When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Economy

From Mexico, No Regrets After 20 Years Of NAFTA

NAFTA has brought about practically everything that is positive about the Mexican economy. Unfortunately, good governance and stability remain elusive.

Stephen Harper, Enrique Pena Nieto and Barack Obama at the 7th North American Leaders Summit in Toluca, Mexico, on Feb. 19
Stephen Harper, Enrique Pena Nieto and Barack Obama at the 7th North American Leaders Summit in Toluca, Mexico, on Feb. 19
Luis Rubio*

-Analysis-

MEXICO CITY — It seems Mexicans have seen it all in the 200 years since their independence from Spain — periods of darkness and light, growth, crises, peace and extreme violence. We have had our grandiose dreams, most of which have yielded us paltry results. Our distrust of government is neither new nor accidental.

There are many reasons for the disappointing results so far, but two stand out: lack of continuity and lack of realism. The continuity problem arises every six years, when a new president takes office and effectively returns things to square one. No plan in Mexico has survived a six-year presidency. Each government has its own logic and projects, and cares little for objectively evualuating existing programs.

The lack of realism among the leadership emerges from numerous “creative and innovative” ideas every new government team seems to have. Some of them make sense, but others seem to rely on the misplaced confidence that the government, having all the power, can do anything. Beyond that, our governments and legislators have been inclined to push through ambitious plans without implementing the changes that the execution of those plans required. So we are saturated with good intentions that very seldom translate into concrete developments for Mexico or improvements for its people.

The result is that there is no governing system citizens can trust. Everything depends on the current president and his six-year plans, whose priorities never seem to include creating a system that governs for all, with equanimity. Which does not earn them citizen loyalty, but instead provokes enduring expectations, fears and uncertainty.

The reforms of the 1980s and 1990s were no different. A central transformative concept was thwarted by many contradictions. Some sectors became competitive, others didn't. Privatization followed the logic of maximizing fiscal revenues rather than transforming industrial structures. There was liberalization, but the regime’s favorites continued to enjoy their privileges. There was deregulation, but subsidies remained. There goes another grand plan to change the universe.

Then things changed in 1994

But there was one exception, which has changed the country for the better. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed 20 years ago, in 1994, was intended to confer permanence to reforms that had been undertaken to date. Even with their deficiencies, those reforms would create an opportunity to transform reality, but only if they were maintained in the long term. NAFTA’s key role was to give certainty to reforms, and it became a cornerstone of the key modernizing project at the time: investment.

Crucially, NAFTA revealed the inviability of existing institutions in providing the guarantees investors required. NAFTA is essentially a means of “borrowing” U.S. institutions to benefit Mexico.

The treaty was designed to preserve achievements but not to advance as needed. So in yet another of the transformative project’s numerous contradictions, NAFTA did provide guarantees, but it also allowed the reform process to be abandoned at a most important moment. Everything stopped when Mexican society and its economy should have begun to improve productive structures, education, the nature of government and regulation to raise productivity. It was urgent to see through a comprehensive transition so that a closed and protected economy could gradually become open and competitive. What we saw, however, was the creation and maintenance of a dual economy, with one part competitive and another a burden impeding growth.

NAFTA contributed to changing many industrial sectors, opened up opportunities for the growth of companies and new enterprise, increased economic productivity, and attained its primary objective of investment.

Whatever one’s position on NAFTA, nobody can doubt its enormous impact and central role in bringing about practically all that is positive about the Mexican economy. What NAFTA cannot do is substitute the essential functions of government. And that’s Mexico’s greatest deficit, and the key to truly realizing its huge potential.

You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Stories from the best international journalists.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
Already a subscriber? Log in

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
Geopolitics

A Ukrainian In Belgrade: The Straight Line From Milosevic To Putin, And Back Again

As hostilities flare again between Serbia and Kosovo, the writer draws connections between the dissolutions of both the USSR and Yugoslavia, and the leaders who exploit upheaval and feed the worst kind of nationalism.

On the streets of Belgrade, Serbia

Anna Akage

-Analysis-

At high school in Kyiv in the late 1990s, we studied the recent history of Yugoslavia: the details of its disintegration, the civil wars, the NATO bombing of Belgrade. When we compared Yugoslavia and the USSR, it seemed evident to us that if Boris Yeltsin or Mikhail Gorbachev had been anything like Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic, bloody wars would have been unavoidable for Ukraine, Belarus, and other republics that instead had seceded from the Soviet Union without a single shot being fired.

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

Fast forward to 2020, when I visited Belgrade for the first time, invited for a friend's wedding. Looking around, I was struck by the decrepit state of its roads, the lack of any official marked cabs, by the drudgery, but most of all by the tension and underlying aggression in society. It was reflected in all the posters and inscriptions plastered on nearly every street. Against Albania, against Kosovo, against Muslims, claims for historical justice, Serbian retribution, and so on. A rather beautiful, albeit by Soviet standards, Belgrade seemed like a sleeping scorpion.

Keep reading...Show less

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Stories from the best international journalists.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
Already a subscriber? Log in
Writing contest - My pandemic story
THE LATEST
FOCUS
TRENDING TOPICS

Central to the tragic absurdity of this war is the question of language. Vladimir Putin has repeated that protecting ethnic Russians and the Russian-speaking populations of Ukraine was a driving motivation for his invasion.

Yet one month on, a quick look at the map shows that many of the worst-hit cities are those where Russian is the predominant language: Kharkiv, Odesa, Kherson.

Watch VideoShow less
MOST READ