Repentance almost always exudes a strong whiff of Catholic guilt, but let’s try to get rid of it and approach it in a different way. We usually make the best possible decisions in the context in which we need to decide and with the information available that we have. In the face of new facts and information that has come to light, we may be wrong, but when making a decision, we always try to choose the one that seems best for our interests. And well, we must always ask ourselves what the genesis of our interests is and what controls their change. Many of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s supporters dismiss those who have expressed regret for voting for him because of the decisions he has already made as a government; But what opportunities did the Mexican political system offer at the time? Will there be someone who voted for Lopez Obrador and now regretfully believes Meade or Anaya were better options? Nothing in reality makes us think that the PRI and PAN candidates were better alternatives and here lies a big problem, our aspirations and political horizons for social justice keep crashing into the walls of the parties. There are other alternatives, but now I would prefer to talk about other regrets that I find more worrying, those of López Obrador, those regrets that have a concrete impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and on the search for social justice.
A few days ago, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador announced that the National Guard would now be dependent on the Minister of Defense (Sedena). This decree stands in contrast to the words of López Obrador himself, uttered in 2010 during Felipe Calderón’s six-year presidency: “President Juárez knew that we could not bet on a military republic, but on a civil republic, […] it is not with the army that the problems of insecurity and violence can be solved, which do not serve to compensate for the incompetence of civilian governments”. Apparently the President of the Republic has repented and now command of the National Guard will be military, an alarming fact for those of us who agree with the opinion of a López Obrador of the past. Without explanation, we can say that putting public security under the control of Sedena can mean strengthening a civil republic, quite the opposite. It seems that López Obrador’s interest now is in using the army to compensate for the incompetence of the civilian side of his government, as he himself stated more than 10 years ago. We know too well the shattering consequences of placing public safety in the hands of the military.
In 2015, López Obrador stated that it was Enrique Peña Nieto’s duty to guarantee freedom of transit and human rights protection for migrants who entered Mexican territory from the southern border. He appears to have regretted this position, although the President has sometimes decried the human rights abuses of migrants by the National Guard, his strategy against the caravans was not one of guaranteeing freedom of movement and protection. In June of this year, López Obrador stated that what is being done seems normal to him, that is, it seems normal to him to use the armed forces to stem the migrant caravans. On what grounds can the behavior of the public authorities on the border with Guatemala be interpreted as a guarantee of the freedom of transit demanded by López Obrador in 2015? His strategy has impacted the lives of thousands of people, including children; Changing your position from 2015 to now is creating hell for migrants. Here’s what happened on Emiliano Zapata’s land in Morelos.
Since 2012, the Nahua people have opposed a government project to build a thermoelectric power plant, gas pipeline and aqueduct for their operations on their land. Faced with resistance, those who fought were persecuted and imprisoned, but legal strategies and social mobilization continued; With a lot of effort, they managed to prevent at least the start-up of the thermoelectric plant. López Obrador visited them in 2014, he was received by the Nahua peoples, to whom he promised to defend them; During a rally in Yecapixtla, he told them: “I want to tell you that we will defend the peoples with everything we can. We don’t want that gas pipeline, we don’t want that thermoelectric plant […]. We will support them in any way we can. […]. Imagine what it means that in the country where Emiliano Zapata was born, the best guide in the history of Mexico, here in Anenecuilco [en realidad estaba en Yecapixtla], where they want to realize a thermoelectric system. What happens to these? It’s like if they go to Jerusalem and build a toxic waste dump or a nuclear power plant, that’s a crime.” The people applauded him, there was hope that if López Obrador became President of the Republic, the situation could change. In 2018, people did voted overwhelmingly for him in this area.
As soon as he became president, López Obrador repented, saying that a lot of money would be lost if the thermoelectric power plant didn’t run. He betrayed his own word. We can imagine the pain, disappointment, and anger at the deception. In addition, López Obrador disqualified those who opposed them in the following way: “Listen to the left-wing radicals, who to me are nothing more than conservatives,” he said to those to whom he had promised to shut down this thermoelectric power plant. Among those who resisted the most was Samir Flores, one of the leaders of the struggle. Unfortunately, on February 20, 2019, Samir was murdered in the yard of his home. We can wonder what the impact of the president’s disqualifications, which made a defender like Samir Flores even more vulnerable; The fact that López Obrador disqualified those who opposed a project (which he had previously opposed) had clear consequences because it reduced the cost of outrage and social mobilization over Samir’s murder; After all, an opponent of one of history’s most popular presidents had been eliminated, a Nahua had been assassinated who, in the words of López Obrador, could be considered “a radical leftist who was nothing more than a conservative”.
There are many examples of López Obrador’s regret and its consequences. In 2016, he criticized then-Oaxaca gubernatorial candidate Alejandro Murat, whom he described as part of a “hereditary and corrupt monarchy,” after which he strengthened his friendship with him and has mentioned him as a presidential candidate for 2024. His regrets, or if you prefer, his changes of mind, suggest a shift in the compass of his political positions; If you can decide now, you are thinking differently or radically opposite because the ideas and interests guiding your decisions have changed. In 2014, López Obrador wrote that “not even with all the telethons in the world would Televisa make up for the serious damage done to the Mexican people as part of the mafia in power”; In June of this year, the federal government signed a contract with Fundación Teletón to build a children’s rehabilitation center in Guerrero. Obviously, many people voted for the López Obrador, who thought that a gas pipeline on the Zapata land was a crime, or that entrusting public security to the army was terrible. It seems to me that there is an urgent need to be able to mobilize us in the face of such serious decisions . Regretting voting for him doesn’t automatically mean voting for Meade or Anaya, and in any case, talking about that specific regret distracts from the really worrying ones, López Obrador’s regrets, the structural and concrete implications on sensitive issues and fundamentals of hat public life. The regret that counts is the one that stinks of betrayal.
Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS México newsletter and receive all the informative keys on current affairs in this country