Standards of political conduct allow establishing cycles and, at the same time, pointing to constants or ruptures. In the case of Latin America, despite being a more heterogeneous region than is generally considered, its behavior patterns are no exception.
From the second half of the 1970s onwards, different analyzes began to categorize the political cycles in which a good part of the countries were integrated. Terms such as transition, consolidation, governability, neoliberalism and left turn served as a guide to understand what was happening. The context was varied and in it the democratic path, with its varieties, successes and failures, became the dominant note. The current situation, after the recent Colombian elections and the predictions about the outcome of the Brazilian elections in October, allow us to ask, as was pointed out 15 years ago, what the meaning of these changes is and how they affect a scenario dominated by progressive governments.
To go further, if almost half a century ago there were singularities such as those of Colombia, Costa Rica or Venezuela, where the transitory vision was inadequate to understand these political regimes whose evolution from authoritarianism had occurred two decades earlier, the passage of time has not it only diluted this exceptionality, but led to very different paths.
While Venezuela regressed to authoritarian paroxysm, Costa Rica was the quintessence of continuism and even assimilated into the regional trend of tired democracies as its historic political parties entered a state of serious deterioration. In turn, Colombia, the most deviant case from the regional average, broke its differentiating trajectory, marked by a persistent armed conflict and the continuity of traditional political elites, to be assimilated to Latin American trends.
What happened in Colombia, the third largest country in Latin America in demographic terms, would be evidence that a certain normality – within the turmoil caused by the consequences of the global crisis – is spreading throughout the region. His presidential elections last June 19, which were reliably organized by the Registry Office, are more than just the country joining the much-hyped triumph of the left. In fact, similarities can be found in other Latin American countries.
Thus, the president-elect was running for his third consecutive presidential candidacy, as had already happened with Lula da Silva and Andrés Manuel López Obrador. The second round, which featured two candidates alien to the traditional political class established throughout republican history, confirmed the scenario for similar situations in neighboring countries.
Likewise, the fact that the electoral campaign was exhaustive, with a very long development that included irrelevant intra-party consultations, coincides with what happened in Argentina with the PASO, although in Colombia there was the additional circumstance that 15 integrated political forces in three coalitions they only managed to place one candidate in the second round, which, on the other hand, would not have needed the verdict of the polls to do so due to his undisputed leadership.
Another recurring factor was the protagonism of social networks in the electoral dispute, designed with perfection by political communication professionals who jump from country to country. The attempt to cover up the impunity shown by one of the candidates, by not participating in any face-to-face debate, was assimilated to the current fashion everywhere, as it could not be otherwise. But Andrés Manuel López Obrador no longer participated in the debate between candidates in the 2006 elections, and the networks did not exist at the time. The laudable activism of the Colombian justice, urging the reluctant candidate to attend the latest debate, was in vain. However, it is possible that the polls charged their negligence, something that constitutes democratic normality.
It should be added that Colombia broke the ceiling on electoral participation in competitive elections, approaching the Latin American average. Bearing in mind that voting is not mandatory and that it was difficult for the country to mobilize more than half of the registered population, the participation of 58% points to a more mature political behavior.
If the violence resulting from the armed conflict was one of the factors behind the abstention, it seems obvious that the aftermath of the Peace Accords concluded six years ago played a role. In this sense, and as a symbolic legacy, the fact that the winning candidate had been a guerrilla in his resume normalized a situation that had already occurred in other Latin American countries such as Brazil (Dilma Rousseff), El Salvador (Salvador Sánchez Cerén), Uruguay (José Mujica) and, dramatically, Nicaragua (Daniel Ortega). This is evidence of the impression of a phenomenon that has plagued Latin America for over 30 years.
Finally, presidentialism and its connection with its caudillist aspect implies two usual circumstances that frame a political scenario that will make sense when, within a month, the new president assumes power. Fragmentation will be the dominant note in both legislative chambers, to which will be added the meager quota that the Historic Pact maintains.
The creation of majorities that support the president’s work, together with the configuration of a cabinet with pluralist sensitivities and members from very different backgrounds, will be a test for the new government. Furthermore, the absence of a clear opposition leadership will be a disorienting factor that is common in presidential regimes.
The shadow of former president Uribe, the presence of the defeated candidate Rodolfo Hernández, with the supposed support of ten million voters but without a bench, or that of Humberto de la Calle from Centro Esperanza or David Luna from Cambio Radical, make up the possible cast. of candidates to exercise opposition control, which is so scarce, in fact, in the region.
In this scenario, in addition to the account of the historic triumph of a candidate who, indisputably, represents a left that had never before reached power in Colombia –an anomaly in comparative regional terms– it is worth mentioning the appointment of Francia Márquez, the first vice-president of the country, a black woman and environmental leader from Cauca, as a promise that exceptionality leads to normalization.
*Spanish translation by Giulia Gaspar
