Mexicans are very serious about their democracy. A few years ago I walked across the bridge over the Rio Grande into Nuevo Laredo. It happened to be election day and in the downtown plaza citizens were waiting patiently in long lines to vote at crowded polls. Just like at the corrida de toros, some were in the shade and others in the sunshine, but everyone was hot. Nuevo Laredo is scorching in the summertime.

The election was on a Sunday, but beginning on the previous Wednesday campaigning and political advertising were prohibited by law, and polling organizations weren't allowed to release the results of their polls. Most surprising, in spite of the heat, all across Mexico not a drop of alcohol was available anywhere on election day, no cervezas, no margaritas, nothing. Bars were closed and millions of pesos were being forfeited in the interest of sober democratic decision-making.

Not to overstate, but it was an impressive picture: millions of serious, dignified, even proud, Mexicans determined to stand in line in uncomfortable conditions in order to vote thoughtfully and deliberately, freed from the distraction and commotion that often characterize modern political campaigns.

This take on democracy is relatively new in Mexico. More than 70 years of corruption and one-party rule had given Mexicans the right to skepticism about national politics. But in 2000 the long reign of the Institutional Revolutionary Party came to an end with the election of Vicente Fox, a conservative, pro-business, Coca-Cola executive who appeared to be a perfect south-of-the-border soulmate for George W. Bush.

Now Mexico is considering the results of an extremely close presidential race between Felipe Calderon, who can be expected to continue Fox's right-of-center policies, and Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who represents a move toward the left. The gap between them is a fraction of a percentage point, and Lopez Obrador, with fewer votes, has alleged election irregularities and requested a complete manual recount. Mexico's Federal Electoral Tribunal has until Sept. 6 to resolve Obrador's allegations and declare a president-elect. We have only to wait for the tribunal's ruling.

"Wait" is the operative term here. In the United States we expect to know who our next president is going to be on election night or at least by the next day. But for an election this important, with a vote count this close, Mexico should take its time and count every vote carefully, if only to erase any lingering doubts about who actually won. Clarity and credibility on that point are at least as important as the result of the election itself.

In fact, the United States would do well to support the full democratic process in Mexico until all uncertainty is removed and then to fully accept the winner. Half of Mexico's population must have looked somewhat suspiciously on President Bush's hasty, if not eager, congratulation of Calderon, whom they are likely to perceive as his candidate-of-choice.

View Comments

But any indication of preference between the two candidates is likely to be interpreted in light of the history of U.S. interference in Mexican affairs that dates at least to the Mexican War, which is still seen in Mexico as an aggressive land-grab that cost that country a vast swath of rich land from California to where I live in south Texas. In fact, much of the latter part of the 19th century is marked by widespread U.S. influence and exploitation of Mexican natural resources, particularly oil, agriculture, and mining. (For an extensive and convincing confirmation of this point, see John Mason Hart's "Revolutionary Mexico.")

True, that was a long time ago. But Mexico's proximity to the United States continues to be a mixed blessing for Mexicans. It's not surprising that most Mexicans keep somewhere in the backs of their minds some version of the famous saying, often attributed to 19th century Mexican President Porfirio Diaz: "Poor Mexico: So far from God and so close to the United States."

A clear expression of a willingness on our part to cooperate with either candidate as soon as the established processes determine who the winner is, would be a welcome and well-justified demonstration of our acceptance of Mexico's right to exercise democracy as it sees fit, even if it means an unwelcome move to the left.


John M. Crisp teaches in the English Department at Del Mar College in Corpus Christi, Texas. E-mail jcrisp@delmar.edu.

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.