence, peaking with a car bomb two months ago, murders and decapitations, and the appearance of narcomantas (threats presumably from drug cartels, printed in signs and placed in different places in the city) just days before the celebration, were enough reasons for a whole city to decide to stay at home.   

Mayor José Reyes Ferriz, who has repeatedly been a target of public threats from the drug cartels, caved in a couple of days before Independence Day and declared that he would cancel the ceremonial gathering.  Instead, he invited citizens to view the grito through their television sets at home.  

It was a sad scene as Reyes, notably nervous and fearing for his own life, stepped out to a balcony hovering over an empty square.  Sweat pouring down his face and trying to control his trembling, the mayor of Ciudad Juárez whimpered his Vivas without any response other than utter silence.  The only ones present at the 200th anniversary of our independence in Juárez were a dozen soldiers (called in for security purposes) and about 15 neighbors who stepped out to witness the heartbreaking scene.  Fireworks were banned in Ciudad Juárez, under the assumption that people would confuse them with gunshots and bomb explosions.  This was the silent cry of Dolores.

Ironically, just a couple of miles across the border in El Paso, Texas, 7,000 migrants felt safe enough to hold El Grito as Mexican Consul Roberto Rodríguez led them through each of the Vivas.

I asked a person from Juárez (who requested to remain anonymous) how she felt about the way her city had celebrated 200 years of independence.  She said “I love Mexico, but I don’t love it enough to risk my life in order to attend its party.”  She consoled herself by saying, “At least we were able to see the fireworks from across the border.”  

Mexicans hiding or having to go to a neighboring country to commemorate their own independence because they fear for their lives in their homeland… is that what we are celebrating?

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

Can anyone live on minimum wage in Mexico?

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “Can anyone live on minimum wage in Mexico?”, published on August 30th, 2010
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1798

Here’s a copy of it:

_______________________

In a quaint coffee shop in the heart of La Condesa  (one of Mexico City’s trendiest neighborhoods), Ana and Ricardo sit down and take a break from their jobs. One of them orders a shot of espresso, the other a soft drink and a muffin. Their bill exceeds 120 pesos ($9.10), excluding tip. After a while, they get up, pay and happily go on their way. 

One block from the café another Mexican, Silvia, mops the floor of a local supermarket and earns minimum wage. A single mother of two she has to make ends meet with 345 pesos ($26.20) a week working six days.

Her story is not an exception.  It is a reality shared by 12 percent of this country’s economically active population.  Another nine percent of our workers earn the sum of two minimum wages, 115 pesos ($8.74) daily.  This creates problems and challenges far greater than what these figures reflect.

In the U.S., the minimum wage is set at $7.25 per hour. At 13 pesos to the dollar and an 8-hour workday, this means that a minimum wage employee in the US earns 13 times as much as one in Mexico. Does this tell you a little bit about the risks migrants are willing to face in order to illegally cross the border?

Politicians in Mexico love to relate purchasing power to the price of the tortilla. At current rates, one minimum wage is the equivalent of 6 kilos of tortilla per day. This sounds like a lot (this is why they love to use this figure). I guess politicians expect us to live off of tortillas (and people wonder why our country has one of the worst obesity problems in the world). Unfortunately, though tortillas are cheap, nothing else on the shelf is. If Silvia pays a really low rent, she will blow the rest of her income when she goes to the  supermarket once a week and buys a box of cereal, a carton of milk, a couple of cans of food and a 2 liter bottle of her soft drink of choice. Not nearly enough to feed a family, let alone provide a balanced diet… Wait, don’t forget your tortillas!

The problem does not stop with migration or obesity.   On average, a corner drug pusher in Mexico earns 8,000 pesos ($608) a month. That’s almost six times as much as Silvia. Oh yeah, he doesn’t pay taxes either and works about half of the hours.  He also gets to carry a gun and earn the respect (or fear) of his peers. Schoolchildren in his neighborhood look up to him in ways that will never compare to a person whose work tools are a mop and a bucket.

Now, we tend to think that what will break the poverty cycle is access to higher quality education. Well, let’s look at the costs and aim for the highest quality we can find in the country. In Mexico that would be Tecnológico de Monterrey. At a university level, this institution currently hosts almost 50,000 students nationwide (on more than 30 campuses).  Tuition costs average 72,000 pesos ($5,470) per semester.  If Silvia wanted to put one her kids through this university, she would have to find a way to fully evade taxes and for her and her children to survive without food or shelter. She would also have to work 70 hours a day. 

Following a correct path, if he’s lucky Silvia’s son will have access to a low quality public high school. If he’s really lucky, he will graduate from a public university and maybe start earning  5,000 pesos ($380) per month. Selling marijuana to rich kids is a likelier (and more profitable) career path for him.  Maybe he will turn to stealing, kidnapping or extortion. And can you really blame him for resenting Ana, who nearly spent his mom’s daily income on a muffin?

Without a doubt, high quality education is the key to open many doors. The good news is that Tecnológico de Monterrey and other private institutions are exploring ways to make education more accessible. The bad news is they are not doing it nearly fast or creatively enough.

In the meantime, a revision of this critical figure and the way it is calculated is long overdue. We can no longer determine minimum wage levels based solely on the price of basic goods without taking into account the context we live in and the society we are trying to build. There is a lot more at stake stemming from this than a package of hot tortillas.

In Mexico, Corporations May Be Better Poised to Address Social Concerns

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “In Mexico, Corporations May Be Better Poised to Address Social Concerns”, published on August 18th, 2010.
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1782

Here’s a copy of it:

_______________________

According to Keynesian economics, the state (and specifically government) was created to step in, regulate and control market abuses. The idea was that laissez faire gave profit-seekers the power to sidetrack certain aspects of organized societal living, such as fair distribution of wealth, worker conditions and education so government involvement was necessary to tame the private enterprise beast.

Ironically enough, today in Mexico (and one could argue the world), large companies are making it part of their business strategy to get involved and address those problems in which government has faltered. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming much more efficient than state action and the past 15 to 20 years have seen visionary companies embrace this concept, creating a partnership and bonds with communities that politicians have never been able to nurture.

Large companies like Banamex, Bimbo, CEMEX, Cervecería Cuauhtémoc Moctezuma, FEMSA, and even Telmex have been setting up ambitious projects and foundations to promote development, alleviate poverty and improve health and welfare. They are also finding a business logic to self-regulation and obtaining efficiencies in their processes that deal with carbon emissions and use of natural resources.

Why does CSR have a better chance of succeeding than government actions? Three key concepts: ongoing concern, a drive for profitability and accountability.

We learn about ongoing concern in accounting classes. It is the idea that for accounting purposes, one should believe that the entity will continue to exist perpetually. Though companies may come and go (after all even business mammoths go bankrupt, think Mexicana de Aviación) they are far more permanent than government administrations at a state and federal level. The fact that Mexico does not have re-elections (or political memory, see my previous post) provides no incentive for specific government administrations to address problems or worry about their reputations in the long run.

If a company is efficient in its use of natural resources, its costs go down. If they are able to project themselves as a company that honestly (and this is key) wants to partner with civil society and cares, their products become more attractive and may even provide better margin. If managed correctly, CSR provides profitability advantages to companies willing to invest themselves in intelligent business strategies. Government administrations on the other hand, seldom seek profitability or even sustainability. Government officials try to find personal profit and many a time they do it in very creative (corrupt) ways, but that’s a topic for another article altogether.

The third key aspect is accountability. Today’s consumers are becoming more and more selective with their brand preferences and in many product categories. Price is no longer the only variable. Even after massive PR campaigns we still remember the child labor stories of a certain shoe company. The Gulf of Mexico crisis is not yet contained and BP is already thinking of changing its corporate branding to try to soften the PR blow. Consumers are making companies accountable for their actions and hitting them where it hurts the most if they do not deliver.

Even in terms of talent attraction, companies must keep in mind that tomorrow’s (even today’s) white collar labor market will choose to approach companies based on their reputation as a respectable entity. It’s easy enough to understand why a company is more concerned in pushing forward the social agenda than government. When was the last time that a Mexican governor or president was effectively held accountable for his shortcomings?

So I say give my taxes to the business mammoths. They’re more likely to put them to better use.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

‘El Peje’ to Run Again in Macondo, Mexico

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “‘El Peje’ to Run Again in Macondo, Mexico”, published on August 5th, 2010.
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1761

Here’s a copy of it:

__________________

On July 25, Andrés Manuel López Obrador emerged from his long self-imposed silence, took to a stage in the heart of Mexico City and announced his intention to run for president in 2012. It was not unexpected, as ridiculous as his candidacy may seem to many.

Plaza Zócalo was filled with supporters welcoming “El Peje,” as López Obrador is known, and chanting “Es un honor, estar con Obrador” (It’s an honor to support Obrador). Confetti flew, arms raised in unison and slogan-covered signs flourished among a group that, once again, threw their hearts and hope at the once and future candidate.

This scene brings to mind the magical town of Macondo, created by Gabriel García Márquez in Cien años de soledad, where the whole population loses its ability to remember.  And as in the Macondo of Cien años, it seems we in Mexico need our own José Arcadio to figure out how to get the population to remember again.

Radicalism and disappointment with Calderón explain some of the support for Lopez Obradór. But if he has enough support to be considered a presidential hopeful, it is only because our citizens have forgotten the aftermath of the 2006 election. We have forgotten his complete disrespect of democratic processes and of our institutions, the same processes and institutions he now pledges fealty toward in order to have second shot at office.

Those of us who lived through the chaos created by a losing candidate who refused to accept his defeat (even after the Electoral Tribunal’s decision), violently overtook Congress on various occasions, and set up camp in the middle of Mexico City’s most important avenue, with complete disregard to the damage inflicted on both local transit and the general perception of rule of law in Mexico, are seriously worried that this fiend still has a leg to stand on in the 2012 presidential race.

The Mexican José Arcadio also must help the candidate to remember the past. In 2006, during the Convención Nacional Democrática López Obrador named himself the “legitimate President of Mexico” and refused to recognize Felipe Calderón as the actual leader. López Obrador set up a parallel government (in a parallel universe, perhaps) and thanked the nation for giving him the honor to serve. Taking that at face value, López Obrador should not be allowed to run in 2012, since Mexico of course does not have a reelection process.  Moreover, López Obrador’s display and announcement is a clear violation of the electoral procedures (Código Federal de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales, COFIPE), which do not allow proselytism prior to official campaign dates.

Most of us refuse to believe that López Obrador could actually win the next election. Leftist parties will have to choose between Lopez Obrador and Marcelo Ebrard—ironically Ebrard has always been considered Lopez’ protégé—and this division will only strengthen the chances of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional’s likely candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto.

Between the absence of a strong Partido Acción Nacional candidate and the political pattern set in recent state elections, it’s altogether likely that 2012 will end the two term break from PRI’s 70 year rule. Yet again, this country’s memory is short. In the Macondo of Cien años, a swarm of yellow butterflies/flowers symbolizes both irrational and overwhelming love and the concept of death. How fitting that in Mexico yellow is also the color of El Peje’s Partido de la Revolución Democrática.

The United States’ Limited View of the War on Drugs

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “The United States’ Limited View of the War on Drugs”, published on April 6th, 2010.
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1418

Here is a copy of it:

__________________________

It took the deaths of two American citizens and the husband of a diplomatic employee—all tied to the U.S. Consulate inCiudad Juarez—for the Obama administration to apparently take notice ofMexico’s drug problem. Still, it seems that even the rhetoric fromWashington will limit itself as much as it can to address this crisis as long as the bloodshed continues to hit outside ofU.S. national borders.

On March 14all the headlines focused on the targeting of U.S. Consulate employees in the border town ofCiudad Juarez, which has become one of the main stages for drug-related violence in the recent years. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was quick to respond to these attacks in an unusual address on a topic that had been left off the agenda until recently.

It seems that as long as the victims of drug-related violence did not carry U.S.passports, the Obama administration only cared enough to issue petty warnings to American tourists not to visit our country. Yet when Enriquez, Redelffs and Salcido were gunned down President Barack Obama told the world he was outraged and promised a quick response to the issue. Clinton said that “this is a responsibility we must shoulder together” and subsequently made an official visit toMexico 10 days later. There, she met with key officials in Calderón’s administration to work on a joint solution to the problem.

The promise of a shoulder-to-shoulder collaboration on (in this blogger’s view at least) a problem generally created by the most profitable market for the drug trade filledMexico’s hopes. But we were reminded of former Mexican President Porfirio Díaz’ famous quote “Poor Mexico! So far from God, so close to theUnited States.”Clinton’s visit toMexicoturned out to be yet another example of quick and shallow politics to diffuse a media situation, instead of addressing the real problem head-on.

Reminding us of the $1.4 billion investment the U.S. is making over three years in “a thus-far unsuccessful effort to crush cartels who ship $40 billion worth of illegal drugs north each year” Clinton came to Mexico to accept part of the blame of this problem by saying that the U.S. should crack down on gun control. “These criminals are outgunning law enforcement officials […] And since we know that the vast majority, 90 percent of that [weaponry] comes from our country, we’re going to try to stop it from getting there in the first place,” Clinton said. As always, the question ofU.S. consumption was marginally addressed and no specific strategy to decrease it was put on the table.

In a recent interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, President Calderón said that as long as the largest market for these illicit products is not willing to discuss alternative solutions (such as legalization), debate over these strategies in source countries is futile. Both Calderón and Porfirio Díaz’ words hit right on target.

As long as the Obama administration continues to look at the problems brewing south of theU.S.border as something of marginal importance—deeming his attention only when theU.S.media cares enough to cover the death of Americans—Mexicois left alone to deal with this growing hot topic. $1.4 billion and a promise on gun control are just not going to cut it.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.

Seven Ideas for Defeating Drug-Related Violence in Mexico

Standard

Here’s a link to my AQBlog article “Seven Ideas for Defeating Drug-Related Violence in Mexico”, published on Feb. 17th, 2010
http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1322

Here’s a copy of it:

——-

As headlines continue to report a tale of horror, violence and massacre in what had seemed to be a peaceful country, a growing debate stirs on whether or notMexico’s government stands a chance to win the war on drugs.

The general consensus is that President Felipe Calderón has inherited a cancer that the Partido Revolucionario Institucional(PRI regime) had contained through institutionalization of corruption. This is a cancer that former President Vicente Fox was unable to effectively cope with when he took office, ending the PRI’s hold on power. Now Felipe Calderón is trying to get rid of this disease by beating it with a big stick and empowering the military to crack down on criminal organizations such as the Zetas and Beltrán Leyva’s group , but as Ana María Salazar has stated recently, “Mexicans are paying a huge price”

Calderón’s war on drugs seems limited if the goal is to effectively address the complex issue of drug-related violence. A recent conversation I had with a group of Thunderbird School of Global Management and Tec de Monterrey postgraduate students proves there are at least seven more ideas that the President should consider incorporating into his strategy:

1. A hard line political and militarily line is needed, but we should recognize this is not the path to a solution. This part of the strategy should be seen as mere containment. Just like the Planarian worms if you try to cut the head off a criminal organization, it will grow back and sometimes even multiply , but you need to keep doing so to prevent the worm from growing stronger.

2. Strengthen the rule of law. Don’t just prosecute dealing. Make possession and consumption outside of tolerance areas punishable by law. Help law enforcement not just by providing better salaries, but by providing the means for officials to get access to credit and health insurance. Bring the police back to your side. Work withU.S.law enforcement and border officials to crack down on arms trading.

3. Accept that the problem is not going to go away entirely. Create drug-use and related industry tolerance zones (relocate casinos and gentleman’s clubs) and tax entry to these areas. Inject the funds allocated though taxation of unhealthy habits into the comprehensive strategy to combat drug-related violence.

4. Create an alliance with the media. Get the national media to understand that its sensationalism is hurting Mexico’s reputation worldwide. Most of Mexicois not facing the level of violence of Ciudad Juarez, but the printed press is making it out to be that way. Responsible, objective coverage is needed to avoid a contagion effect with creative yet less powerful deviants.

5. A comprehensive strategy to strengthen education. This does not relate to the naïve idea that educated people don’t do drugs. However, better schools give children the tools to go out into the world and to have better possibilities of succeeding with an honest job. Investing in education does not just mean a “Don’t do drugs” campaign. It should be seen as a long-term strategy to make it harder for drug dealers to recruit “mules.”

6. Make the economy work for you. Drug consumption inMexicobecame relevant when theU.S.economy dropped and security tightened to the point where profit margins for drug sales plummeted in theU.S.market. It will be way more effective to figure out ways to cut their margins inMexicothan it will be to capture or kill a drug leader and wait for the next one to come along.

7. Make it easier for businesses to become your allies. Instead of overtaxing private enterprise, the government should provide incentives to grow. This creates more jobs. People with full-time jobs that are fairly paid have neither the time nor the need to engage in illicit activity. Help business by running an international public relations campaign. Just like he recently did inJapan, Calderón needs to become a better spokesperson and attract foreign direct investment back intoMexico. Volume drops resulting from the recent crisis have temporarily leveled the playing field with regard toChina. This window of opportunity is closing and Calderón needs to act on it now.

Mr. President, you need to be more intelligent and creative than they are.

*Arjan Shahani is a contributing blogger to AmericasQuarterly.org. He lives in Monterrey, Mexico, and is an MBA graduate from Thunderbird University and Tecnológico de Monterrey and a member of the International Advisory Board of Global Majority—an international non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of non-violent conflict resolution.