Cuauhtemoc Cardenas

You could call it the triumph of persistence. Cuauhtemoc Cardenas tried and tried and finally won Mexico’s second-biggest political prize.

On Dec. 5, Cardenas will be sworn in as the first elected governor of Mexico City. He will be ideally placed to return, in the 2000 election, to the presidential residence where he was born.

After losing the last two presidential races--many believe he may have been defeated in 1988 through fraud--Cardenas had been written off, by friends and foes alike, as a political force. But in defeating the formerly invincible PRI in Mexico City, he is once again a figure on the national political stage.

And that’s not all. His campaign for the governorship of Mexico City injected new life into his Party of the Democratic Revolution. The PRD had been widely viewed as so weak that experts had declared it dead after its poor showing in the 1994 elections.

Cardenas remains an enigmatic figure in Mexico. The son of President Lazaro Cardenas, the most revered Mexican president of this century, he was raised in the corridors of power, but his real political profile has yet to emerge. To some, he can sound dull--his charisma, writes political observer Carlos Monsivais, is having no charisma. Then, a spark is lit, and he speaks like a seasoned politician who understands and can explain the intricacies of his profession in a highly complex country. There are other times when he sounds like an avenging leftist angel, holding a flaming sword.

The truth is, perhaps, he is all these things. When he speaks, you can feel the tensions that Mexico feels: the conflict between a Mexico that belongs to the Third World and a Mexico that is geared toward a modern market economy.

Cardenas began his political career as a member of the ruling Party of the Institutionalized Revolution (PRI), serving in the Cabinet, then as governor of the state of Michoacan in 1980-86. But he and a cadre of associates created the “corriente democratica” within the party; among other things, they demanded democratization of the candidate-selection process. When their call went unheard, he resigned from the PRI in 1987.

The leftist temptation began in his youth. When he was 20, he was president of the University Students Committee in Defense of Guatemala, which was formed after the 1954 CIA-sponsored coup in that country. He was also a founding member of the Movimiento de Liberacion Nacional, which his father created in 1961, to support leftist nationalistic movements in Latin America.

Married for 34 years, Cardenas, 63, has three children. And while he now seems to be next in line for Mexico’s presidency, there is much that can block him. Things could go awry in Mexico City, or the PRI or another political party could field a formidable candidate, or Cardenas himself might be considered too old for the job in 2000. For now, he has become the favorite of Mexico’s youth--82% of voters between the ages of 18 and 29 cast their ballots for Cardenas.

*

Question: Many people are wondering why you have been smiling so much, considering the tasks you’re facing. For instance, unemployment in Mexico City is high and the people expect you to do something about it. Is it a function of the governor of Mexico City to create jobs?

Answer: . . . I don’t believe there are more problems in Mexico City than there are in any other big city in the world. Nor do I believe they are problems without a solution, and I don’t think it is ungovernable as some have suggested.

. . . The governor should do everything he can to help create jobs. But the government has only limited economic tools. The city has a considerable budget for public works and it can also manage some fiscal issues to our advantage.

We’ll use all the tools available. Public works may help create jobs, but we should not create false expectations, because that does not create permanent jobs. A few weeks’ job may slightly help one who has it, but that is nothing more than a temporary solution to a long-term problem. But a government elected by the votes of more than 1.5 million people does have the authority to rally the productive groups in the city and invite them to take advantage of the widespread business potential of this big city. Mexico City has an enormous tourist potential. This city is the largest consumer market in the nation. The city generates one-fourth of the country’s GDP. This city is the largest center in the republic for financial transactions. There are so many investment opportunities that could lead to a remarkable recovery of the economy and thus to job creation.

In the five months between now and the inauguration on Dec. 5, we’ll be able to convene and work with the business people to fine-tune the economic program we proposed during the campaign.

*

Q: Working with the private sector?

A: Absolutely. Furthermore, the truly substantial part of the investment to reactivate the economy of the city must come from the private sector.

*

Q: Talking about other problems of the city, could you tell us how you are planning to improve public safety?

A: We’ll take action at two levels. First, we’ll stage a frontal attack against organized crime, which now is responsible for more than three-quarters of the crime committed in the city. Also, we’ll clean up and moralize the different police forces and the judiciary system to make them more efficient.

We will seek the cooperation of society to support the police. We are working on a plan called “barrio policing” and on a Citizen’s Safety Committee that will coordinate with cops who patrol their barrios on how to take care of their safety needs.

*

Q: You play two different roles. You are the new Mexico City governor, but you are also the moral leader of your party, the PRD. Is your party against the market economy?

A: No, no. That is a misconception that should be clarified. The PRD’s economic policy is to add a social agenda to our economic policy. The goals of our economic policy should crystallize in a society as reflected in employment, better salaries, a better distribution of income, in better education and health services, in an improved quality of life, balancing our productive activities with a clean environment. We want to reactivate the economy in a balanced way. We will nurse with special care our export industries, but we should also assist industries that supply products for the domestic market and the agricultural sector. Our economic development should be more balanced, both in its productive end and in its regional development. We also believe that, in the handling of the economy, the interest of the Mexican people should take precedence.

These are really the big differences we have with the economic policies of the current administration. But this cannot lead anyone to believe we want to change our Constitution. We won’t try to limit the participation of the private sector or fail to recognize the positive role the market plays in increasing production, productivity, creating employment and propitiating a healthy competitive atmosphere. But, on the other hand, we cannot be unaware of the need of the state to ensure the competitive environment is fair and does not exclude people, regions and sectors.

*

Q: Does that mean you want to increase state intervention in economic issues?

A: No. The state will simply intervene when it needs to in order to create conditions of fairness in a competitive situation. And, evidently, the state has to intervene to assist those who lag behind. The state cannot be insensitive and simply watch those who have fallen behind, have no jobs, live in misery and have fallen prey to the inefficiencies of the education system. The state won’t act as an entrepreneur but it should pay close attention to those scientific and technological developments that can help the nation in its productive efforts.

*

Q: Many people fear you’ll bring back the statist policies of the past.

A: For me and for my party, to privatize or nationalize property is not an ideological issue. Both privatization and nationalization are nothing but tools of the economic system in some very specific circumstances. If the goal of the privatization process that took place during the past administration was to enrich the public officials who put them up for sale, then we disagree with the goal. We are against the corrupted way in which the privatization took place. We do not oppose turning an industry from the public to the private sector.

*

Q: Is your party planning to nationalize any industries?

A: No. Neither I nor my party have any plans to expropriate property.

*

Q: Some time ago you opposed NAFTA--

A: No. We opposed the NAFTA that was signed in 1994, not the idea of a NAFTA. We opposed it because we felt, in 1994, that this agreement did not deal with some vital questions for Mexico. Instead of being a mere trade agreement, it should have been negotiated as an agreement for development similar to the European agreement, which set compensatory funds for the less-developed countries.

*

Q: I don’t believe that was an option, but what would you do with the NAFTA that does exist?

A: We should review those areas where the NAFTA does not work now. For example, regarding the prohibition for Mexican vehicles to transport merchandise in the United States or the problem with the Mexican tomato.

*

Q: Does your party support keeping NAFTA in place?

A: Yes, but modifying it where necessary. Before it was signed in ‘94, parallel environmental agreements were added. Now we need to add some additional agreements on a social agenda.

*

Q: What does that mean?

A: The NAFTA should mean an improvement in labor conditions, better wages, training programs for workers. And thinking beyond the NAFTA, I don’t believe we should continue ignoring the issue of migration. This is an issue that should be a top priority in the bilateral agenda between Mexico and the United States. I realize we won’t solve the issue immediately, but we should start taking some serious positive steps to solve it.

*

Q: But immigration is already a topic in the bilateral agenda. What do you mean?

A: First, we have to establish a strategy for economic development in Mexico that can effectively reduce the migration flows. Then we have to protect the rights of Mexicans who live in the United States, regardless of their migratory condition, because these are people who work there and contribute to the prosperity of the United States.

*

Q: But do you want this in NAFTA?

A: No, but the NAFTA is part and parcel of the relationship between both countries, and it does affect Mexico. Now, migration is not included in the NAFTA, but it could be. It is up to both governments to decide if, technically, this agreement on immigration is inscribed within NAFTA or not. Regarding immigration, however, I want to set the framework for serious talks in this issue, whether it is within or without NAFTA. The framework should state what the initial steps should be and a timetable.

*

Q: Your party has announced its intention to review some of the privatization of industries sold by the last administration. Will you do that?

A: Yes. The party has sued the government in the case of the privatization of the telephone company, because the way it was done did great damage to the national patrimony. We do not object to its being privatized. We reject the way it was done because we found ample proof of corruption in the deal. Unfortunately, our suit has not gone anywhere.

*

Q: Will you then go after other privatized companies?

A: Only in those cases where we find evidence of corruption. We are not opposed to the privatization process.

*

Q: I know the history between you and Carlos Salinas, but wouldn’t you concede he was right in inserting Mexico in the globalization process?

A: The country was getting itself into the globalization process with or without Salinas. The problem was that in the way Salinas did it, Mexico came into the globalization process as a subservient country. Our access was not fair, because there was no reciprocity or advantage for the country.

*

Q: So Salinas did not bring Mexico and the United States together?

A: Maybe he did bring the two countries together, by agreeing to everything the U.S. wanted. That is an easy way to improve relationships. In the six years of his term, he never gave a “no” or even a “maybe” to anything they asked for.

*

Q: OK, so you don’t like Salinas. Do you like President Ernesto Zedillo?

A: Well, in the first place, he backs the same economic policies past administrations have pushed for. However, we have to recognize his attitude vis-a-vis the elections allowed for free and fair voting on July 6. Unfortunately, that was not the case across the country. Many regional governments tried to buy or influence the vote in their regions. And Zedillo still holds the notion that there is a state party. I don’t believe he is really trying to separate the party from the government.

*

Q: So you don’t believe real democracy has finally arrived in Mexico?

A: No. We still have to improve our political processes and practices to make it even across the land. In Veracruz, Tabasco, Puebla, Oaxaca, the PRI still keeps the old habits.