United States

Mexico’s respectable ranking in globalization report

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “Mexico’s respectable ranking in globalization report” http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/2219

Date published: Feb 2nd, 2011 I hope you find it interesting. Please feel free to comment.

Here’s a copy of it:

______________________

The auditing firm Ernst & Young recently surprised all of Mexico (and possibly the world) with the results published in their “Winning in a polycentric world” report, which ranks economies based on their level of globalization.

In this ranking, which EY coordinates with the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) think tank, Mexico is placed in a very respectable #36, surpassing China (39) Japan (42) and Brazil (46) among others as “most globalized.” Hong Kong, Ireland and Singapore rank at the top of the index. The United States does not fare are well as one would expect, placed as #28, only 8 slots from its neighbor to the south.

Why does the Ernst & Young report throw out these unexpected figures and why is it so important? Granted, there are many types of studies and rankings that provide different lists. However, what makes “Winning in a polycentric world” a very relevant report and an important piece to further study, is the fact that this is one of the few reports that measures globalization in relative terms, linked to the size of the economy measured by GDP.  This is done to some extent, in order to level the playing field.

The report has 20 indicators grouped under five broad categories: movement of goods and services, movement of capital and finance, exchange of technology and ideas, movement of labor and cultural integration. Thanks mostly to strengthened economic ties (mostly fueled by NAFTA) and improvements in our financial and banking systems, Mexico gets high points for trade and movement of capital. If these were the only variables to analyze, the report would paint a profitable future for Mexico. However, the category in which the country gets its lowest grades is technology and innovation and that is very bad news.

In the book As the Future Catches You, Juan Enriquez Cabot makes a strong case for the importance of innovation and harvesting ideas as opposed to relying on commodities and primary resources to boost an economy.  He looks at where most of the added value in the supply chain lies in answering the question “how can countries rich in natural resources get so poor during this century?”. Enriquez wrote the book more than 10 years ago but we can prove he was right when we see Hong Kong, Ireland and Singapore at the top of Ernst & Young’s rankings mostly due to their ability to turn a profit without large natural resources.

Though our relative to GDP quantity of exchanged goods and capital allows us to rank higher than China and Japan, this should not cast a shadow on the fact that Mexico’s long-term relative decline may very well rest on the fact that we are lagging behind in terms of improving education systems, creating new ideas and investing in technology. As Enriquez wrote, “in a borderless world, those who do not educate and keep their citizens will lose most intellectual wars.” 

The Globalization Index rankings cannot be considered a promise of long-term growth or wealth accumulation for Mexico.  Number 36 makes a nice headline, especially when most of what we are hearing these days about the country has to do with grim pictures of violence and a failing state.  But the challenge of producing knowledge in-country and in favor of Mexicans still stands. In a globalized world, the most valued currency is and will be effective brain matter put to value-creating use.

Special thanks to Diego Del Pozzo from Ernst & Young and Salvador Treviño from Tec de Monterrey for providing the sources for this post.

*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.

Mexico looks for child geniuses

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “Mexico looks for child geniuses”

http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/2126

Date published: Jan 19th, 2011 I hope you find it interesting. Please feel free to comment.

Here is a copy of it:

____________________________

The Secretaría de Educación Pública or SEP (Ministry of Education) in Mexico has traditionally been known for being slow, over-bureaucratized and square-minded. Low quality levels are reflected year after year through a series of international comparative studies. One need only consult the results of the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) to see in disgust how Mexico’s constant is to come up last in the OCDE countries year after year.

Vidal Garza, a friend and editorialist for a major newspaper in Mexico, writes that the problem is even more apparent when you look at the amount of money we spend on our public schools: “Mexico invests 5 percent of its GDP on public education. The average annual expense per student in elementary school is $1,604, yet we fare deficiently in PISA. We do worse than Uruguay, Chile and China, which actually spend a lot less per student.”

To make things worse, The SEP (and Mexico as a whole) is in a constant battle with the SNTE, Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación, a corrupt teacher’s union that promotes strikes and teacher absenteeism as a the means to advance a political agenda. SNTE has filled our public schools with undedicated, unqualified and mediocre people who should not even have the honor of being called “teacher.” Granted, this is a generalization but a real one. I have met a couple of very good teachers in the public system; unfortunately today they are a rare breed.

It is no secret that we need to improve productivity in terms of education in Mexico. That’s why I was pleased to see a spark of progressive thinking on the part of SEP when I learned that they will be instituting a program to identify overachievers and children with higher intellectual proficiency in elementary schools with the intent to “credit, promote and advance them” in an accelerated manner. For example, if a child in 3rd grade shows the intellectual capacity of a 6th grader, the program will identify, prepare and eventually advance him/her to a 6th grade classroom. SEP estimates that around 10 percent to 15 percent of kids could benefit from this program. 

This is great news for the smarter kids. It is not my intention to brag, but when I was in elementary school I always felt that I was being held back in the classroom. For a child with thirst for knowledge, there is nothing less stimulating than learning at a slow pace or having to go over the same material he/she already knows by heart because others take longer to understand it. These 10 to 15 percentile smart kids need to catalyze their capabilities and be inserted into a more challenging setting. It is great to see that SEP is finally working to do something about it. According to the theory of evolution, if an organ is not being used, it ends up atrophying. I am a firm believer that an under-stimulated brain does not develop to its full capacity and now smarter kids will have a better shot.

I do however have to play devil’s advocate and point out some important side issues that should not be overlooked:

1. In transferring kids to a higher-grade classroom, the program needs to make sure that these younger, smart kids do not become the target of bullying by the older kids. Also, they need to not only have the intellectual skills, but the emotional intelligence to be in a classroom with older kids.
2. The crash-course preparing a child for a higher grade will NEVER substitute the social interaction with his/her peers vs. being inserted into an older social setting. Hopefully the psychological implications of these changes are being observed as part of the program, especially in regard to the early puberty stages.
3. Advancing a smart child has important implications in regard to the rest of the class. The smart kid sets the bar for the rest in the group. He/she becomes the one to beat when it comes to getting good grades. If they are set aside from children their own age, what will happen to the “average” kids? Does the program take this risk of further promoting under-achievement into account?
4. When the smart child graduates from middle school and is ready to enter university level (here or abroad), we have to make sure that he/she will not be denied access due to young age. Let’s make sure we are not breeding child geniuses who will have to wait to continue their studies.
5. The generalized problem with education is not that we are holding back child geniuses (after all, on their own estimations these amount to 15 percent of the kids at most) but that our teachers are inadequate. If you advance a 3rd grader to a 6th grade classroom with a mediocre teacher, you cannot expect that our PISA standings will improve. Granted, you are helping the individual child in some way, but the bigger issue still needs to be addressed.

This list of issues is by no means exhaustive. I am sure you can think of some others and hopefully SEP is thinking about them also. The point is that this program is a small ray of hope for our future in education. Now if we could only figure out a way to get rid of the SNTE…

*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.

SB 1070: A Discussion with Brewer’s Primary Opponent

Standard

Here’s a link to my most recent article on AQBlog, titled “SB 1070: A Discussion with Brewer’s Primary Opponent” http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/1954

Date published: October 25th, 2010

I hope you find it interesting.

Here’s a copy of it:

_______________________

When Governor Jan Brewer became vocal about and stood by Arizona Senate Bill 1070 (referred to as the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act” after its approval), she catapulted her way into the Republican candidacy for the 2010 gubernatorial election, and most likely, an incumbent landslide victory over Democratic candidate Terry Goddard.

I recently had the opportunity to discuss SB1070 and related issues with Matthew Jette, who ran against Brewer in the Republican primaries. Jette faced harsh opposition from his party members in multiple occasions when he tried to bring some sense and rationality into the undocumented workers’ rights discussion and eventually lost the primaries because he stood by what he knew was right.

Had it been implemented as it was originally drafted, the bill would have made not carrying immigration documents a criminal misdemeanor and would have given state police officials the power to detain people based only on suspicion of their immigrant status and provided them the right to demand proof of holding federal identification papers. My conversation with him presents an interesting look at what SB1070 is really about.

When I asked Jette about the overall state support for the bill (70 percent voter approval rate), he shared that “SB1070 is bad policy and the wrong mechanism in an effort to marginalize and blame a certain group of people for the depressed economy and housing market. […] The people ofArizona are frustrated with a lot of different issues ranging from health care, education, the economy, and housing. [Politicians] using this frustration as a driving force, have rationalized their actions with SB1070.”

 

In sum, undocumented workers are being used as a scapegoat for Arizona’s larger problems, but as Americas Quarterly’s own Christopher Sabatini recently blogged in a great piece on the evolution of immigration, “despite what the anti-immigrant nativists would have you believe, immigrants—even undocumented immigrants—pay more in taxes than they take out, providing a critical source of new revenue for those soon-to-be retiring baby boomers that threaten to bankrupt our social security system.”

Jette provides further insight on the subject: “Arizonaranks last or near last in many education measurements. Yet, this Governor and others routinely have decreased spending and perpetually under-minded education by investing public dollars into failing charter schools.Arizonaranks last in new job creation nationally and is one of the few states falling further behind in its recovery.” Unfairly, undocumented workers are being blamed for the shortcomings of others.

Now given the focus on racial and ethnic issues that the bill provoked, the majority of Americans failed to understand that besides providing an easy channel for harassment and detainment of Hispanics (documented and undocumented), SB1070 is in reality an attack on the civil liberties of all Americans visiting or residing in Arizona.

When you empower a law enforcement official to detain someone based on nothing more than his perception or suspicion that they might be an unauthorized immigrant, you are de facto throwing presumption of innocence out the window, one of the bastions of theU.S. legal system. Moreover, as Dr. Jette mentioned in our interview “regardless of the language, immigration is a federal issue. A state officer cannot ask for or charge anyone for not carrying federal papers. [Also,] holding individuals for an unspecified amount of time does infringe on one’s civil liberties.” If the citizens ofArizona were keen on these facts, I believe support for SB1070 would dramatically drop.

Fear mongering and ignorance about the effects of SB1070 are not the only things tainting this already controversial piece of legislation. KPHO, a CBS outfit, recently reported on what could be Jan Brewer’s real motivation for supporting the bill. Her Campaign Chairman and Policy Advisor have been linked to lobbying for the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), which, in turn, has been a campaign supporter for the incumbent governor. CCA is one of the frontrunners in privatizing prison systems.

Jette shares his views on why the CCA has backed Brewer and SB1070: “SB1070 is more about money and corruption than it is about race, security or wasted dollars.Arizonais the only state attempting to privatize their prisons and the CCA is the one entity that would benefit the most with the passing of SB1070. The Correction Corporation ofAmericamade a financial contribution to helping Governor Brewer pass Proposition 100 (the 1 cent sales tax increase) and the significance of that rests with the fact that the CCA is the only entity which would house immigration detainees as a result of SB1070.” As it turns out, Brewer (and her team) is in bed with those who stand to win the most out of an increase in arrests (justified or not) stemming from this piece of legislation.

For now the most controversial portions of SB1070 have been put on a leash by District Court Judge Susan Bolton via an injunction, but Brewer has made it very clear that if need be, she is ready to take her appeal through the court system all the way up to the Supreme Court. And when she does, hopefully theUS Justices will have the right minds to discard her plights.

*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.

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.