Argentina: Agrarian conflict

Context

On March 11, 2008, Minister of Economy Martin Lousteau, announced Resolution 125, that consists of an increase in the moveable retentions to soybean and sunflower exports and the lowering of retentions for wheat and maize.  As a result of this Resolution, a strong conflict ensued between the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and the agrarian-farming sector.

In sign of protest against this policy, the four rural entities called for a stop in activities and started a series of pressure measures (route cuts, break in grain commercialization, beef and milk, and interruption of inter-urban transport) which affect national and international commerce and generate fuel supplies and food product scarcities in the internal marketplace.

The citizenship begins to show its annoyance by means of “cacerolazos” (cookpot banging protests), oriented to making the government responsible for the conflict, demanding solutions.  According to the survey carried out by PAPEP Argentina in April, 2008, most of the citizens are in an intermediate situation, both understanding of the government’s decisions as well as understanding the reasons for the protest.  However, the longer the conflict goes on, the fatigue of the citizens and the demands of public opinion in general for resolving the conflict by way of negotiation become greater.

After several weeks of conflict, on June 16, President Cristina Fernández announces that she will submit Resolution 125 to Congress, turning around a conflict that seemed to have no way out.  The official project of moveable retentions is approved in the Chamber of Deputies.

Finally, on July 16, 2008 The Senate Chamber rejected the project with a historic tie-break by  Vice-president Julio Cobos, ending a conflict that had lasted 127 days.

In this context, the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner must resolve, in the short term, the following dilemma: Rebuild pro-official movement with a change of course or rebuild it without changing course? Change the manner of doing politics: Exercise power in the manner nearest to the population, with more fluid expression channels and making cabinet changes as a sign of changes in course.