At first, Mexico's recent presidential election looked unpromising: the PRI, the country's long-dominant party, crept back into office, but with only 38 percent of the vote and no majority in Congress. Yet the campaign revealed just how much Mexicans actually agree on, and the new government is likely to pass long-overdue reforms.
HÉCTOR AGUILAR CAMÍN is Publisher and Editor of Nexos and the author of the novel La guerra de Galio (Galio’s war). JORGE G. CASTAÑEDA was Mexico’s Foreign Minister in 2000–2003. He is Global Distinguished Professor of Politics and Latin American and Caribbean Studies at New York University and the author of Mañana Forever? Mexico and the Mexicans.
Jorge G. Castañeda, former foreign minister of Mexico, and Shannon K. O'Neil, CFR senior fellow, discuss Mexico's President-elect Enrique Peña Nieto and the future of U.S.-Mexico relations.
It's my party: Enrique Peña Nieto, shortly before his election, campaigning in Toluca, June 27, 2012 (Edgard Garrido / Courtesy Reuters)
Mexico has long been hostage to unchallengeable traditions: its nationalist approach to oil wealth, overly sensitive attitude toward sovereignty, entrenched labor monopolies, persistent corruption, and self-serving bureaucracy. Acquired over time, these attitudes and practices became cemented in the national soul and embedded in the habits of the government and society, sapping the country's potential.
The good news is that all of this is rapidly changing, as Mexico leaves behind its hefty psychological baggage. Yes, the last 15 years, a time of too little economic growth and too few reforms, have been frustrating, especially for those who expected the transition to democracy to solve everything. But these years have unveiled a new national consensus: a broad agreement on values that, despite seeming normal for any other modern democracy, did not figure clearly in the Mexican public consciousness until very recently.
The vast majority of Mexicans now agree that the only way politicians should get and keep power is through the ballot box and that the clamor for greater accountability and less corruption is legitimate. They believe that protecting human rights, adhering to the rule of law, and ending the culture of impunity are nonnegotiable goals. They demand due process rights and greater security, and they think poverty and social inequality must be reduced, along with the influence of Mexico's powerful monopolies and oligopolies. Yet they also reject any macroeconomic policy associated with large public deficits and consider the advantages of globalization, free trade, and economic integration with the rest of North America greater than the drawbacks.
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Mexico is winning its death match against the drug cartels and rebuilding once-corrupt institutions in the process. But an election is approaching, and the candidates are calling for a truce. Mexico can take its place in the sun, but only if it wipes out the cartels for good.
FOR some thirty years Mexico was at peace with herself and the world. Her people were law-abiding and respectful of all authority. Her national finance was sound and her credit good. Foreigners and foreign capital were welcomed and accorded generous protection. Large enterprises received governmental encouragement, and business prospered. Church and state coöperated in the maintenance of law and order.
Recent and forthcoming elections in key Latin American countries come at a time when US relations with many states in the region are particularly uncertain. Discusses six areas which should be addressed by policy-makers (1) the debt crisis (2) the need for co-operation between the USA, Europe, Canada and Latin American countries in ending Central America's wars (3) support of democratic institutions (4) the drug problem (5) the need to rebuild inter-American institutions (6) relations with Mexico and Panama. Concludes that too much attention has been devoted to Nicaragua at the expense of greater concerns, although straightforward solutions are unlikely. Former US ambassador to the Organization of American States, and co-negotiator of the Panama Canal treaties. A substantial criticism of Reagan's policy in Central and South America, and interesting for its view of both regions as one.
