Latin America Team Executive Summary

If it wasn’t for policies and buffers created by previous administrations, AMLO’s reign would be dragging Mexico’s economy to the ground. Mexico has seen a significant gap between expectations and performance in the economy. In fact, in 2019, the GDP was expected to grow by 2.5%. Meanwhile, there was a 0.3% decrease in GDP, followed by a disastrous global economy in 2020. AMLO has continued to mismanage the situation. During the pandemic, many countries chose to use funds to provide economic relief. However, AMLO used excess funds to provide the government with liquidity instead of funding pensions and infrastructure. The US devotes 13% of their GDP to fiscal stimulus, and for Brazil, this number is 12%. Many other developed or developing countries devote a significant portion of their GDP toward fiscal stimulus, but Mexico continues to intentionally lag behind. Mexico only dedicates 0.7% of their GDP toward fiscal stimulus, and AMLO defends this by falsely claiming that Mexico has not taken on more debt. Moreover, the future is not looking bright for Mexico. The Central Bank was expecting an increase in liquidity, but with the exchange rate at only 20 pesos per dollar, this hope is also gone. Mexico’s economy is soon running out of options, and there are currently no revitalization plans. 

Mexico’s lifeline rests on AMLO creating policies to increase trade and stimulus for the economy. While domestic demand for Mexico’s manufacturing is still low, global economic recovery has the potential to boost exports. After USMCA, there is specifically an increase in access with the US and Canada, and this provides an avenue for Mexican growth. Foreign demand for Mexican goods was the only reason that Mexico’s historic economic decline wasn’t even worse. AMLO has refused to enact bailouts or deficit spending, so the government must somehow boost manufacturing and exports. While countries like Brazil have committed 6.2% of their GDP to reviving their economy post-Covid, Mexico has only committed 1.3% of the GDP, highlighting AMLO’s philosophy. Increased export exposure is necessary as the US takes in almost 80% of Mexico’s manufacturing. For Mexico to recover, they must increase manufacturing investment and hope that US supply chains move away from Asia and toward North America. Moreover, if AMLO decides to strengthen state control of the electricity market, there could be potential consequences. For continued cheap prices necessary for exports, companies require an electricity market based on free competition.

Political Competition

To look at AMLO’s political competition, it’s important to first look at AMLO’s party affiliation. AMLO ran in 2018 under the National Regeneration Movement party (MORENA), a party that he founded. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume that he will not be facing significant competition within his own party. As of right now, AMLO’s biggest threat is arguably the coalition of his three strong opponent parties. The three major parties - the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), the National Action Party (PAN), and the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) -  are joining forces under the name Va por México (Go for Mexico). The main purpose of the coalition is to win the majority seat in the lower house in the 2021 legislative election. This coalition claims to have emerged as an effort to combat the threats to the current deomcratic system posed by AMLO. A few social causes this coalition claims to support are the defense of employment, support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and the eradication of violence against women. 

The coalition of the three parties play into AMLO’s narrative of lumping his opponents together as a corrupt elite. However, analysts have shown that the joint force will make it more difficult for AMLO to maintain majority seats in the lower house. The coalition is headed by former PRI president Alejandro Moreno Cárdenas, PAN governor Marko Antonio Cortés Mendoza, and PRD incombent Jesús Zambrano Grijalva. There does not appear to be one specific political figure that is the face of AMLO’s opposing force. Rather, the coalition seems to be a force that is trying to undermine AMLO’s power without clear plans at the moment of who will be at the receiving end of the political power in the future.

Propaganda and Persona

AMLO has condemned social media titans for censoring free speech around the world. In a January 2021 G-20 meeting, he proposed a global coalition of the world’s Democratic governments to stand up to Big Tech. He accused them of using the pandemic as an opportunity to shift wealth to billionaires and replace democracy with surveillance states. AMLO has also accused the Mexican news media of corruption and bias. He does address journalists and answers their questions for nearly two hours every weekday morning, which is something unique in the world and in Mexican presidency. During these sessions, Lopez Obrador often criticizes reporters and their outlets as “fifis,” which is slang for “posh.” He has also accused them of supporting the “power mafia,” or what he refers to as the previous admin’s corrupt government officials and business executives. However, VertificadoMX, a regional fact-checking initiative in Monterrey, concluded that about 50% of what he says in his YouTube appearances is false. Notimex, a daily service run by the staff of AMLO, launched its own fact-checking unit, Verificado Notimex. Animal Politico, one of the International Fact-Checking Network’s signatories in Mexico, found six false claims he made in Lopez Obrado’s speech celebrating his first year in power. The president allegedly twisted information about employment, gas prices, foreign investment, and more. Verificado Notimex, on the other hand, didn’t publish anything about the president’s speech. Notimex’s director is chosen by the president and ratified by the Congress. Although the initiative is a step in the right direction, it can’t exactly be unbiased and criticize the president due to its governmental ties. 

AMLO can be described as a populist, but not to the extreme likes of Trump, as many Western media sources like to say (source, source, source). In his initial win, AMLO presented himself as a representative for the poor. His platform was built on fighting corruption and poverty, which resonated deeply, and with great support, with many Mexicans. Lopez Obrador starkly differs from Mexico’s previous president, Enrique Pena Nieto, in how he presents himself. Peña Nieto publicly lived a lavish life, and his government was riddled with corruption, which contrasted the difficult life that most Mexicans lived as a result of growing economic inequality. AMLO, on the other hand, elucidated a sense of humility and simplicity. AMLO’s strategy of austeridad republicana, a strategy of cracking down on corruption, and not to spill over into outright economic austerity to save money, is likely a significant contributor to his popularity/support in Mexico. However, campaign promises do not necessarily translate to actual action. AMLO has failed to truly dismantle the corruption that he built his platform on, which is typical of electoral politics. 

Militarization

Mexico has had a longstanding history of using the armed forces as a substitute to the incumbent policing forces, starting with the policies of Felipe Calderon, and continuing to the regimes of Enrique Peña Nieto and Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. This egregious utilization of the military can be explained by two primary factors: the increase in homicide rates due to the War on Drugs, and the ineffectiveness of local and state police forces. The two factors combine to explain a story that details how the sizable influence of drug cartels and gangs make it highly difficult for the Mexican government to prevent illegal practices (i.e. drug trafficking and gang violence). Efforts to do so with ineffective police forces have only resulted in increased backlash from the criminal parties, hence the increase in homicide rates. And from the perspective of the federal government, a paltry police force could only be saved by the reckoning of the armed forces to complement them in preventing criminalization.

The longstanding rhetoric used by Mexico’s administrations all always purport to use the military as a temporary means of reinstituting order in a society filled with bitter chaos. However, most of these efforts almost always end with two negative outcomes: that homicide rates have effectively not been curbed, and that the temporary policy becomes rather more permanent. AMLO’s electoral success in 2018 rode on a platform derailing the policies of past administration--most vehemently those relating to corruption, but also those relating to the use of military forces in civil matters. The consequences for such an action is obvious: less civil liberties, more danger in the streets, and the infiltration of the lackluster reputation of the military as it relates to corruption and accountability (human rights alert). However, AMLO’s policies, like those of Jair Bolsonaro, have seemed to oppose the presupposed rhetoric. AMLO’s May 11th presidential decree in 2020 officially deployed the armed forces for civilian enforcement until 2024. In other words, a stay on the temporary nature of the militarization of armed forces.

Civil Liberties

AMLO took advantage of the “politics of resentment” to get elected using people’s resentment injustments imposed by an uncaring elite. Federal funds are shifted and redirected as if AMLO was the sole person in charge. The referendums that have taken place so far are a sham: they are based on less than 1 percent of registered voters, are predominantly in areas controlled by Morena, and are framed with questions embodying a flagrant bias toward the result López Obrador wants. He halted construction for an international airport in Mexico City when it was already 35% complete and had to pay bond holders 7 billion. He also halted construction of a multistate train route. HIs administration also approved of a new law that categorizes fiscal evasion and non-compliance as organized crime. He famously declared “to hell with institutions” and has repeatedly scorned and dismissed the press. 

Human rights violations—including torture, enforced disappearances, abuses against migrants, extrajudicial killings, and attacks on independent journalists and human rights defenders—have continued under AMLO. AMLO has increased deployment of armed forces. The government has not provided much support for people in the “Remain in Mexico” program. Only 1.3% of crimes reported are actually solved due to corruption, inadequate training and resources, and complicity of defenders with criminals and other abusive authorities. AMLO has increased the use of the military through the National Guard, they now have the power to detain civilians, take charge of crime scenes, and preserve evidence. Torture is still used and is not very thoroughly investigated. Enforced disappearances have been a consistent problem and many bodies have remained unidentified. There continues to be attacks on the press. 

Policy and the Pandemic

Mexico has had one of the weakest responses to the COVID-19 pandemic globally, ranking 13th in total caseload (2.18M) and 3rd in total deaths (196K). In fact, the Lowy Institute, an independent geopolitical think tank, rated Mexico as second-lowest out of 98 countries worldwide on an index that tracks six measurements related to COVID-19 containment and prevention--only one spot higher than the notoriously egregious Brazil. Like Brazil, Mexico’s populist regime under AMLO has been quite dismissive of the pandemic, with the figurehead himself flaunting all the recommended guidelines to curb disease spread. His focus has been that of ensuring ‘liberty of choice’ for the Mexican people, especially as it relates to freedom of movement. Quite ironic coming out of a leader whom we are studying for his denigration of civil liberties.

One of the most culpable factors behind the paltry response to the pandemic is the lack of testing that has been conducted within the country. Currently, there are only 0.11 tests conducted for every thousand people in Mexico, and tests in the country have a 25.4% positive rate--which essentially means that there are too few tests being conducted to give an accurate representation of the situation. The lack of information would thus hamper the implementation of effective policy guidelines to curb the spread of the disease, especially as it relates to geographical containment. This being said, Mexico has recently seen a huge downturn from its recent peak in caseload and deaths in January 2021, with good strides being made in the vaccination campaign relative to countries that are in its economic ranking.