Néstor Kirchner Implies He’s In Charge
President Cristina Fernández & Vice President Julio Cobos
(when they were still on speaking terms)
“Sometimes in the mornings Cristina remembers, and she says to me, “What a vice president you gave me!” — November 21, 2008, former President Néstor Kirchner
With that simple line, the former president seemed to confirm, at least implicitly and perhaps without recognizing it, what many political analysts and businessmen say in private: Néstor, and not his wife, Cristina Fernández, is the person who is really pulling the levers behind the curtain of Argentine politics. Néstor, in other words, is the Wizard of Argentina’s Oz.
Of course, that may not really be the case. But it’s not an unreasonable interpretation of Kirchner’s odd and exceptionally antagonistic dig at Julio Cobos, the nation’s democratically-elected vice president.
Kirchner clearly doesn’t like Cobos. Nor does Fernández. Both have explicitly called Cobos a traitor in private, according to multiple local media reports. And both have elliptically referred to him as such in public. Meanwhile, Cobos, by all accounts, doesn’t feel much love for the Kirchners either.
Though the details of this petty political melodrama are interesting, if not disturbing, they aren’t nearly as interesting as the implication behind Kirchner’s off-the-cuff comment on Friday. Fernández has long denied that she is second in command to her husband, who ran the country from mid-2003 to late 2007. And nobody doubts that Fernández is a tenacious leader in her own right.
But many people who have dealt with the government on economic and business matters say off-the-record that it is the former president who has the ultimate word over economic policy. Many others who have had contact with Kirchner say he is also the person in charge of matters political. Fernández, so these people say, controls diplomatic policy and foreign relations while Kirchner is in charge of domestic matters pertaining to the economy and politics.
If true, it would make sense for Kirchner to say that it was he who chose Cobos to be Fernández’s former running mate and her current vice president. This tacit admission of responsibility for such a decision took nobody by surprise, but it did seem to confirm that it was he, and not she, who made one of the most fundamentally important decisions of her presidential career. It indicated that, from the very beginning, she was not calling all the shots, not even the most important ones.
Kirchner also implied something else in his comments Friday: that Fernández has “more balls” than anyone else. Of course, he didn’t say this explicitly and his implication was figurative, not literal. “I can’t use the word I need to use,” he said in a speech to labor union members, “but she’s got all she needs to have, even more than we have, to move Argentina forward.”
You can see a video of Kirchner making the relevant comments here.
Popularity: 1% [?]
To me He just looks weaker and weaker.
After LILITA CALLED HIM A SWINDLER, hE JUST LEFT THE KITCHEN TO START MOVING AROUND.
Still the guy talks with such an authority that looks like he’s the one really in charge of the Nation.
And the first one is just the last one….
Catarsis
In private? Half of the newspapers political analysts say it in every single column.
I fail to see why the “double command” thing seems to be such an issue, while in reality it is a non-issue. They’re wife and husband. They belong to the same party. Does anyone really beleive the 2007 election would have turned otherwise if Nestor was the candidate? How can a voter be betrayed if he chose Cristina and it turns out her husband and political ally is having an influence over her Government? The people who chose Cristina disagreed with Nestor’s policies?
Let’s ignore all of that for a second. Is it really reasonable to expect that the then current President doesn’ have a vote regarding who his successor takes as a running mate?
Again, this strikes me as the most irrelevant non-issue being pushed by the media. There are other -valid- things to critizice. A whole lot of them
Hay muchos que eligen ser hipócritas, Taos.
Me refiero a muchos de la oposición al gobierno nacional, e incluso a muchos ciudadanos.
La gente que votó a Cristina Fernández en las últimas elecciones, lo hizo para darle continuidad al proyecto del ex Presidente Néstor Kirchner. No sé por qué se hacen los sorprendidos ahora.
De todas formas, en mi opinión, Cristina no es un mero títere. Ambos tomaron y siguen tomando decisiones: algunas veces prevalece la opinión de ella, y la mayoría de las veces la de él. Pero incluso me animo a decir que Cristina fue muy influyente durante las gestión de su esposo.
¿No estamos discutiendo temas menores?
Saludos, Taos
Pd: Dime Taos si en Estados Unidos no ha pasado lo mismo, pero sin el voto conciente de la población, como creo sucedió aquí. El otro día estaba viendo el programa de Conan O Brien, y en su monólogo dijo:
-Obama se reunió con Bush para saber cómo estaba el país. Luego se juntó con Cheney para saber la realidad.
Y también me han contado de algún afiche en el que se ve a Bushhh como “sirviente” de Cheney.
Hey Faco and Matias,
Very good points. Many thanks for your feedback. I’m glad to have it here as it enriches this blog and the dialog it aims to inspire.
As for the “in private” part, I’m referring mainly to businessmen. Analysts often don’t have business interests that could be hurt by speaking out against the Kirchners. As a result, they often are more willing to speak openly about the administration.
Business leaders, however, are exceptionally fearful about saying anything in public that might be perceived by the Kirchners as an affront to their sensibilities. I encounter this almost every day at work when trying to get sources to go on the record. This is unfortunate for multiple reasons, but it’s the way things work here at the moment. I would say that very close to all of the major business leaders that I know and come into contact with are very critical of the Kirchners in private but are afraid to say anything critical in public.
They cite the example of the president of Shell, who has spoken openly and negatively about government policies. His reward: Commerce Secretary Guillermo Moreno sought to put him in jail and Nestor Kirchner called for Argentines to boycott his company. Others worry the government will cause them trouble over taxes or trade or production or pricing policies, etc. Such concerns are voiced over and over again in my meetings and interviews.
It’s pretty clear that both Kirchners play a role in governing the country. But both have denied this repeatedly in public, so I found it interesting that Kirchner let the extent of his influence slip through the cracks in this apparently inadvertent comment.
Take care and best wishes to both of you,
Taos
I would highly, really doubt that political analysts and journalists don’t have *any* interests, specially when speaking out against certain government decisions that affect the economy.
A lot of businessmen don’t want to speak out against the government because their earnings are State related. Others, because they are dodging tax payments. Others have a “good thing going on” with the current government. None of them want trouble.
Of course the Kirchners are not against doing business, especially when they can get into it. But a whole lot of the criticism against them comes most from the companies side. Then again, I myself prefer businessmen being imposed by the government than business imposing over them, but that’s just me.
Thanks for the response, and best wishes for you too.
Well…
As I said before, the only one here who have real eggs is Lilita.
AND MANY , to say the least are hidding behind her big butts.
She not only has the bigg eggs and her big mouth, she has what it takes to help us cross the river.
Me? señor, I have no bags lo loose, no accounts to care for, no drums to play, no tangos or jazz to dance anymore….so I feel with the liberty to say like Lilia, that they are swindlers and traitors to our Nation and that we are going to the abiss…
While descending to this hole, we are getting company.
The ones with the companies and the business and the whole fricken enchilada, chickens included….
the bag lady
No sé por qué parece que siempre estoy defendiendo a los Kirchner, créanme que si bien comparto algunas cosas con ellos no soy un kirchnerista.
Pero lo que dice el comentario anónimo (the big lady) me dan ganas de llorar. “Lilita” Carrió… ¿la misma que hace 5 o 6 años se paseaba mal vestida, despeinada y con un crucifijo por todos los medios? ¿la misma que ahora hasta parece una mujer elegante? Es decir, ¿la misma que hace 5 o 6 años buscó los votos de las clases bajas y como éstas no le respondieron inició un giro sin medias tintas hasta convertirse en la candidata preferida de la derecha argentina?
Otra cosa: ¿la misma que eligió los insultos y los agravios como forma de hacer política? ¿Qué ideas tiene? ¿Alguien sabe?
¿Cómo hace para aliarse a López Murphy (el ultra conservador ex economista del país que propuso un ajuste en Educación durante el gobierno de De la Rua) y, al mismo tiempo, con el partido socialista? ¿Cuánto va a tardar en amigarse con Mauricio Macri?
Por último, recurro a una frase futbolera, del ex técnico de River Daniel Passarella: “los que miran desde afuera son unos fenómenos, siempre están invictos”.
¿Qué gestionó Carrió?
Los argentinos nos merecemos otra cosa. ¿Nos merecemos otra cosa?
Saludos
I think it all comes down to who takes charge in the bedroom. If you can find out that answer, the same will carry over to the pink house (no pun intended). Thanks for the insight.
I’m tired of the Argentine right. I’m not Peronist (what is exactly that?) and I’m aware of the corrpution problems in the Kirchner administration, but their economic choices are sound and when some people call Cristina names they are only repeating what their parents (or themselves, ja) did to Evita some sixty years ago. I should only hope that Crisitna could compare with Evita.
– They closed that hole called AFJP, good for them and us
– They did not cave under the pressure of the agrarian oligarchy, good for them and us
– They nationalized the national air carrier, not so good because it was too late, but nevertheless is done.
Things to do? Too many to list, between them stopping the subsidies pólicy (on the way in some areas), and taking sides with the people instead of friends in some businesses (transport anyone?).