MEXICO CITY, April 11 (UPI) -- It is not only in Mexico that the head of state must ask Congress for permission to leave the country. In Argentina, Israel, Peru and Portugal, for example, it is also necessary. But a presidential trip planned for the following week would only be blocked in extraordinary circumstances, wouldn't it?
And that must be what has just happened in Mexico. A presidential trip of thee days to the United States and Canada scheduled for April 15 to April 18 was blocked Tuesday by a vote in the Mexican Senate. President Vicente Fox's meetings with businessmen and politicians in the two countries, which with Mexico, form the North American Free Trade Area, have had to be cancelled at the last moment.
Fox expressed some apologies in an interview with a journalist from the Canadian newspaper, the National Post. "Mexico is absolutely reliable," Fox said, even though the country might not appear it, it is "a successful, reliable and accountable partner," Fox insisted.
So what then were the extraordinary circumstances? Was there a terrorist attack on Mexico City, a vote of no confidence in the government, a Bhopal-like catastrophe at some Mexican plant?
No, happily, none of these dramatic and mostly awful events occurred.
So what happened?
What happened was that all twenty-four members in the Senate of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional, the party that ran Mexico for seven decades until Fox's election victory in July 2000, voted, together with other opposition Senators, to block Fox's planned trip next week, for a variety of reasons.
Let us mention some of them.
Enrique Jackson, the PRI's coordinator in the Senate said, "What has Fox brought back from the sixteen other trips that we have allowed him? Where are the thousand of millions of dollars that he was supposed to bring back?"
Well, indeed, it is true that Fox is a much-traveled president and that traveling on the part of any national leader is often considered a rather dubious activity, a way to hob-bob internationally, get away from problems at home, and squander public money. But Fox's tight, three-day, two country, four town agenda for next week did not leave too much time for relaxation.
Moreover there were some good reasons for the trip. Energy reform is one of Fox's priorities. Mexico needs foreign investment in its energy sector. Fox was meeting energy investors in Calgary, Canada and 500-600 Canadian businessmen in Vancouver. He was also going to have meetings in Seattle and San Francisco in the United States. All in the space of three days.
Another complaint: some Senators said that they blocked Fox's visit because the president has not defended successfully the rights of illegal Mexican workers in the United States. There is some disappointment in Mexico at the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court decided March 27 that an undocumented worker dismissed illegally by his employer has no right to compensation.
But what is Fox's record on defending the interests of the millions of (mostly illegal) Mexican workers in the United States? It is extremely good, one of the great successes of his term so far.
Fox's trips to the United States have made President Bush and the U.S. Congress more ready to tolerate illegal Mexican immigrants and defend their interests. The extortionate fees that U.S. banks often charged for remitting money to Mexico have been educed as a result of Fox's pressure. The president's record on this issue could hardly compare more favorably with that of the PRI, which took little or no interest in Mexicans abroad and often hassled them on their return. And if the U.S. Supreme Court has just taken a decision that was against the interests of illegal Mexican workers, what better time for Fox to go to the United States to re-assert their interests?
Our hunt for the extraordinary circumstances that blocked Fox's trip is not going well. Perhaps we must look at recent history and at an individual.
First, some recent history. In 1999 President Ernesto Zedillo, whose relationship with the (PRI-dominated) Congress was never good, was planning a brief trip to the United States, which he learned the Congress would block. Rather than be penned in by the Congress, he cancelled the planned trip. But a precedent was set. Mexico's congressmen discovered a party trick that could be played at some future occasion.
And then there is a person: the very unpopular person that the PRI and Partido de la Revolucion Democrática, the left-wing opposition party, is always keen to go after. It is not Fox himself, but his foreign minister, Jorge Castañeda.
Two weeks ago Inside Mexico recounted the attack on Castañeda by Cuban President Fidel Castro. Castro alleged that Castañeda had conspired to encourage Castro's early departure from the United Nations summit in Monterrey.
True or false? It is hard to know. But what is notable for us now is that Mexico's traditional friendship with Cuba and the fact that Castañeda is said to be arrogant and dismissive of the Congress made him in Mexico a very popular target for Castro's ire. And Cuba was mentioned again Wednesday, when President Fox said that "they [the Senate] want to align us with Cuba rather than with Canada and the United States."
Fox is right, at least to some degree. Part of the reason for blocking his trip is that there is still a left-wing and nationalistic element in Mexico, strong in both the PRI and the PRD, that resents the United States, capitalism, foreign investment and the modernizing forces Fox represents. Yet probably more important than that in the decision to frustrate Fox this week was the Senate's simple dislike of Castañeda.
Castañeda, some Senators complain, has never appeared before the Senate, despite requests that he should do so. Castañeda is said also to have sought a legal change, which would remove the Senate's ability to block a presidential trip. He was seeking, then, to reduce the Senate's powers. But many think -- and not only among the opposition -- that Castañeda should be replaced by Fox by someone with an easier personality.
Fox, however, has so far not changed his cabinet at all in more than a year in office. His team management may need to become more active.
There is yet another side to the whole issue: the role of the Congress in the Mexico's new, more democratic guise. Before Zedillo the Mexican Congress was normally kept firmly in its place by the executive. Zedillo began to change that, just as he began to make elections fair for the first time by creating an independent electoral body. But the result is that the Congress is now feeling its way, uncertain of its true role. That, at least, can be given as an excuse for its behavior, though there must also be question marks about the quality of Mexico's elected officials.
What do Mexicans make of the Senate's decision? A telephone poll reported by Reforma, a Mexico City newspaper, found that 60 percent of those consulted thought the Senate decision harmful while 28 percent thought it good. Sixty-three percent thought the decision would harm Mexico a lot or to some extent. So the Senate was condemned, though far from overwhelmingly. Before long, its bizarre decision will be forgotten by most Mexicans.
But outside Mexico the decision may say a lot. In the United States and Canada businessmen are going to have a better appreciation of the difficulties the Mexican government faces, and of the difficulties of operating in Mexico. Perhaps some businessmen who were thinking of investing will not do so, or will commit less money than they might have done.
Mexico is learning to be democratic: that is the problem, or at least part of it. The country's elected officials are still at school. And Tuesday the Senators, led by the PRI, said ya, boo, Fox, you can't go on your trip! They were pictured laughing at the decision. Funny! Isn't it?
Not for Mexico.
(Inside Mexico is a weekly column in which our international economics correspondent reflects on the country in which he lives. Comments to [email protected])
