In most democratic countries, government members and their supporters alike assume that their political fate will depend largely on their ability to manage the economy. They rarely pretend to represent something far loftier than the cost of living. Unlike the clerics running Iran, who subordinate absolutely everything to their religious priorities, or Communists in Cuba and elsewhere, who put “the revolution” first and are more than willing to impoverish the population if it gets in their way, they become distraught when consumers start complaining because grocery prices have gone up a bit. They know that if the economy fails to deliver as promised, they are almost certain to be sent packing by an electorate obsessed with its own petty concerns.
The Peronists can afford to be less single-minded about these things than the Iranian mullahs or the Cuban leftists. Though on occasion the more imaginative among them make out that their movement is devoted to ideals that are even nobler than those of such people, their creed is far more down-to-earth; they simply want political power and the opportunities to feather their nests it gives them. What is more, experience has taught them that in Argentina mishandling the economy can be advantageous to those who are cunning enough because, to the bewilderment of foreign onlookers, in this part of the world people who are sunk in dire poverty are prone to vote for the politicians who put them where they are.
This must be why, despite its quite appalling economic record, Kirchnerism continues to be a powerful force in the depressed districts that surround Buenos Aires City and the “feudal” provinces. If Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and her sidekicks can get millions of votes by blaming everything bad on oligarchs, selfish businessmen and North American bullies, why should they waste time worrying about what happens to ordinary folk?
When their electoral prospects look glum, as they sometimes do, Kirchnerites and their fellow Peronists in power busy themselves assembling economic bombs that are timed to go off after they have left office and a fairly soft-hearted, on the whole law-abiding, middle-of-the-road government is trying to repair the damage that was wrought by its predecessor. Two years ago, they ran the risk of remaining in office when some very big ones were due to blow up but, luckily for Cristina and company, Sergio Massa was roundly defeated by Javier Milei in the run-off. Had he won, the Kirchnerites would have had to choose between blaming hyperinflation on capitalistic villainy in the hope that people would take them seriously and employing a left-leaning populist version of the libertarian’s famous chainsaw.
The time-bomb strategy worked well enough for the Kirchnerites when Mauricio Macri was in the Pink House and, after a promising start, he found himself overwhelmed by economic woes. But so far Milei has succeeded in dismantling many of the explosive devices that the previous government had carefully planted. However, last week he was suddenly confronted by one which had been ticking away for over 10 years without many noticing it when a New York district judge, Loretta Preska, ordered the government to hand just over half the shares in YPF to a vulture fund that had purchased the rights of companies harmed by the cack-handed takeover of the oil firm by the Kirchnerite government back in 2015. If the sentence stands, the country will have to fork out the equivalent of a cool US$16 billion, an amount that, for now at any rate, it cannot afford.
The individual most responsible for this sorry state of affairs is, needless to say, the Buenos Aires Province Governor Axel Kicillof who, as it happens, thinks he is made of presidential material and for that reason has long been a target of the expletive-rich abuse Milei likes hurling at his critics. When masterminding the operation, which apparently was designed to let key Kirchnerites get their hands on even more money, Kicillof told the world that in his view it would be foolish to take into account the legal niceties because, as far as he was concerned, national sovereignty was at stake and it trumped everything else. To nobody’s surprise, neither Ms Preska nor the lawyers arguing the case for those who had acquired the rights of people who felt they had been swindled by Cristina’s government let themselves be beguiled by Kicillof’s supposedly anti-imperialist rhetoric. As was to be expected, they seized on it with unabashed delight and made full use of it.
By the rules prevailing in most other democratic countries, Kicillof’s political career should be well and truly over. As economy minister between 2013 and 2015, he played fast and loose with the rules prevailing in the rest of the world to commit a series of crass blunders that have cost the country dearly; according to some experts, such as Alfonso Prat-Gay, so far they amount to almost US$50 billion. But, as generations of Peronists have found to their relief, they can get away with doing things that in less tolerant societies would earn them either a spell behind bars or, at the very least, put an end to whatever political aspirations they may have.
Kicillof, unlike his long-time benefactress Cristina or so many others who have been associated with her, is thought to be personally honest. He may well be, though it is hard to square his reputation in this regard with his willingness to work closely with individuals who are notoriously corrupt and, in some cases, have been sentenced by the courts to years in jail. Perhaps he believes that a taste for thievery on a massive scale is a minor flaw that should be overlooked when those who indulge in it are leading a worthwhile political project, though that seems rather far-fetched. In any event, the mere fact that, despite all the harm he has done, Kicillof remains one of the most powerful politicians in the land is disturbing in itself.
In the upcoming provincial and national midterm elections, Milei hoped to have Cristina as his main opponent even though, before being condemned to house arrest, she had resigned herself to competing for a seat in the decidedly lacklustre Buenos Aires Province Legislature. Her place has been taken by Kicillof who, in addition to having to defend his role in the noxious YPF affair, is under attack for his reluctance to combat violent crime in Greater Buenos Aires. If straightforward logic had anything to do with it, Kicillof, who is a bad speaker with little resembling charisma, should be easy meat for an impetuous president who evidently despises him, but unless his fellow Peronists turn against him, he could survive the coming libertarian onslaught to fight another day.
Comments