Anyone who took time out of their summer this year to read a newspaper or website is likely familiar with the results of the Mexican election on July 2. After a heated campaign between Andrés Manuel López Obrador and Felipe Calderón, the election spawned a continuing drama reminiscent of the 2000 United States presidential election.
The aftermath of the election went sour as soon as the voting was over. Preliminary results put National Action Party candidate Felipe Calderón as the winner with a majority of 0.6 percent, or just over 200,000 votes. On Sept. 5, after two months of legal challenges by Party for the Democratic Revolution candidate Obrador and a partial recount, the Federal Electoral Institute declared Felipe Calderón the official winner.
Obrador claimed the election was rigged against him, and this would deny his constituents their rightful political power. This is not exactly an original claim for an apparent election loser to argue. However, European Union election observers declared the integrity of the election was uncompromised. Unfortunately for Mexico and the rest of the world, Obrador has refused to accept that it might be possible he actually lost the election.
Instead of conceding the election when his legal options were exhausted, Obrador decided to form a "parallel government." Just what exactly this organization plans to do remains unclear and shrouded in flowery, vague rhetoric. Most of it revolves around being the "legitimate" government of Mexico with Obrador, the "legitimate" president of Mexico, at its head. Supposedly, the representatives of this government will be picked at an assembly on Mexico's Independence Day, Sept. 16. At this point, no one knows just how far Obrador plans to go. Clearly though, he will seek to use his "parallel government" to undermine and attempt to bring down Calderón.
Beyond the presidential battle, there is another development that Obrador seems to be missing. The results of the election for Congress have made his PRD the second-largest political party in Mexico. Far from being denied a voice within the system, I would say that this seems like an excellent building block for the future and an opportunity to shape policy within the existing political system. With his political party's firm grip on power, Obrador's attempts to undermine the federal government look increasingly like attempts to avoid being sidelined in the future rather than showing true concern for his country.
In any sort of narrow and brutal election, doubts arise over the validity of the vote. The United States faced this obstacle in 2000. However, Al Gore had the common sense to avoid drawing the nation into a civil confrontation when his legal options were exhausted. In his final concession speech on Dec. 13, 2000, Gore stated, "For the sake of our unity of the people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession." Obrador should emulate Gore and leave the fight before he drags his country into turmoil.
Ultimately, Mexico does not need a modern-day Antigone in the form of Obrador. Rather, instead of an uncompromising standoff that can only end in disaster, Obrador can rejoin the political process. However, if he continues to threaten to form his own government and disrupt Mexico, this goal will become unachievable.
What makes it even more imperative that Obrador cease his fledgling revolution is the potential consequences for the United States. Internal disruptions in Mexico, the United States' second-largest trading partner, could well spillover into the border regions. In the United States, these consequences could include everything ranging from increased illegal immigration to trade disruptions or even to a spread of the unrest.
For the sake of Mexico and our own country, Obrador must quit his present course of action and moderate his stance. Otherwise, the United States might have a modern-day Greek tragedy on its hands.
Andrew Wagner ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in computer science and political science.