The statements of Peter Lamelas, the candidate of Donald Trump to be an ambassador of the United States in Argentina, left in the background a report issued by the JP Morgan investment bank.
Two weeks after having recommended to its customers “taking a respite” from Argentina, Morgan analyzed the situation in the country and, although it was praise with many aspects of the management of Javier Milei, left a disturbing definition in relation to the October elections. Emulating a traffic light raised three scenarios: one (red), which would be directly a bad result for the government, if it obtains less than 30% of the votes throughout the country in the legislative; A second scenario (yellow), which qualifies as a “long and rugged path”, as a result of having received between 33% and 39% of the votes; and a third possibility (green), which for JP Morgan would be “consolidation and success”, in which he got 45% of the votes or more.
We are going to translate it: either they take more than 45 % of the votes or this can go to hell. Of course, they disguise him as an impartial analysis signed by two technicians, but what they are saying openly is this. It is an extortion, in which they not only warn the government and freedom advances, but extorting the whole of citizenship or the population because the voice of JP Morgan (one of the most important investment banks in the world) is not any voice, their decisions have consequences. This was verified transparently in 2018 when he was the first to “disarm her positions in pesos” when the plan was unsustainable and began the “market revolt” that finished detonating the Macri government.
This report operated in Tandem with Trump’s candidate’s statements to occupy the embassy in Argentina. It circulated through many places, but remember it said Lamelas: that it will tighten all the governors so that they do not make agreements with China; who wants to guarantee CFK’s conviction (remember when we said it was an armed ruling by factual powers that wanted to redesign the Argentine political regime?, well); He said they have to support Milei in the elections; that we had to continue watching what arises to the left of Peronism; that had to guarantee strategic resources, commercial opening, businesses, etc.
In less than five minutes he sketched a true Statute of Coloniaje and he would be the highest authority with plenipotentiary powers in that redesigned regime.
In that context, the IMF also made its contribution and approved the goals of the agreement with Argentina and will disburse the missing money that Luis “Toto” Caputo needs. In this way, an explicit support from Washington is specified to the Milei government on the way to the elections.
What tells us all this? In the first place, and as we always say, but it is worth highlighting, it speaks of the true antidemocratic character of this political regime that allows these interference that acts on reality and extortes or, as they say, “vote every day”, while citizens are summoned (and under these conditions) to vote every two or four years.
Secondly – a difference of many local observers – these power factors, see a government already a political regime, excessively fragile for the great “tasks” that they believe they have to carry out as part of their mandate (retirement reform, labor, etc.).
Let us observe but the issue of the province of Buenos Aires. Objectively look what is chosen on September 7 in the province? Well, a part of the local legislature and a percentage of the councilors of the deliberative councils are renewed. If not, to some extent, everything is bound with wire, why an choice of these characteristics unleashed practically a “civil war” both in LLA and in Peronism?
Within the government, the “iron triangle” (Milei-Karina Milei and Santiago Caputo) fractured with the displacement of the latter, leader of the “forces of heaven”, which were practically outside all lists. They self -perceived as a key digital team for the political project of Lla y Karina Milei flew them from a stroke. It is no small matter in a government with hundreds of farewell people and with the recent open break with Victoria Villarruel.
On the side of Peronism, well, everything was about to break the day closing day, they reached an agreement at 5 in the morning, and delivering all the paperwork quite late with the help of a “suspicious” cut of light. Now, regardless of unpresentable forms there is a content topic with what program and what strategy do you want to face Milei? What are the new songs? There is the discussion.
Fourth, there is the issue that at this point discusses the entire politicized country that is that great mass of people who might not vote, the disenchanted of everything (even Milei).
Finally, if this is the reality: a fragile government, but with a decision to move forward and with the support of the IMF, the US government, a large part of the businessman (although a sector, as we said last week, is disenchanted and that contributes to fragility); A large part of society also disenchanted with everything, etc. The output proposal cannot be an electoral “merely” alchemy, but a forceful, parliamentary and extraparliamentary opposition. Not only a “political” force (in the superstructural sense of the term), but also a social force that gives it power; And not only a “social” force (in the merely corporate sense of the term), but also a political force with a global program, for a whole exit.
These two conditions are gathered in the proposal of the left. For a long time it was said that she was condemned to be a minority (despite strong elections she made in Jujuy or in Mendoza, in CABA), but eye the same thing was said in other parts of the world and it turns out that now in countries such as Great Britain, a phenomenon to the left of the Party work arises; In Chile to the left of Boric and in the USA (in New York), to the left of the Democratic Party. There would be a thousand things to discuss with those emerging “left”, but what I want to highlight is that they said it was impossible for anything to arise from those “responsible left.” And there they are. As in the emergence of ultra -right (which was also considered impossible in a country like ours), Argentina may not be the exception. Obviously I say it because it can happen and also to happen.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
