FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Lopez Obrador, Mexico’s Would-Be Mandela, Stares into the Darkness

by JOHN ROSS

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador demands a speedy trial on contempt of court charges arising out of his purported defiance of orders not to build a road to a Mexico City hospital. To qualify as a candidate for the presidency of Mexico, AMLO, the current frontrunner who President Vicente Fox’s PAN and the once-ruling PRI seek to imprison and thus exclude from the race, must be free of all criminal charges by January 15th 2006, the final day for registering his candidacy.

The snag in this scenario is that Lopez Obrador’s foes control the legal timetable. The PRI-PAN-dominated congress can send its recommendation to indict to the attorney general’s office in an hour or a month. Similarly Attorney General Rafael Macedo de la Concha, a former military prosecutor and staunch Fox loyalist, can bring a request for an arrest warrant to a judge whenever he deems it tactically advantageous ­ i.e. when the case can be assigned to a judge who will do Fox’s bidding. That judge is not obligated to even issue the warrant but once he or she does, AMLO will be theoretically stripped of his political rights and observe the rest of the proceedings from behind prison bars. The PRI and the PAN eagerly await the photo op.

If eventually convicted, Lopez Obrador could be pardoned by a triumphant Fox to demonstrate his magnanimity ­ Los Pinos (the Mexican White House) insiders recently floated this trial balloon to the Washington Post. But despite the conciliatory gesture, rumors abound that Macedo de la Concha and prosecutor Carlos Javier Vega Memije are reviewing arrest warrants for Lopez Obrador incurred when he led Indian farmers against government oil drilling platforms in 1996 (see “My Life With AMLO ­ So Far” ­ part three.) In what passes for a justice system here, arrest warrants are sometimes held in abeyance for years and trotted out whenever leaders of popular movements become a threat to the party in power.

Interior secretary Creel also charges El Peje with criminally releasing confidential U.S. Treasury Department information in defense of a former Mexico City finance secretary caught red-handed by T-Men cameras at Las Vegas gaming tables. AMLO’s reign at City Hall has been punctuated by exquisitely orchestrated scandals since he was elected mayor on the same day in 2000 that Vicente Fox became Mexico’s first opposition president.

Both Fox’s PAN and the PRI stand convicted of big-time finance finagling in the 2000 “presidenciales.” The illicit triangulation of millions of dollars from mysterious donors outside of the country, the so-called “Amigo gate”, was matched by the PRI’s “PEMEXgate” in which the then-ruling party purloined $110 million USD from the state oil monopoly to finance its campaign. Although the PRI was fined a billion pesos for this pillage, both parties have since erased the scandals from their respective memory banks. A PRD bid to extend the desafuero to the PRI senator responsible for PEMEXgate transactions was rebuffed by the PRI and the PAN less than a week after the two parties ganged up on Lopez Obrador.

Although Washington considers El Peje a Mexican Hugo Chavez, on a sliding scale his danger to U.S. hegemony in the Americas is probably at Lula-level, a notch below the return of Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega. Nonetheless, Lopez Obrador remains a dangerous populist riding the pendulum swing of social democracy from the neo-liberal savageries the Washington Consensus has imposed upon Latin America and Mexican oligarchs were recently summoned to the digs of Romulo O’Farrell, an 88 year-old billionaire publisher historically close to the U.S. Embassy, where they were instructed that AMLO must be kept from the presidency at any cost.

Among El Peje’s crimes (other than trying to build an access road to a hospital): holding the banks responsible for swindling billions from the nation after the 1995 pesos collapse ­ a scandal known as FOBAPROA; calling for renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement; resolutely opposing the privatization of Mexican petroleum and electricity generation; and, as his campaign slogan promised, putting “the poor first.”

While the attitude of the U.S. ambassador Tony Garza, a Bush crony, has been more abstract than that of Charles Lane Wilson, the envoy who ordered Madero’s liquidation in 1911, the embassy cheerfully praised AMLO’s crucifixion. Both Garza and the Mexico City American Chamber of Commerce, which represents 80% of U.S. investment in Mexico, toasted the desafuero as proof of “a maturing Mexican democracy.”

In Rome, where he sought sanctuary from the boiling mobs in the Zocalo to bask in the fading aura of Karol Wojytla along with scores of other despots, scoundrels, and buffoons ranging from Tom Delay to Robert Mugabe, President Fox boasted that the congressional vote established “a new paradigm of legality” that would make Mexico the envy of the world (sic).

Character assassination has peppered U.S. coverage of the AMLO debacle. Long accustomed to being butchered in the PRI-run press here (in Tabasco, he was sometimes accused of killing his own brother), Lopez Obrador has now become a minor felon on front pages north of the border, i.d’d with Chavez and described as a “messianic leftist” who challenges free market reforms. An April 7th New York Times editorial labels AMLO “a demagogue”, and although the paper endorsed his right to run for office, its greenhorn Mexico correspondent James McKinley, mendaciously accused El Peje of cultivating a following through “hand-out politics” and of having “a history of leading violent demonstrations.”

The violence motif was echoed on the nation’s two-headed television monopoly. On the eve of the desafuero, Fox had summoned both the owners of Televisa and TV Azteca to Los Pinos and immediately thereafter a previously unknown “NGO”. “Mexicans for Peace”, began airing primetime spots accusing AMLO of fomenting riots that never materialized.

Should character assassination fail to shake Andres Manuel from the race, the rest of his body could well become a target. Political assassination of undesirable candidates is a tradition that predates the Mexican revolution.

For now, the PRI and the PAN are playing the “desgaste” card, hoping that AMLO’s followers will tire of protesting and go home as the case lapses into legal limbo, the classic Mexican “ni modo” (“there’s nothing we can do to change this”) that often dampens social ardor here. A major measure of this strategy will come April 24th when Lopez Obrador will lead a silent march from the anthropology museum in Chapultepec Park to the Zocalo, following the route and emulating the silence of student strikers in 1968 whose massacre became a watershed in the struggle for democracy in this beleaguered nation.

“We are no longer imaginary citizens and we are not going back” Lopez Obrador preaches to civil society and his “desafuero” has become a sort of sack in which, as the Mexican “dicho” instructs, the “pueblo” (the people) is depositing all its grievances, a formula that often produces violent social upheaval here. AMLO seems to sense this and urges non-violence, sometimes citing Mandela and Martin Luther King (going to jail can only enhance the resemblance), keeping a tight lid on demonstrations, and urging his supporters to be wary of “provocateurs”

But no amount of Aztec sun balloons and bright yellow bunting, bottled water and piped-in pop music is going to calm the bad gas that always seeps just under the surface of Mexico’s stoic calm. The tinder is always set here and provocateurs from both the left and the right are past masters are making the mix of class and race hatred down below explode, often for obscure political ends. AMLO is faced with the daunting challenge of trying to control and channel this anger into palpable political change with a minimum of bloodshed.

For the non-electoral left, severely disaffected by the PRD’s complicity in gutting an Indian rights bill for which the Zapatista rebels had long battled, defending AMLO is wrought with contradictions. “We neither support Lopez Obrador or the PRD”, Subcomandante Marcos recently wrote, “but the desafuero is a great injustice and signals a return to a dark past” and the Zapatista Army of National Liberation urged its supporters to join the struggle.

Nuri Fernandez, a veteran Mexico City activist, stood in the Zocalo April 7th with 330,000 defenders of AMLO but when she called upon protestors to combat the desafuero with massive non-violent civil disobedience, “the people around me looked at me like I was a provocateur.” Fernandez was infuriated by Lopez Obrador’s decision to face congress alone. “He cannot do this alone ­ this is not just his movement. It belongs to the people.” Long active in the anti-globalization movement, she complained that AMLO was behaving as if he didn’t want to upset the markets.

But the stock market here has been roiled by all this hullabaloo anyway, dropping 12% in a little less than a month until it recorded a big gain on Desafuero Day, a cogent reminder of the cynicism that rules at the top.

What has happened here worries even institutionalized historian Enrique Krauze who, during a recent late night television debate, reminded his peers that when democratic options are shut down, the revolution begins. Students went to arms after the Tlatelolco massacre left them no other option and the Zapatista rebellion detonated after the PRI repeatedly stole local and national elections. As Lopez Obrador never fails to recollect, Francisco Madero proclaimed the Mexican revolution from a prison cell.

On a Saturday morning two days after the desafuero, Nayeli, 20, stood on the steps of Lopez Obrador’s modest apartment house in middle class University City, her face broken apart in rage. “When they did this, the little justice left in this world died” she sobbed to reporters, “we will never forgive them for it.”

It is on such no-longer imaginary citizens as Nayeli that the future of Mexico now rests.

JOHN ROSS will be in San Pedro California on May 15th where he was once imprisoned for refusing to participate in the Vietnam War, to receive an ACLU Upton Sinclair (“Uppie”) Award along with Dennis Kucinich. He will then wing off to the UK, Spain, and the Middle East (Istanbul for the concluding session of the Iraq War Crimes Tribunal) on a combined reporting and lecture tour. Contributions to ease travel costs can be sent in Ross’s name to 3258 23rd Street, Apartment 3, San Francisco Ca. 94110.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JOHN ROSS’s El Monstruo – Dread & Redemption in Mexico City is now available at your local independent bookseller. Ross is plotting a monster book tour in 2010 – readers should direct possible venues to johnross@igc.org

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
February 24, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Exxon’s End Game Theory
Pierre M. Sprey - Franklin “Chuck” Spinney
Sleepwalking Into a Nuclear Arms Race with Russia
Paul Street
Liberal Hypocrisy, “Late-Shaming,” and Russia-Blaming in the Age of Trump
Ajamu Baraka
Malcolm X and Human Rights in the Time of Trumpism: Transcending the Master’s Tools
John Laforge
Did Obama Pave the Way for More Torture?
Mike Whitney
McMaster Takes Charge: Trump Relinquishes Control of Foreign Policy 
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Decline of US and UK Power
Louisa Willcox
The Endangered Species Act: a Critical Safety Net Now Threatened by Congress and Trump
Vijay Prashad
A Foreign Policy of Cruel Populism
John Chuckman
Israel’s Terrible Problem: Two States or One?
Matthew Stevenson
The Parallax View of Donald Trump
Norman Pollack
Drumbeat of Fascism: Find, Arrest, Deport
Stan Cox
Can the Climate Survive Electoral Democracy? Maybe. Can It Survive Capitalism? No.
Ramzy Baroud
The Trump-Netanyahu Circus: Now, No One Can Save Israel from Itself
Edward Hunt
The United States of Permanent War
David Morgan
Trump and the Left: a Case of Mass Hysteria?
Pete Dolack
The Bait and Switch of Public-Private Partnerships
Mike Miller
What Kind of Movement Moment Are We In? 
Elliot Sperber
Why Resistance is Insufficient
Brian Cloughley
What are You Going to Do About Afghanistan, President Trump?
Binoy Kampmark
Warring in the Oncology Ward
Yves Engler
Remembering the Coup in Ghana
Jeremy Brecher
“Climate Kids” v. Trump: Trial of the Century Pits Trump Climate Denialism Against Right to a Climate System Capable of Sustaining Human Life”
Jonathan Taylor
Hate Trump? You Should Have Voted for Ron Paul
Franklin Lamb
Another Small Step for Syrian Refugee Children in Beirut’s “Aleppo Park”
Ron Jacobs
The Realist: Irreverence Was Their Only Sacred Cow
Andre Vltchek
Lock up England in Jail or an Insane Asylum!
Rev. William Alberts
Grandiose Marketing of Spirituality
Paul DeRienzo
Three Years Since the Kitty Litter Disaster at Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Eric Sommer
Organize Workers Immigrant Defense Committees!
Steve Cooper
A Progressive Agenda
David Swanson
100 Years of Using War to Try to End All War
Andrew Stewart
The 4CHAN Presidency: A Media Critique of the Alt-Right
Edward Leer
Tripping USA: The Chair
Randy Shields
Tom Regan: The Life of the Animal Rights Party
Nyla Ali Khan
One Certain Effect of Instability in Kashmir is the Erosion of Freedom of Expression and Regional Integration
Rob Hager
The Only Fake News That Probably Threw the Election to Trump was not Russian 
Mike Garrity
Why Should We Pay Billionaires to Destroy Our Public Lands? 
Mark Dickman
The Prophet: Deutscher’s Trotsky
Christopher Brauchli
The Politics of the Toilet Police
Ezra Kronfeld
Joe Manchin: a Senate Republicrat to Dispute and Challenge
Clancy Sigal
The Nazis Called It a “Rafle”
Louis Proyect
Socialism Betrayed? Inside the Ukrainian Holodomor
Charles R. Larson
Review: Timothy B. Tyson’s “The Blood of Emmett Till”
David Yearsley
Founding Father of American Song
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail