Chau for now mi querida Argentina...

Well, I have been back in the U.S. for about a month, and just about every day of that month the thought has occurred to me that I should write a final post for this blog. You know, an all-encompassing "these are the great lessons I learned and epiphanies I had" type of post. But I guess if I have learned a lesson in my reflections on the trip, it is that I had no real great epiphanies. In fact, in some ways I feel the direction of my life is perhaps a little less clear after the trip. At the same time, it's not an experience I necessarily want to wrap up. I would like that experience to remain at least a small constant in my life, to be an introduction to a lifelong interaction with the country and the language, even if that interaction at the moment consists of little more than reading the news about Argentina in the New York Times. And in the news Argentina has certainly been in the last week or so.

Of course I could comment at length about the Sanford affair, but I've just about gossiped that out of my system.

But, much more interestingly, I had an invitation to share my thoughts on the mid-term elections that happened there last Sunday. It is that piece which I share now, which will likely be the last post on this blog. I am contemplating a new blog for this new chapter of my life, in which I will no doubt build a monopoly on wit and insight that will generate lucrative offers to share my musings on anything I so desire. Until then, chau for now.


The Politics of Food: How Argentina's President Lost to Soy

I feel ambivalent about soy. There’s an awful lot of hype surrounding that little white bean, and it has amassed considerable political potency as an alleged healthy alternative to our bad food and oil habits. I can't help but wonder if its praises are a little oversung, and as the outcome of Argentina’s election last Sunday demonstrates, its pull on the political compass is questionable too.

Although these were mid-term elections, and therefore Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner wasn’t up for re-election, the results have some political pundits predicting her certain defeat in 2011 and others speculating that she may resign sooner as her approval ratings sink into abysmal territory.

It’s a dramatic turn of sentiment for a citizenry that just two years ago overwhelmingly elected their “Queen Cristina” as Argentina’s first female president. Though it cannot be overlooked that she succeeded her husband, Nestor Kirchner – who resuscitated Argentina’s economy following its 2001 collapse – the theory that Cristina rode the coattails of her spouse into the post of president and then fumbled miserably doesn’t hold water for two reasons.

First, she was Nestor’s advisor during his presidency, and he hers now. Through the course of the Kirchner dynasty, the policies and strategies have been as much hers as his. Though she may be wearing the captain’s hat at the moment, they both have their hands on the wheel of this sinking ship.

Second, Nestor ran for a seat in the lower body of Congress this election and lost handedly. The Kirchners wrongly assumed 1) his popularity remained intact even as hers waned, and 2) he was so popular he could win his election, carry other Peronist party candidates to victory, and ensure the Peronists maintained the majority in Congress. He failed on all fronts.

Nestor lost to Francisco de Narváez, a wealthy businessman originally from Colombia with a prominent tattoo on his neck. Narváez also triumphed over my disbelief that a federal politician could pull off both a tattoo like his and one of the most important electoral victories in the country. Much more interesting than Narváez’s neck tattoo, however, is his affiliation with former President Carlos Menem, the man widely credited for destroying Argentina’s economy.

That tattoo must be one hell of a diversion tactic. His TV ads* were too. Because Narváez’s kind of money should be wildly suspect to Argentines. Only a few escaped the bankruptcy into which Menem plunged Argentina less than a decade ago, and those few were generally Menem’s associates. How on earth could a candidate in close quarters with the man who destroyed the Argentine economy beat the man who saved it? What explains the sudden demise of the Kirchner dynasty? The simple answer is soy.

In the early twentieth century, Argentina was once of the wealthiest nations in the world because of agricultural exports. Money might as well have sprouted from the fertile plains of the Pampas, where Argentina’s iconic cattle grazed, tended to by the now-mythical Argentine cowboy, the gaucho. However, like many Latin American countries, Argentina has been plagued by violent swings of the political pendulum, erratic economic policies and failed gimmicks, government corruption, and foreign interference veiled as assistance. The turmoil culminated with the economic collapse of 2001, when Argentina committed the largest default on debt in world history, the presidency changed hands five times within two weeks, and the banks instituted “el corralito,” freezing accounts and prohibiting Argentines from withdrawing their money as its value plummeted.

When Nestor resuscitated the economy, exports began too boom again. But the agricultural industry has evolved to meet global demands at the expense of its own. Once beef, the chief agricultural export now is soy, a crop of little value among a people renowned for consuming more beef per capita than anywhere else in the world. So many grazing pastures have become soy fields in Argentina that the country may have to import up to 1 million tons of beef from its neighbor Uruguay. There is something horribly ironic about the breadbasket of the world needing to import its most iconic food.

Shortly after taking office, Cristina instituted an agricultural tax program that tied export taxes on crops to their prices on the global market. As the prices increased, so too did the export tax, cutting sharply into the profits of farmers. Some critics say she did this to fill state coffers. Others suggest she did it to keep domestic food prices and inflation low. Either way, this move embroiled Cristina in serious discord with the farming community, once a bastion of support for her. In protest, farmers blocked transit routes, stopped exports, and inspired Peronist politicians to defect. In the months leading up to the election, political unrest was reaching a fevered pitch, Cristina refused to budge and even accused agrarian leaders of trying to stage a coup, and the fall of the Kirchner dynasty was imminent.

The Kirchners lost the debate on soy because it centered on the farmers, not the crop, where the focus should now turn. Narváez has vowed to block Cristina’s agricultural policies, which is fine so long as he creates incentives for Argentine farmers and ranchers to produce food that will feed its own people and global demands rather than just removing disincentives from growing soy. Much as the economy cannot rely on the agricultural industry alone to sustain it, the agricultural industry would do well to not rely on one crop as its cash cow.

Speaking of cows, I hope they make a comeback in Argentina. Rotating fields between cattle and crops is the nutrient cycle that has kept the Pampas so fertile for so long. Soil can only grow soy for so long before becoming barren, a cost that must be accounted for when calculating the profit of this crop.

Soy is seductive, attracting proponents from all political backgrounds even as its production increasingly trends toward a transnationalism championed by unethical corporations, foreign investors, and the agrarian industrial complex. Though Argentina should aspire to be a world player, it will be a short-lived aspiration if the agricultural industry neglects its country’s own food needs to feed the global appetite for soy. Beware the crop that has changed the political direction of the most beef-eating country in the world.


*Translation of the words in Narváez ad: 1) Seguir asi va a doler. --> Continuing like this is going to hurt. 2) Basta. --> Stop. 3) Y si el cambio empieza un dia (I think)? --> And if change happens one day?