It was unthinkable a few months ago, but Petro is now the second most powerful politician in Colombia.
How did Petro win, and what does it mean for Colombian politics?
As Colombia basked in the summer heat of June, former mayor Enrique Penalosa appeared to be coasting to victory. It was almost certain that he would return to the mayoralty of Bogota after a 11 year absence. Penalosa stood four years ago and lost - surprisingly - to Samuel Moreno, a mayor now shamed by a scandal that has shocked the nation, and has put Moreno in jail. Bogotanos would not make the same mistake twice it was thought; Penalosa - a hugely successful mayor during his time in office - was just the man to rescue Bogota from the inferno of Moreno´s mandate.
In a move designed to shore up Penalosa´s support, and push him over the finishing line, ex-President Alvaro Uribe had joined the campaign earlier in the year. Uribe left office last year as the most popular president in Colombia´s history. A Uribe Penalosa ticket had been thought to be invincible. But public opinion is divided on Uribe. He is - for some - the nation´s savour, having brought the FARC to its knees. Others though point to what they see as corruption on a massive scale during his time in office. Rightly or wrongly, Uribe is now a divisive figure for sections of Colombian society.
Uribe´s support for Penalosa caused much soul-searching within the Green Party (on whose platform Penalosa was standing). Antanas Mockus (the Green Party´s presidential candidate in 2010), and one of Uribe´s fiercest critics, left the party to stand as an independent - against Penalosa.
As the summer sun intensified, so did the competition. Gustavo Petro had now left the Polo Democratic party on whose platform he had stood in the presidential elections, to form his own, independent progessive movement.
Petro´s move was shrewd. By this point Mayor Samuel Moreno had been suspended from office, and was forced to stand trial for alleged corruption in the process of awarding contracts for Bogota´s infrastructure works. Petro knew that if he were to stand on the Polo platform he would be tarred with the brush that brought about Moreno´s denouement. He left and promptly stood on a whiter than white, anti-corruption platform.
The collective he accused of refusing to deal adequately with the Moreno corruption scandal elected their own candidate to run for office, but the majority of Polo´s natural voters stuck with Petro.
The polls continued consistently to show strong support for Penalosa. But while in June he had enjoyed a ten per cent lead over the nearest candidate, Gina Parody, by September the race had narrowed and there were three horses in the race. By this time it had become clear that Mockus was failing to make a major impact and as a result joined forces with Parody. Parody´s support rose and she became a serious contender. But it was Petro´s candidature, however, that was beginning to make waves. He quickly moved from also ran to serious challenger, with some polls showing him in the lead while others put him a close second, behind Penalosa.
With only a week to go until polling day, however, the race was still neck and neck, between Petro and Penalosa. The city´s voters were set to deliver a technical draw. But, with days to go, Petro broke free, his support swelling - as votes ebbed away from the many also ran candidates - and polls on the eve of the election showed the 8 and 9% lead which eventually became the reality on Sunday night as the voting booths shut.
It was a dramatic end to a campaign that owed more to opinion polls than to policies. Penalosa, the favourite from the outset had been beaten by Petro the outsider - a plucky tortoise who outran the dead cert hare.
Why did voters, eventually put their faith in Petro? There are three overriding reasons:
Petro represents change. He presents himself as a political outsider in a country in which the political elite is a closed group - where governors, senators and presidents are taken from the same (often family) stock. Bogota needed to make a break from the past, from Moreno.
Petro has positioned himself as the anti-corruption candidate. Colombia has been shocked by the scandals at the heart of current mayor Samuel Moreno's administration. By leaving the Polo Democrats, Petro was able to cast himself as the white-knight candidate. It is also true that Petro has made his political career by uncovering and standing against corruption at the heart of the political system.
While Colombia is a right-wing country, Bogota is a left-wing city. Colombians elected right-wing Alvaro Uribe as president between 2002 and 2010, but in Bogota they elected left-wingers Luis Garzon in 2003 and Samuel Moreno in 2007. Petro will continue this trend.
It is also possible to point to the split in the centrist vote - Penalosa would almost certainly have won if the field of candidates had been narrower.
What does Petro´s victory mean for Colombian politics?
This will depend on how Petro governs, of course. For the time-being it is a blow to the Green Party which must now be set for a period of cool and calm reflection. It is also a shot across the bows of the establishment parties. Penalosa lost, despite the support of three parties in the national government´s coalition, the Conservatives, the U and the Greens. Petro won as an independent. Gina Parody came third as an independent. This website reported last month on the phenonomen of personality over party politics...Petro´s election accelerates this trend.
It is bad news for former president Alvaro Uribe. Not only did his candidate lose, but Petro a bitter oponent won.
The most important aspect of Petro´s win, however is the potential for it to act as a cataylst for the peace process. Petro is a former guerrilla. Although it is thought no bullet was fired by him in anger, he was nevertheless part of the intellectual arm of M-19. He demobilised in the 90s and began his legitimate political career. President Santos has been quick to point to Petro as an example of how former militants can be re-cast, rejoin and make a useful contribution to society. The history of conflict resolution - particularly in my own country, the UK - shows us that offering combatants a routemap back to useful civilian life can be a powerful tool.
For now those on the right in Colombia will be licking their wounds, those in Bogota will be waiting anxiously to see how Petro performs, and those in the world of political commentary will be speculating whether one day this former guerrilla could become president.
Bogota needs change, for this website Enrique Penalosa represented the best choice before the electorate. But Petro won with a clear mandate. There is no doubting that Petro is an intellectual, and that he has fought for years against corruption. His victory is historic, time will tell whether his period in office will be looked upon in the same way.
1 comments:
Great article. Petro is a very valuable actor in the Colombian politics scene. He is a staunch critic of corruption both left and right of the spectrum. Despite being the object of fierce accusations (and even serious threats that have forced some of his family members into exile) from both the Polo and the U parties he has shown unbendable courage. Congratulations to Bogota! Peñalosa made a terrible mistake when he accepted the support of the parapolitical and corrupt U party. He could have easily won the elections without their support; losing these elections is the prize he paid for making pacts with the corruption the Green party was supposed to fight. He lost the support of the core of the Green party and he deeply disappointed people that wanted true change and not more of the same corrupt politics of both the left and the right. I'm sure Petro's mandate will prove his critics wrong and progressives from all sides will come together in his support.
Post a Comment