Milei the Great or Milei the Footnote?

There is absolutely no way for President Javier Milei to insult his way to greatness. He will have to realise this sooner or later. If he doesn’t, he will become just a footnote in the history of a country already burdened with enough political footnotes.

The problems Argentina faces are too big and too enduring for anyone to solve alone, especially when alienating much of the rest of the world. More than 10 months into his term, the La Libertad Avanza leader has not established solid ties with anyone in the political, business, or union establishments. The support he receives depends solely on his performance in the polls – a situation that is bound to change eventually.

Milei has a unique opportunity to capitalise on the fact that most Argentines are tired of corruption and economic mismanagement by their leaders. There is also a consensus among the political establishment that rising fiscal deficits and money-printing, which fuels inflation, had reached their limit. 

The President’s greatest achievement is having understood both this demand and the emerging consensus, translating them into a winning electoral formula. However, as has happened with other leaders in the past, the strategies used to win elections do not necessarily work when governing and facing reality. 

Milei’s biggest mistake is acting as though Argentines voted for a comprehensive package, including a pointless cultural battle that aligns him with international figures like Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, the US’s Donald Trump, or Spain’s Santiago Abascal.

Most Argentines do not care much about that agenda. There are plenty of examples: a recent survey by the polling firm Analogías, for instance, showed that 84 percent of the public has a positive view of public universities, even as Milei was criticising them as nests of corrupt politicians and leftist activists.

If Milei wants to be remembered as more than a footnote, the best advice he could follow is to focus entirely on solving the economic problems he was elected to address. Most people — aside from his social media followers — would prefer he does so more quietly, without insulting everyone along the way.

But even beyond the issue of manners, the sustainability of the Milei project requires the President to tone down his political agenda and move toward the centre, both in action and in language. Politically, Argentina stands in the eye of the radicalisation storm that has previously swept through other Western countries – Milei might believe that this sentiment will endure forever, but he would be mistaken. What stands between him and greatness is ensuring that any positive results from his economic programme translate into structural, positive and lasting change.

Earlier this month, neighbouring Brazil was upgraded by the risk ratings agency Moody’s to a step closer to regaining the investment grade it lost over a decade ago when its own wave of polarisation and radicalisation was starting. 

A key factor in this decision is that President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, now in his third term, is acting as a political mediator with a pragmatic rather than ideological approach to economic management. Another reason is that the Brazilian political establishment includes an amorphous group of unscrupulous small regional parties known as the “Centrão” (or “Big Centre”), which significantly limits the Executive’s ability to deviate.

In Argentina today, being centrist equates to being a pariah. Moderates like former Buenos Aires City mayor Horacio Rodríguez Larreta, Unión Cívica Radical Senator Martín Lousteau, or former Peronist presidential candidate Sergio Massa – the man Milei defeated last year – seem stuck in political limbo. Even Buenos Aires Province Governor Axel Kicillof, who dared to show some signs of independence from his political mentor Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, faces friendly fire from the more radical sectors within his group.

But “for good” might not last “forever” in politics. In the two presidential elections before 2023, the Argentine public voted for moderation: Mauricio Macri’s Cambiemos coalition was centrist rather than extreme in 2015, and in 2019, Alberto Fernández promised dialogue and civility to counterbalance the Kirchnerite influence over his ticket. 

For different reasons, both failed the voters. Milei's election was a painful consequence of their failures. It is now up to him to transform that reaction into something more constructive.