In late March, Argentina’s Congress approved President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner’s proposal to change the date of the country’s congressional elections from October 25 to June 28. The president has stated that moving up the date will allow Argentines to avoid the unnecessary obstacles, political drama, and partisanship that normally accompany elections and instead focus more immediately on the economic crisis at hand. The opposition claims otherwise. More specifically, they have identified this move as a thinly veiled attempt to consolidate power before the economic distress and general discontent now gripping the country cause the bottom to fall out of the Kirchner regime.
Regardless of her true motives, the final outcome of the president’s actions could have far-reaching consequences. Congressional candidates will lose four months of valuable campaign time as a result of the ruling, which will decrease the chances of a significant opposition victory. This comes at a time when opposition to the president has been steadily mounting. Recent polls reveal that less than 30% of Argentines approve of the president’s policies. The president has been engaged in a heated battle with Argentina’s agricultural sector ever since she attempted to increase export taxes on farm products in March of 2008. This struggle, along with growing inflation and the general economic slow-down, have served to decrease her popularity.
If the date change brings about a favorable result for the president, Mrs. Kirchner and her allies at the congressional level may be able retain their hold over Argentine politics for quite some while. As the New York Times explains, the upcoming congressional elections are important because they will serve as a referendum of sorts on Fernandez de Kirchner’s presidency. These elections will strongly influence her party’s decision regarding her nomination for the 2011 presidential elections.
Where governance is concerned, this turn of events is disconcerting. Most notably, as a result of the date change, the pluralism and competition deficit could take yet another hit in a country that has largely been dominated by a sole party, the Peronist party, since the end of the 1940s. One of the more interesting twists to this story, however, is that the most powerful opposition members belong to the same umbrella party as the president: the Peronist Party. In fact, Peronist congressmen Felipe Sola and Francisco de Narvaez have expressed their desire to unite the Peronist party against the president.
It is this overweening Peronist dominance that may be the biggest threat to good governance in the country. Argentines frequently express their disapproval of the Peronist party and its stronghold over the country. Most recently, political analysts have pointed to the passionate public response to the death of former President Raul Alfonsin, a member of the Radical Civic Union party who presided over Argentina’s democratic transition in 1983, as evidence of the public’s weariness of unsatisfactory Peronist leaders and their role in bringing about the debilitation of their country’s democratic institutions.
Nevertheless, a truly viable alternative to Peronism does not exist in the country. Argentina’s traditional opposition movement is predominantly made up of two parties: the Radical Civic Union and the Civic Coalition. While these parties made greater strides in the last few months to present a stronger challenge to the president in the run-up to the congressional elections, the date change has presented a serious obstacle. The death of former President Alfonsin has certainly increased the publicity and popularity of the Radical Civic Union in recent days. Nevertheless, considering the fact that their efforts at mobilization are severely hampered by the dissimilarity of their members (the rank and file of these parties is made up of conservatives, socialists, and Peronist defectors alike), the probability that these non-Peronists could effectively join together to challenge the president is slim.
In reality, the opposition members with the best chance of challenging the president are Peronists themselves. The Peronist party is made up of several diverse factions. While Mrs. Kirchner and her supporters belong to the center-left Victory Front, several influential party members adhere to the older Peronist tradition, while others have more conservative leanings. The dissident Peronists who make up the opposition have expressed concern over the instability wrought by the interventionist policies of the president. The ranks of these dissenting Peronists, the majority of whom are concentrated in the province of Buenos Aires, have swelled recently as lawmakers have abandoned the president’s particular sect, which is popularly known as “Kirchnerism” or “K.” Since the president’s proposal to move up the election date was passed, Sola and Narvaez, the leaders of this new opposition movement, have ramped up their efforts to destabilize the Kirchner regime by publicly condemning the president’s policies and holding meetings with party bosses in Buenos Aires. Narvaez heads the list of the candidates for the Buenos Aires province, while Sola holds the second position. Interestingly enough, their main opponent in this race will likely be President Fernandez de Kirchner’s husband, former President Nestor Kirchner. In addition to these influential congressmen, Vice President Julio Cobos, who joined the Kirchner faction after a long-standing affiliation with the Radical Civic Union, has also evidenced his strong disapproval of Mrs. Kirchner’s actions through both actions and words. While the date change has the same negative effect on this group as it does on the traditional opposition parties, the Peronists have far more resources at their disposal in their fight against the president and her allies.
As a result of this state of affairs, Argentina finds itself in a lose-lose situation. If Mrs. Kirchner and her allies survive the elections without any substantial losses, the atrophied state of the country’s democratic institutions will remain the same. Argentina’s hyper-presidentialist system has only been exacerbated during the reign of the Kirchners. During his term, Nestor Kirchner passed several reforms which strengthened the executive branch. In 2007, Mrs. Kirchner inherited this elevated power, which she has at times exercised in an almost autocratic manner.
Unfortunately, a successful “opposition” challenge may not bring about any more favorable results. Should Sola and Narvaez successfully oust the Victory Front from their dominant position in the Congress, Peronism will still reign supreme. While the date change has thrown a wrench in the works, a victory for these opposition Peronists is not out of the question. Some have argued that the president’s move could backfire by highlighting both her insecurity and the dismal reality of the economic crisis at hand. In addition, as the alliance between Sola, Narvaez, and conservative Buenos Aires Mayor Mauricio Macri of the Pro party shows, the dissident Peronists seem willing to seek support for their efforts outside of the Peronist bloc.
While an opposition victory may slow or stem further consolidation of Kirchner power, it is not likely to solve Argentina’s governance problems. While the dissident Peronists have proposed some new policy changes, the undemocratic, machine-style characteristics of Peronist rule will undoubtedly remain in place. This clientelistic organization, which consolidates support throughout the country by allocating highly sought after state resources in a largely corrupt process, is the manifestation of a political culture in need of serious renewal, and the outcome and timing of the upcoming elections won’t change that.
Photo Credit: Flickr user !que comunismo!
