Replies

St. J -- posted my previous response before I read your analysis. I agree with most of it. Calderón does have a legitimacy problem. So does Ulises Ramerez, though his is a chronic problem going back two years -- and Ulises' problem was made worse by the federal election, the annual teachers' strike AND Esther Elba Gordilla's attempt to form a party of her own (for those unfamiliar with her, Gordilla is the boss of the Teachers' Union, that the Oacaca teachers want out. She was part of the PRI central committee, but was expelled for being too close to the conservative PAN movement. She started her own political party, basically as a pressure group -- and to drain off support for her old party. She's sort of an unknown in all this... trying to force the Oaxaca teachers into line, and keep control of her own machine in Oaxaca).

With only 33 percent of the vote in the last election (assuming the votes were properly counted) Calderón has no choice but to make concessions to the other 66% that voted for one or another "leftist" party. You're already seeing PRI-PAN coalitions forming in the Senate and Chamber of Deputies (PRD used to claim that the two were one party under the skin -- "PRIAN" -- and it looks like they're sort of correct).

The Naval "exercizes" (these involve the Mexican marines transporting paramilitary police, according to some papers), it looks as if the Feds are ratcheting up the pressure for a solution NOW, rather than after the inaguaration.

I don't think this has anything to do with immigration -- not directly -- though.

My comments on immigration have to do with the long-term necessity of structural change coming to Mexico in order to create enhanced economic opportunities for the Mexican people. Calderon's reform program offered hope in that regard, but the current political climate makes reform impossible. Therefore, we will not be seeing any meaningful progress on immigration from the Mexican end because Calderon is using the issue as a rallying point to help him build consensus behind his presidency.

I think it may be somewhat unfair to discuss the legitimacy problems of Calderon and Ruiz in the same sentence. Ulises Ruiz represents the very worst of the old PRI regime; steal the election, rob the treasury when you get into office, and to hades with the rest. Felipe Calderon won an election that was examined with a fine toothed comb on the other hand. His problem is facing down a left that wants to destroy the process itself.

On the issue of the "mixed nature" of governing institutions within Mexico, you are correct to raise it as suggesting that there may be some precedent for the ultimate goals of the protestors in Oaxaca in so far as they may be appealing to a tradition of local autonomy whose roots go very deep. But there is no precedent for the legal negation of constitutional government, the goal which the teacher's union and APPO are pursuing here. That is something different.

And I think that APPO and the SNTE in Oaxaca have gone so far that Elba Esther Gordillo and Nueva Alianza are no longer even remotely in the picture. Yes; she had something to do with the start of the conflict and she correctly tagged Ulises Ruiz as part of Robert Madrazo's "political cartel" (my term), which set her against them. The PRD is controlling the show now and their national directors will be in Oaxaca this Wednesday to govern a large meeting between their party, APPO, and the SNTE. It's the PRD that matters now. And unless they try to urge a settlement in line with what Segob is offering, I think the rest of us will only be able to conclude that the "ingovernability" of the country is their goal. I think the PRD wants to set a precedent for undermining constitutional order in Oaxaca which they can later carry to the national level. And I also think the federal government's perception of this strategy is the underlying motivation for the forceful response they now seem to be preparing as an alternative.