Guatemala's newish, evangelical, nationalist, comedic, humble, entrepreneurial, military-sympathizing president
For me, Jimmy Morales was the right man at the right time. After months of sustained protests leading to the resignation and arrest of Otto Perez Molina, voters were hungry for change and saw Morales as an outsider untainted by the country's politics. He might not be the change that everybody wanted but he was the best of the alternatives.
Guatemalans could read into Morales whatever they wanted to - new, evangelical, nationalist, comedic, humble, entrepreneurial, military-sympathizing, etc. He was a political novice, to an extent, which was a plus for voters. He had a limited platform that was easy to understand even though anyone who wanted to get a sense of how he would govern were left perplexed. I heard from one person on the ground that his humility played well among the country's more rural and indigenous populations. That could have helped siphon off some voters from his competitor who we thought had her strength in the countryside.
Sandra Torres could not present herself as someone who could represent a new way of doing politics. It's not just because she is a former first lady. Her social programs and family members have been tainted by corruption for some years now. I thought that UNE and Torres were dead in the water following their shenanigans in the 2011 presidential election. They surprised me that they were still around four years later. I guess even a dead in the water candidate can get approximately 30 percent of the vote.Those on the left in Guatemala have had nowhere to go except for UNE.
Baldizon might have done better than Torres but he probably still would have lost. Baldizon is part of the new wealth in Guatemala but he's been tainted by corruption in the Peten and in Guatemala City (which is how he became part of the new wealth). His relationship with Perez Molina and the Patriotic Party and the corruption allegations against his vice presidential candidate did not help. Nearly all Lider's voters and operatives seem to have thrown their support to Morales for the second round. The same goes for the PP. While I am at it, Baldizon dropped out after the first round but has everyone agreed that he really did come in third or has everyone just agreed not to pursue that line of questioning?
What comes next? Nobody has a clue. CACIF and other economic elites are going to be pulling Morales towards their preferred policies. Avemilgua and other retired military are going to be doing the same. The US and CICIG are going to make strong recommendations backed up by both carrots and sticks. Civil society is promising to remain vigilant so that what happened with OPM does not happen with Morales. The FCN is going to have a few opportunists jump ship to their party in the Congress but they are still going to have to negotiate to pass Morales' preferred legislation.
I'd like to think that there will be a reduction in the level of corruption after all the investigations and protests of the last few months and years. I thought similarly back in 2011. However, the bad guys are always one step ahead of the good guys. Corruption is likely to become more sophisticated - it will never go away. Former political, military and economic elites are going to find new ways to thwart a system that has the potential to hold them accountable for crimes of the past and to prevent them from engaging in crimes of the future.
The uphill battle continues.
Guatemalans could read into Morales whatever they wanted to - new, evangelical, nationalist, comedic, humble, entrepreneurial, military-sympathizing, etc. He was a political novice, to an extent, which was a plus for voters. He had a limited platform that was easy to understand even though anyone who wanted to get a sense of how he would govern were left perplexed. I heard from one person on the ground that his humility played well among the country's more rural and indigenous populations. That could have helped siphon off some voters from his competitor who we thought had her strength in the countryside.
Sandra Torres could not present herself as someone who could represent a new way of doing politics. It's not just because she is a former first lady. Her social programs and family members have been tainted by corruption for some years now. I thought that UNE and Torres were dead in the water following their shenanigans in the 2011 presidential election. They surprised me that they were still around four years later. I guess even a dead in the water candidate can get approximately 30 percent of the vote.Those on the left in Guatemala have had nowhere to go except for UNE.
Baldizon might have done better than Torres but he probably still would have lost. Baldizon is part of the new wealth in Guatemala but he's been tainted by corruption in the Peten and in Guatemala City (which is how he became part of the new wealth). His relationship with Perez Molina and the Patriotic Party and the corruption allegations against his vice presidential candidate did not help. Nearly all Lider's voters and operatives seem to have thrown their support to Morales for the second round. The same goes for the PP. While I am at it, Baldizon dropped out after the first round but has everyone agreed that he really did come in third or has everyone just agreed not to pursue that line of questioning?
What comes next? Nobody has a clue. CACIF and other economic elites are going to be pulling Morales towards their preferred policies. Avemilgua and other retired military are going to be doing the same. The US and CICIG are going to make strong recommendations backed up by both carrots and sticks. Civil society is promising to remain vigilant so that what happened with OPM does not happen with Morales. The FCN is going to have a few opportunists jump ship to their party in the Congress but they are still going to have to negotiate to pass Morales' preferred legislation.
I'd like to think that there will be a reduction in the level of corruption after all the investigations and protests of the last few months and years. I thought similarly back in 2011. However, the bad guys are always one step ahead of the good guys. Corruption is likely to become more sophisticated - it will never go away. Former political, military and economic elites are going to find new ways to thwart a system that has the potential to hold them accountable for crimes of the past and to prevent them from engaging in crimes of the future.
The uphill battle continues.
Post a Comment