|
Archived Articles
Simeon Mitropolitski is a Canadian analyst, of Bulgarian origin, and a former syndicated columnist with the Bulgarian News Agency (BTA). He is the author of several hundred articles dealing with hot political and economic topics, both national and international.
He was part of the first group of Bulgarian intellectuals and students that began the opposition movement that finally put an end to the communist regime in this country in 1989, and in 1996-1997 participated in international observation teams during the elections in several Balkan countries - Romania, Albania and Bulgaria.
In 2002 Simeon and his family moved from Bulgaria to Canada where they live now in Montreal, province of Quebec. Simeon is a Master of Political Science from McGill University and a B.A. of Political Science and History.
Global Real Estate Project
|
 |
Mexico Needs More Than TimeIn order to catch up with most developed states a country has to do at least two things - to follow right economic policy and to stick to it for at least 20-30 years. There are many examples how countries trying to catch up have failed down the road. Many Latin America nations had their golden moments when they thought it's a matter of time to be among the richest and then suddenly their all efforts became void. And they had to begin again to push up the hill the big stone, as was the case of Sisyphus from the Greek mythology. Mexico is among the best examples of what shouldn't be done if a nation wants to become one of the richest. The financial crisis of 1994 still hasn't been fully forgotten by the local elite and the entire population. The new economic course set by the adherence to the NAFTA, will hardly be enough to make from Mexico the next economic tiger. In the best of scenarios the country will need at least 10-20 more years to show itself to the world. If by that time something happens and the trend is reversed, it will have to start from the zero its efforts. At the stake are not only the economic prosperity of one nation but also the prosperity of its small and rather poor southern neighbors desperately in need of regional model for their own development. At stake is also the security of the United States, because if Mexico fails millions of new migrants will storm the northern frontiers in search of better life. Mexico's future depends not only on the huge amount of direct foreign investments, which on the other hand are vital for any bold economic project. Bringing in $20 or 30 billion per year is of course a noble task that could ultimately determine the whole course of national development. But attracting enough money isn't the only problem that Mexico faces on its road to prosperity. The second, closely related, and at least as important is how to keep this money inside. That's the place where many developing countries failed in the past. After a good start they were unable to maintain the pace of development. There were many reasons for that: huge external debt (Brazil); bad global economic environment (Indonesia); sudden political change (Argentina); major natural disaster (Turkey). On the other hand, all countries that show any lasting results succeeded in avoiding all these dangers, and above all their governments were ready notwithstanding the difficulties to stick to their initial plans and reach the other side of the river. For Mexico this will be more difficult given the role of the state in the history of the nation. As far as history books tell us, the state in Mexico beginning with the Spanish occupation in early 16th century was always considered as a force caring primarily for its own interests. The revolutions have brought down the governments just to see another dictator or party regime installed. Mexico, as a large country with different regional interests, can either be truly federal -- when the federal government helps the local population to care about itself, or be over centralized -- trying to impose its bureaucracy everywhere notwithstanding the local particularities. The United States even before the revolution was an excellent example of a huge territory governed by the local communities. The short period of military occupation of the South states just after the War of Secession was an exception rather than rule. On the other hand, Mexican government was always looking how to crash the local autonomy and every such attempt was followed by major national disasters (countless military coups in the 19th century, the separation of Texas, the revolution of early 20th century, and recently the Chiapas state resurrection in 1994). The Mexican state representatives still behave as if they represent not the people's government but foreign invaders. Their desire to enrich themselves on the back of the ordinary people is proverbial. But this is just an element of the whole picture, perhaps the most visible but by no means the most important. In order to keep the investments in, Mexican government should sooner or later begin seriously tackling this problem, the problem of alienation between the state and the people. Because the foreign investments are just another "people's" money. You can't indefinitely be friend to some money holders and enemy to others. And what does Mexico gain attracting foreigners and pushing out its own children? Mexico needs time to be where it would like to be, but this won't be enough. It also needs a full reflection of its own identity.
Mexico profile: --------------------
See also the directory of companies providing real estate services in, and general real estate information of Mexico.
|
See also:
