The unnecessary brawler


Mixups are never good news. In particular when they lead to disagreement between people or nations. They often begin with what one party believes they heard the other say or saw a gesture or signal that was not intended to be anything other than what the other maintains it was. Anyway.

The matter, then, becomes a sea of ​​explanations and when things do not start to work, the tone of voice is raised as if by shouting we would be better understood. Then we resort to high-sounding words and rudeness, to appear more firm; at this point, however, anger has taken hold of us and we are about to let the fists resolve the dispute between the discussants. Things can no longer go well.

About the President’s written reaction to the letter sent by the European Parliament, many things have been said: delusional, insane, unnecessary, crude, ill-informed. And, it all stems from an initial confusion.

The call of the European Parliament is not for the government to stop killing journalists, but to better guarantee their safety, since in just three months of this year 7 journalists have died at the hands of criminals.

The president who knows that he read and launched a response made on his knees on a flight, without consulting the Foreign Ministry and with the use of unnecessary and frankly rude adjectives, not only for diplomatic language but for the common citizen.

He called them sheep, misinformed, raising fingers, unable to read, in short, a rosary of diatribes as if he were in his mornings or in a professional bully alley. But the worst thing is that, in his central argument, what the president maintains is that it is no longer as it was before, that neoliberal governments killed journalists, completely confusing the meaning of the request or the comment of the European Parliament.

To heat things up a bit, those loyal to the president, morenista deputies and governors, have published letters of support for the Mexican president, using his own language, calling the European Parliament interfering, of being a position that basically attacks the electricity reform of the president (sic) (imagine where we are going) and calling them sheep (as if with these letters they no longer seem like sheep) and ignorant. And all this for not reading the letter from the parliament in question.

It is very difficult to read in the president’s response a reasoned intention weighed against reasons of state or national security. I don’t see what purpose the presidential letter, that of the deputies or governors, satisfies Morena’s clientele and, even less, can one think of a diplomatic, forceful response. None of that is.

The worst thing is that in the treaties that we have with the European economic community and with the parliament itself, there is a human rights clause that gives said parliament the right to give an opinion on matters of this nature and that Mexico has signed and approved by the Senate to this day.

The matter thus seems to reveal the true and permanent character of the president: a permanent alley brawler. His cosmogony can only pass through the eye of continuous anger and in this case, particularly unnecessary. Nothing more, but nothing less either.

Miguel Gonzalez Compean

Lawyer, political scientist and economist

guest column

Essayist and interested in legal and justice issues. currently professor at the Faculty of Law of the UNAM.



Leave a Comment