Politicians are not usually known for their humility. On the contrary, they tend to be extremely vain characters. It stands to reason; They have to convince others, and themselves, that they are superior to all their rivals and, often even more important, those who claim to support them. They know that they will be at risk of falling if for some reason both ordinary voters and the inhabitants of the political world in which they live stop considering them worthy of the role they play. It is therefore natural that, once in power, many worry more about their own image than about the eventual success of the socioeconomic project they represent.
Judging by how he has reacted to the modest victory – 41 percent of the votes, an amount similar to that achieved by Mauricio Macri in the 2019 presidential elections – which La Libertad Avanza won in last month’s legislative elections, Javier Milei He has chosen to privilege his own cult of personality over the ideological cause he leads. For him and Karina, the votes are exclusively theirs. Likewise, encouraged by the hyperbolic praise of his admirers, including the North American Undersecretary of State Christopher Landan who called him a “hemispheric rockstar” who in his opinion is reaffirming the regional leadership of Argentina, Milei seems to feel like the potential savior not only of the Homeland but also of the Western world.
Before knowing the results of those elections, Milei gave the impression of wanting to expand his base of support and share shares of power with others because he understood that his personal authority would not be enough to allow him to continue for a long time in the place he occupied, but as soon as he realized that his party had far surpassed Peronism in the country and that, in the province of Buenos Aires, he had managed to win by an undoubtedly slim margin but still spectacular because it was a matter of a district in which he had recently suffered a defeat. very painfully, it occurred to him that he could once again be the overwhelming leader of his first months as president.
Excited by what had just happened, Milei gave even more power to his sister and less to those who would prefer a kinder attitude towards those who share his pro-market ideas without being willing to completely subordinate themselves to his leadership. Since then, the presidential couple has been engulfing the Pro Macrista with renewed enthusiasm; the appointment of Diego Santilli As Minister of the Interior, it served them not only to secure the collaboration of an all-terrain baquiano who knows the national political world very well but also to once again snub “president” Mauricio Macri.
If Milei privileged his program over his own glory, he would take advantage of the good electoral result and the confusion that prevails in the ranks of those committed to the old corporatist order to form a great coalition that would surely be capable of promoting the many reforms necessary for Argentina to be a truly competitive country. As the respected former Brazilian president has repeatedly pointed out Fernando Henrique Cardoso, It is convenient for the rulers to explain the measures they are taking to captivate the people.
This is what his North American employers want from Milei. Donald Trump and Scott Bessent: Familiar as they are with the difficulties faced by presidents who, despite themselves, are forced to live with parliamentarians and governors determined to defend their own interests and those of their electorates, they expected that Milei, taught by the many setbacks they had experienced in the weeks preceding the legislative elections, would assume a more generous stance towards other politicians. While there are no signs that Trump and Bessent are about to express their disapproval of the strategy their ally has adopted, it would be strange if they considered it appropriate for the country they see as their most important Latin American partner. For them, the eventual failure of the mileist project would be a very hurtful setback.
In democratic societies, personal leadership – or two-personal leadership in the case of the Milei – is intrinsically precarious. Too much depends on the emotional connection of the president with different sectors of the citizenry. Although Milei has retained the gratitude of many for having substantially reduced the inflation rate, others blame him for failing to improve their own economic situation. It will not be given to him to do it; Even if the country soon enters a phase of accelerated growth, it would take several years before the bulk of the population would directly benefit. Furthermore, meritocratic programs such as the one launched by Milei are far from being egalitarian; Unless the majority of the political class feels firmly committed to the reforms it is promoting, there will be many temptations to take advantage of the problems that arise.
This is what many politicians did in the months before the elections when they waged a kind of guerrilla war against the sacrosanct fiscal balance. Fortunately for Milei, the damage they inflicted on his project was limited, but the rebellion should have taught him that it would be risky for him to insist on giving those who don’t love him too many excuses to twist his arm.
Milei believes himself to be a charismatic leader, a conviction that is strengthened every time he travels to the United States or Europe to give himself the pleasure of haranguing thousands of fervent fans who treat him as if he were a popular singer or a sports star, but it would seem that his recent electoral success had less to do with the glittering image that fascinates those dissatisfied with the international status quo than with the discredit of all alternatives to his management, especially the one still headed by Cristina.
Milei is lucky; Although the former president’s power of attraction has diminished so much that virtually no one celebrates her little dances when she goes out onto the balcony of the apartment where she is confined, she still retains her ability to frustrate the efforts of the Peronist flock to regroup. Although it would be premature to assume that the movement that did so much to form today’s Argentina is on the verge of extinction – entire libraries can be filled with the obituaries that began to appear in the fifties of the last century – there is no doubt that it has weakened so much that today it serves more as a bogeyman than as a valid political alternative.
It is for this reason that not only within borders but also abroad the hope is being consolidated that this time Argentina, which for so long has appeared as the most striking and symbol. For some, more mysterious, the collective failure at a time when dozens of countries were able to get rich, is about to break with the past. In part, the optimism is due to the existence of a plethora of unexploited natural resources, such as those of Vaca Muerta, that could be activated quickly, and in part to the support of the United States, which, despite its many internal problems and the possibility that in a couple of years the Republican government will be replaced by another with very different attitudes, will continue to look for reliable friends in its “backyard.”
As for those persuaded that it would be better for Milei to bet on a friendlier relationship with China, they would do well to recognize that the medium-term prospects, let alone the long-term, vis-à-vis the great Asian commercial and technological power are far from being as good as those fed up with North American dominance would like to imagine. According to the World Bank, the current birth rate in China is 1.0 per woman: unless its people begin to reproduce as vigorously as their ancestors did, each young person will henceforth have to financially support the equivalent of two parents, four grandparents and eight great-grandparents. Needless to say, the disastrous demographic model thus assumed is destined to collapse. This is a detail that is often overlooked by those convinced that it is inevitable that China will replace the United States to be the hegemonic superpower of tomorrow.
If it were only a matter of recovering the ground that has been lost since the Second World War or, in Milei’s opinion, since the beginning of the last century, the task before the national political class would be relatively simple; It would be enough to take advantage of the experience of countries classified as developed. However, so much has changed in recent decades that schemes that until recently worked very well are no longer viable. All the supposedly “normal” countries that, in the opinion of many, should serve as examples to follow, are in crisis, which means that, in addition to trying to solve or, at least, mitigate problems that are attributable to the prolonged national decline that has motivated so many jeremiads, the current government and its successors will face many that are new and that, in the rest of the world, are posing dilemmas that no political force or intellectual group seems to be in a position to resolve.
