The Fourth Transformation Government may need a real opposition. It is essential for society that the forces in power have an interlocutor capable of offering answers, alternatives and also resistance to the possibility of excesses or errors. In politics, as in economics, monopolies hinder the possibility of improvement and correction.
Unfortunately, the opposition in Mexico is very far from being that interlocutor. The fault obviously lies with both parties. It takes two people to establish a conversation. Andrés Manuel López Obrador has transformed discursive polarization into a political resource to maintain the support of his popular base. He hypothesized that he needed it to overcome the system’s resistance to change and to ensure a second period for his 4Q. But if the president continued to behave like a candidate in the campaign, his political opponents, the commentocracy and the critical media did the same. Engaged in mutual disqualifications, the two poles have energized the possibility of a space to manage meetings and disagreements. Both based their strategy on delegitimizing their interlocutor, with the grave open.
In a sense, the first chapter is already history, because beyond the presence of heroes or villains, the fact is that 4T has obtained the majority of votes and, everything indicates, has a high possibility of maintaining it for the next eleven years. For this reason it is unproductive to continue betting on the imminent collapse of Morena because “now” the current scandal is the beginning of the fall, as they have been saying since the second month of López Obrador’s government. The elites and the opposition should assume that this situation is here to stay for a while and act accordingly. An opposition dedicated to energizing the public administration whatever it does, or to unsuccessfully reiterating arguments about the perversity of government, is of little use. He can spend eternity preaching to his converts, a third or less of the population, and continue to lose election after election to half or more of those who support Morena.
But this dialogue between the deaf is not good for either party. It makes the opposition irrelevant, transforms the ruling force into a partially ineffective monopoly.
However, this impasse may be changing as the fourth quarter has shifted its priorities. Unlike López Obrador, the president no longer has an urgent need to strengthen her political power, but rather her economic sustainability. Sheinbaum must build bridges to move the economy and generate essential jobs to lift people out of poverty. But to resist, a bridge needs pylons at both ends. So far it has been difficult to find the other bridgehead. And this can only come from the business community.
The attitude of private initiative towards Q4 was, obviously, not univocal or uniform. Overall, over the past six years, leading entrepreneurs have found ways to maintain their dynamism. Bankers, big businessmen and exporters would have little reason to complain, beyond ideological differences. But the same cannot be said of the rest of the business world, which has taken a rather cautious attitude. The uncertainty posed by the underlying alternation, López Obrador’s sharp style, combined with the pandemic, were factors that did not contribute to creating a climate favorable to private investments.
This distrust should generally decrease with Claudia Sheinbaum and based on her intention to establish a dialogue. Unfortunately, his first year coincided with the double impact of the constant tsunami caused by Donald Trump’s mercurial and belligerent style, combined with the nervousness left by the impact of López Obrador’s Plan C, particularly regarding judicial reform. The truth is that domestic private investment has been disappointing at the start of this six-year term.
However, it seems to me that there are signs that something could change. It is increasingly clear to economic elites that this political force will remain in place for several years and that, for the moment, there are no viable political channels or parties to build an alternative. They may not agree with their flags, but they observe that the Sheinbaum government attempts to achieve a responsible and orderly public administration, and invites them to come to the table to negotiate.
Some have seen the imminent arrival of José Medina Mora at the Business Coordination Council as a sign of hardening of the business sector towards the Government. As is known, this organization is the closest thing to an articulation of the voice of private initiative towards the rest of the country and in particular in its relationship with the public sector. In recent years it has been chaired successively by Carlos Salazar and Francisco Cervantes, both considered to be of a conciliatory and moderate nature towards the 4T. The arrival of Medina Mora, who at the helm of Coparmex was characterized by a more demanding attitude, is perceived as a change in the attitude of the business world.
Paradoxically it seems to me that this is a change that favors the possibility of constructive dialogue and concrete negotiations between two entities that know they need each other. Cervantes has operated more as a sort of ambassador, a buffer to overcome frictions and relationships between intellectual property and the public sector, but with very little space to push an ambitious agenda. What changes with Medina Mora is that his appointment has a lot to do with the desire to get involved on the part of the Mexican Business Council, the club of the 53 most powerful businessmen in the country (responsible for around 25% of the GDP). The intention to “get wet”, as the Spanish say, is the data to be saved. Cervantes was an intermediary to manage the distance, while Medina Mora was an intermediary to mediate the terms of a dialogue. As if the Private Initiative responded to Sheinbaum’s appeal: “if we are invited to participate in building the country that drives the 4Ts, let’s sit down and specify what country it is and under what conditions we can cross it”.
I don’t know if this business community will end up being the constructive opposition that the 4T government needs. There are many differences, of course, but there is also good room to agree on the need that exists today to address the premise “for the good of Mexico, the poor first.” It will not be easy, but political and economic elites should understand that they are obliged to coexist and that together they must face the demand for change from majorities that have long been left behind. The time has come.
