“War on inflation”: without plan and with old warnings, the naked outburst lack of political response

Alberto Fernández recorded a message and left aside the tribune he had originally imagined. This meant a structured presentation, after the expectation generated by the unhappy idea of anticipating the announcement of a “war on inflation”. Yesterday's terms were a little more careful — “battle”, he said at some point-, but everything was striking due to the lack of concrete announcements, the unnovelty of the speech - including the warnings - and the recognition of the need to “strengthen expectations.” Strictly speaking, I could have referred to generating expectations, but the point is that it did not give any political signal in that regard.

The President was in fact tied to what he himself had put on the table three days earlier: the war. That same thing - the time that has elapsed and the lack of concrete announcements - sharpened this month's inflation projection, after the 4.7% recorded by the CPI for February. Unsurprisingly and with unnecessary wear and tear due to poor communication management, the focus was on the presentation of a plan. It wasn't like that. The measures will take place from this weekend, as they were allowed to transcend last night, and would be foreseeable, that is, repeated in some cases. But the political deficit was undoubtedly the fundamental fact.

The message confirmed the intention to create a “Stabilization Fund” to contain the price of wheat flour in the local market. It is assumed, by those transcended from the ruling system, that it would be fueled by the increase in withholding of soy derivatives. At least, that could be the formula presented. Along with that, measures to contain prices and the warning on the application of the supply law. The tone sought to be severe in that stretch. Also, in the repeated phrase about “instructing” officials to act immediately. A similar emphasis to the position to promise in the first person the protection of people, as in the first stage of the coronavirus quarantine.

Alberto Fernández also said that in the coming days he will be convening a multisectoral agreement round table, with business, trade union and social entities. At no time did he speak of a political table, despite the fact that he had begun the speech by highlighting the democratic responsibility of all the spaces that made possible the sanction of endorsement of the agreement with the IMF. It seemed more like a minor message to Kirchnerism for having distanced itself and voting against, than a way of highlighting understanding with the opposition. That negotiation pruned the original project and made it clear that there was no support for the “program” committed to the Fund, but it avoids default.

The problem for Olivos remains how to achieve political support. The President, it has been said, spoke of “strengthening expectations”. This basically requires building credibility, the only factor that is not technical or strictly economic but vital to affirm a plan or program. It is not an easy task, consumed more than two years of management, although the objective is presented as an emergency, due to the consequences on the world economy that is being produced by the war unleashed by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The presidential message is expressive of the political picture. The legislative endorsement of the agreement with the IMF does not seem like the fuel that Olivos' imagination meant to relaunch management and, even more, turn around in favor of the re-electionist dream. And it is not just the unfavorable world horizon that the war is shaping, undoubtedly alarming. There is first and foremost the question posed by the internal fracture of the ruling front.

The adoption by a large majority of the Fund's law, in both chambers, was naturally celebrated by the Government. The numbers indicated 202 votes in favor, 37 against and 13 abstentions in deputies. And 56, 13 and 3 in the Senate. It was crucial to the contribution of Together for Change and the Front of All voted divided: the majority accompanied, but a third of the block of deputies and something else from the bench of pro-government senators opted for a negative vote or abstention.

Contemplating only the celebration in Olivos and the minority expression of hard Kirchnerism - together with the absence of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner at the time of the outcome - can generate a political mirage. The sanction was a positive fact for Olivos, a relief in general. But the next story is pending, internally and in the relationship with JxC and other spaces, at least in Congress.

The photos of Congress don't say everything but they are significant. Internally, the President was able to count on about 80 deputies, based on the work of Sergio Massa in the chamber and some ministers and governors. The same thing impacted the Senate: there the bill was supported by 20 Peronist legislators. The thick number, as is known, was added by JxC, in addition to blocks or interblocks smaller in number but which can be decisive in fought votes.

That is to say: a strong support of legislators internally, but with several terminals - above all, PJ governors - and with relative weight vis-à-vis the opposition. In other words, the President must resolve whether he is willing to move on what comes with a compromise formula internally - starting with the relationship with CFK - or if he seeks to generate some form of broader political consensus.

Nothing simple. It's about building credibility. And its absence may be more serious than an economic miscalculation. The President spoke just 24 hours after the adoption of the law guaranteeing the agreement with the Fund. He stressed, in other words, that the “catastrophe” was avoided, according to the term most heard in the legislative discourse these days. It is not enough, it is in sight, to generate expectations. And the logic of internal, conceptual and practical does not help at all.

KEEP READING: