The biggest winners of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador’s landslide victory in Mexican elections have been Russia and Iran. While the ground may have been ripe for Lopez Obrador’s success thanks to the reactionism to Donald Trump’s rhetoric and widespread corruption, the philosophical roots of Lopez Obrador’s populism lie in Cuba. He has borrowed his slogan “Valiant Honesty” from Fidel Castro’s predecessor Eduardo Chibas. Will Mexico, which has not had a leftist government in 30 years, follow the same path as Cuba, and now, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Nicaragua? At the end of the day, the spread of leftist statism throughout the Spanish speaking world combines in itself the worst aspects of autocracy, unbridled corruption, economic ruin, political isolation, deterioration of human rights, and destruction of civil societies.
Worse than that, the countries who have at times have chosen to pursue that path have found themselves soon enough closely attached to some of the world’s worst actors, such as North Korea and Iran. Argentina, for a time, fast on the heels of Peronism, which has allowed in National Socialists from Germany, as well as an assortment of various criminals, soon found the Christina Kirchner government being bribed with offers of oil in exchange for cover-ups of terrorism. Corruption and instability were likewise a theme at this year’ss Summit of the Americas, with fraud being charged in Honduras’ election, the leader of Brazil having had to turn himself in to the authorities after a stand-off, and with Colombia soon voting in a new government with an eye towards a better economic future and away from the destabilization threatening Panama, Colombia, and Peru thanks to the flood of refugees from Venezuela. In this context of regional political upheaval, Lopez Obrador, who claims he does not wish to escalate the drug war that has been devastating the country, and which is at least in part to blame for the influx of illegal aliens and human trafficking from Central America through Mexico to the United States, is not an unexpected development.
Like his historic predecessors, Lopez Obrador correctly identified social problems, or at least those that appear to bother the population the most on an emotional level, and made concrete, on the surface reasonable, promises. He may even carry them out – for a while. But the unsustainable economic policies and the underlying political reactionism, will go far beyond cutting down on conspicuous government-led excesses. Indeed, leftist populism inevitably leads to the kind of corruption that has led to downfalls in those of the countries which have embraced in the past. Why, then, does it remain a popular solution?
First, it’s easy, and appealing. Cutting down on excesses sounds better than a long arduous process of assessing and reforming the system the way a reform-minded candidate would have presented the plan. Second, he is the anti-Establishment candidate who is promising a new approach that could save the second largest Latin American economy from what is perceived as exploitation by foreign oil interests, and from shocking levels of crime by cartels, which has been ongoing and has cost lives of over 130 candidates for office in this election, not to mention 29, 000 murders last y ear. Lopez Obrador is promising amnesty, extended even to the kingpins, and is being compared to Bernie Sanders, and Jeremy Corbyn, who are promising radical and immediate change, not more of the same in smaller quantities. Importantly, he is claiming that he has learned from the mistakes of others and will not allow violence to take root, despite all the changes. Still, economic protectionism and trade wars with the United States may ultimately punish the very people who claim not to have yet benefited from the economic boom brought to Mexico by private invvesters.
And holding a harder line against Trump and on NAFTA also means having to develop closer relationships with other countries – which are likely to be other populist regimes, all of which enjoy close relationships with rogue regimes that benefit from destabilization, poverty, and alienation of the United States. Jeremy Corbyn has made friends with Hezbullah and Hamas, and has engaged in apologetics over Russia’s involvement in poisoning attacks on UK’s territory. Bernie Sanders, a former US presidential candidate, called for normalization of ties with Iran, despite the fact that the Islamic Republic’s regime never took responsibility for the hostage taking of Americans, and for the funding of its proxies, including Hezbullah, with American blood on their hands. Foreign relations, other than response to Trump, have not played a central part in the Mexican elections, yet there have already been concerns about Russia’s interference in the election (which would make sense since Russia craves and supports chaos in any form) and the fact that Putin gave him an unexpected boost. Russia’s propaganda network, RT, has spent months praising Lopez Obrador on TV, an US intelligence agencies detected signs of sophisticated uses of cyberware, disinformation, and propaganda from Moscow in the run-up to the election.
Indeed, for a peek of Lopez Obrador’s own intentions, one needs not look any further than a mournful video of his regrets over Fidel Castro’s passing and an admiration of Cuba’s Revolution – despite all the misery it has brought to anyone but the regime apparatchiks. Aside from his own ideological proclivities, it is likely that in line with his campaign promises, Lopez Obrador will grow closer to various hegemons to reduce the interdepent trade issues with the United States, and to place Mexico in a tougher negotiating position vis-a-vis the ongoing NAFTA talks. Mexico, which has already been growing closer to China through a series of corrupt real estate deals and questionable development projects by the previous projects, is likely to continue on that trajectory, as China offers a lucrative market and favorable terms, and has exercised restrained and moderate rhetoric with regards to Mexico.
This wasn’t always the case. Until recently, China was seen as a competitor for US consumers. However, with the rise of mutually protectionist trade policies between the US and Mexico, China’s role has become significantly more beneficial to Mexico’s interests, as far as Lopez Obrador’s supporters are concerned. This period of growth has happened over only three years, with 40 deals to the tune of $4 billion, between 2014-2016. China is looking to diversify its investments, shifting away from the natural resources sector, towards service sector, such as IT, financial services, infrastructure and energy. Mexico, which is likely to impose protectionist policies towards its energy sector, is a perfect opportunity, with the minds aligned over the investment value of these developing sectors inside the country.
While US and Mexico relations are still particularly close, China has become Mexico’s third largest export partner. A major cyberattack, in which his electoral website was overwhelmed with traffic shortly before the election was blamed by Lopez Obrador’s opponent on Russia and China. Whether or not that was the case, however, the weakening of Mexico’s relations with the United States is at least as important to both countries, as the potentially benefits of growing trade or other relations with the country. The two countries are reportedly considering a free trade agreement. However, the relations between China and Mexico are likely to go far beyond purely pragmatic business considerations. For a couple of years now, the two states have been boosting defense ties. Simultaneously, Mexico is also buying some of the most powerful US-made weapons.
There is a question as to the usefulness of these advance submarines, which could be seen as reflecting the growing defense ties between US and Mexico, but are not particularly useful for fighting drug cartels (which are now going to be amnestied anyway). Could these powerful weapons become a threat to the US in the hands of Lopez Obrador or his ideological successors? One would hope not – the two countries are too close, and the one war that Mexico would not fish to fight is with its Northern neighbor. However, the more interesting question is what happens if Mexico grows particularly close with China or Russia overtime. Could these weapons be turned against the US in the long run? As we have already seen, China is more than willing to open doors for its other strategic partners. It has likely facilitated the entry of Iran into strategic markets in various African countries.
Iran will likewise utilize these shifting relationships to reshape the Mexican and Latin American landscape to serve its own hegemonic agenda. Iran has been increasing its military presence in Latin America, not counting the economic support to Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and others, for some time. Mexico, Ecuador, and Chile are some of the other countries on Iran’s radar. Iran’s naval strategy has consisted of building bases all over the world; developing ties with Latin American countries gives Iran access to strategic waterways and enhances its military strength. More importantly than merely projecting strength and occasionally harassing US and British ships, Iran’s navy is used in the Strait of Hormuz and Bab Al Mandeb to smuggle arms, supplies, and terrorists to and from Syria/Lebanon, and Yemen. It has thus strengthened Hezbullah and Houthis in the Middle East, and is looking to build up its militia presence in Latin America as well.
Despite US and Argentine commitment to fighting Hezbullah presence in Latin America, it’s not clear what has been accomplished thus far. There are entrenched and established Hezbullah communities in Paraguay, Argentina, and Brazil. Moreover, both Iran’s Quds force and Hezbullah share strategic goals in Mexico and South America, looking to recruit and train terrorists, spies, assorted agents of influence, and saboteurs which can present challenges to US security interests all over Latin America, as well as at the borders with Mexico. If Lopez Obrador shows the same level of sympathy towards doing business with Iran as Kirchner, Castro, Chavez-Maduro, and others regional leaders and regimes have shown, it will be easy for Mexico to facilitate an influx of of well disguised Iranian operatives to the United States as asylum seekers, migrants, or even as supposed victims of human trafficking.
Additionally, Hezbullah has succeeded in aligning with drug cartels to smuggle tons of cocaine into the United States under the Obama administration. Although such moneymaking and subversive schemes are likely to draw much greater scrutiny under the Trump administration, Lopez Obrador’s idea of amnestying cartel kingpins will likely facilitate, rather than impede these processes, which could be slowed down by aggressive, and preferably, joint action – but even in the best case scenario will not cease immediately. With a friendly or softer president, this unholy alliance is sure to take full advantage of the situation to enhance its operations.
Such developments will inevitably lead to increased tensions with Mexico – which is exactly what Iran needs. Destabilization of Latin America may not altogether please China, which prefers less risky ventures and investments, but it will not spend much capital for counterterrorism operation. Rather, if it cannot beat Iran’s encroaching influence, China is much more likely to join and take advantage of the opportunity to make deals and build sometimes disastrous infrastructural projects with whomever has the authority and the money to pay. Rather than withdrawing from the continent completely, should Iran’s destabilizing schemes come to fruition, China is much more likely to cut deal with its closest oil trade partner.
By the same token, Russia, which may have limited capabilities to contribute to development of any of these places, will likely, nevertheless benefit from the ensuing chaos to enter various defense agreements with weakened pro-Iran and anti-American countries, and help erect a hostile bulwark of impoverished, chaotic, cartel-and-terrorist ridden countries, suffering from migrant and refugees crises, and controlled by tinpot dictators who will be happy to do Russia’s and Iran’s bidding for a quick buck and protection from foreign and domestic coups. The Cold War is returning, but with additional dimensions of cyberwarfare, advanced weaponry, a potential for naval warfare, and the threesome of hegemons, who, having attracted the ire of the West in one way or the other, feel like they have nothing to lose and everything to gain from separating the United States from Mexico and other Latin American countries, weakening internal alliances, and creating perpetual dependencies on the approval and the backing of these hegemons. Will Lopez Obrador’s leftist populism withstand the same temptations his predecessors and compadres in South American countries have succumbed to with such ease and speed? It remains to be seen, but judging by his rhetoric, his policies, the support he enjoys, and his express admiration of Fidel Castro, who embodied everything Lopez Obrador’s critics fear, he is most likely to follow the same path – becoming just another tool in the hands of ambitious hegemons who will look to divide, conquer, and swallow up first Mexico, then the Americas, and then the entire world.
Artículos Relacionados: