What Mexico Needs Now Is Conciliation

The change in Mexico is irreversible. This is the claim heard throughout the country, even though not all matters concerning the presidential election have been settled yet. Nor have all Mexicans accepted the Federal Election Commission’s declaration that Carlos Salinas de Gortari was the winner of the voting on July 6.

I, for one, having witnessed this historical moment from within, believe that much has changed in Mexico. The people of Mexico are different than before. I was impressed by their desire for change and by the absence of fear to speak their minds. The future of the country looks brighter because this election was indeed a triumph for the people who wanted change.

The change has come in two fashions, illustrated in the following two cases.

One dramatic example happened on election day when Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, Manuel Clouthier and Rosario Ibarra, the three opposition candidates, stormed the office of Interior Minister Manuel Bartlett Diaz, followed by a crowd chanting “Democracy! Democracy!” and demanding that the electoral authorities assume their independence from the official party.

The other example, no less dramatic, came two days later when a group of foreign correspondents met with Salinas and he said that “whoever does not understand the new reality of the country will be dragged down by it.” He had been asked if his own party would accept losses in Congress.

The most amazing aspect of the elections was the absence of violence, both during and after the vote despite the severity of the crisis affecting the country. No one believes that the country’s future can be decided by violence.

Remarkable, within this context, has been the restrained role of the Mexican Army. Where in the Third World would you find an army that remains in the barracks while the country has one constitutional president and two others who are self-proclaimed presidents-elect, as was the case in Mexico?

On the other hand, given the riddle that Mexico is living nowadays, what could be the possible outcome of this crisis? I can think of two possible scenarios:

--The government decides that force should be used to discipline the people into accepting the verdict of the Election Commission. Frankly, I doubt that will happen. The vitality shown by the people in fighting for change would make it impossible to resort to force.

--The process continues its legal course, exhausting every avenue of recourse. When the new Electoral College is formed next month, it confirms the new Congress, it certifies Salinas’ victory and the dis-pute fades away with time. From my perspective, this option is not viable, either.

Cardenas triumphed in the political and geographic center of a centralist republic. With 47.4% of the vote in Mexico City, plus a clear majority in the states of Morelos, Mexico and Michoacan, Cardenas has become a force that must be reckoned with. Unless some sort of political agreement can be reached, Salinas’ mandate will be difficult.

There must be some sort of open arrangement for power-sharing. Not only in the Chamber of Deputies, where only half of the members will be from the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party), but also in the ever-obedient Senate, which has now become open to the opposition with the addition of people who know the intricacies of the system--like former PRI president Porfirio Munoz Ledo.

Perhaps more important, Salinas will have to talk to Cardenas and Clouthier--but especially Cardenas--about how they can work together to proceed toward the future. These dialogues must not be held in a closed atmosphere. No one wants a “deal.”

What is needed is conciliation, and what is at stake is the respect of the people. Unless a consensus is reached among these three vital political forces in Mexico, moving forward will be impossible.