WARNING: 2015 AHEAD

Foreign affairs take back seat — and that’s a good thing

The Presidential elections are likely to be — by far — the most relevant political event of next year. And most local political issues, from crime rates to inflation or unemployment get linked to — and influenced by — an electoral campaign that seems to have started quite early.

Normally, foreign policy matters do not enter into that debate. The pressing issues seem to be closer to home. So candidates seem more interested in explaining to their voters how they plan to improve day-to-day life than to expand on their vision about how Argentina links and relates to the world. Horrible as it may sound, this might not be such a bad thing.

The truth is that messages that may go down well with the domestic voters, do not necessarily help to solve problems and find solutions with foreign counterparts. This is especially true in the case of high-profile issues. The paper pulp mill dispute with Uruguay seems to be a good example of this.

Many argue that the late Néstor Kirchner’s support of the Gualeguaychú environmentalists, which made Uruguayan’s life miserable over the Botnia pulp mill, is a good example of how decisions aimed at local political gains,trigger complicated foreign policy situations. In fact, the bilateral wounds from those episodes have not closed totally. Not to mention the fact that Uruguay’s next president Tabaré Vázquez was who, when in office, had to endure the pressures of “the big neighbour.”

Unfortunately, 2015 seems to bring another high profile issue in tow. Starting on January 1 — and once the RUFO clause expires — discussions will (or should) start, on the matter of what to do with the holdout/“vulture” funds. The latter are far from popular in Argentina. So the temptation to take a hard line against them is high. It would be easy for the government to rally support for a confrontation with the “vultures” and the US. Burning US flags is a popular hobby in many sectors of Argentine politics.

There is another possible scenario: the Government might prioritize gaining access to the international financial markets and decide to — grudgingly — reach an agreement with the creditors. In that case, some opposition candidates might choose to wrap themselves in an Argentine flag and denounce the government’s negotiations as damaging to the country’s best interests. To make matters worse, the new US Congress is not likely to be friendly to Argentina. And might not dismiss anti-American tirades as a mere ingredient of electioneering narrative. They could take them seriously.

The issue of the holdouts/“vultures” is possibly the most serious, given the risk of it becoming a campaign issue and getting out of hand. But is by no means the only one confronting Argentina’s foreign policy in 2015. Although they are unlikely to be in the campaign agenda, they will (hopefully) be in the Foreign Ministry’s radar. And the opposition candidates would be well advised to follow developments in those fronts closely, just in case they get into office.

Close to home is the above-mentioned case of Uruguay. President Mujica tended to have a quite patient attitude toward Argentina in spite of a few sparkles every now and then. It remains to be seen if his successor will follow suit, or if — based on his previous experiences — he has already dismissed the possibility of Argentina being a friendly partner. After all, there are a number of conflictive issues which range from the use of port facilities to Uruguayan complaints about Argentine protectionism.

Then there is Brazil. Dilma Rousseff seems ready to endorse an adjustment policy which might mean a slowdown in her country’s economic activity. Argentina’s exports to Brazil would be hit. And given Argentina’s own foreign trade needs, the government might need to put its best negotiators to work in order to keep the Brazilian door for Argentine exports as widely open as possible.

Further north, there is the case of Argentina’s friendly (some say too friendly) relations with Venezuela. President Nicolás Maduro’s government seems to be in serious trouble and making big efforts to blame its predicament outside its borders. The US is the obvious candidate. And in that process, Venezuela seems inclined to make alliances with governments that are not too palatable to Europe nor the US. There is the danger that — given the Chavista sympathies of a few politicians close to the government — some of his foreign policies could try to involve Argentina. Something that this country does not seem to need at all.

And then there is the case of Russia, Argentina’s latest “strategic partner.”

Over and above its policy on Crimea, Russia seems determined to anger the EU further by financing far-right European politicians, with the sole intention of making life more difficult for Europe’s traditional political parties. This is not seen positively within the EU. Being too closely associated with Putin could be read as an endorsement of such policies.

Again, something that Argentina does not need at all.

@andresfederman

CREDITS: BUENOS AIRES HERALD