This week, Ecuador elected a new president who will rule for 17 months. For any kind of organization or political project, and even more so for a country, this is a very limited time to achieve any significant change; However, this period is almost equal to that of Jamil Mahuad, who during his tenure took several measures that marked the before and after in Ecuador. The question is what can be done in this period of government? It actually depends on the goals and strategy of the new president. I see three scenarios: radical authoritarian, incrementalist democratic and constitutive.

In a radically authoritarian scenario, the president decides to risk his personal future and political capital to cut the Gordian knot around the problem of insecurity. Here, drastic high-risk measures are taken that could have high political (breakdown of democratic institutions), social (violation of fundamental rights) and economic (increased country risk and greater difficulties in international financing) costs. would approach a express bucelization Ecuador, which would be maintained with the support of the armed forces and with the majority of the population accepting an authoritarian solution to the current crisis. I think it’s unlikely.

In the democratic-incrementalist scenario, the president decides to take measures and reforms that the political and economic situation allows in order to achieve certain improvements in the governance of the state and the provision of public goods and services. Certain positive results will be seen in the organization and strengthening of the state in order to regain territorial and sectoral control of areas in crisis, but only as a key to the search for re-election in 2025. There will be no fundamental changes and there is already a risk of failure if we do not act skillfully and politically capable in legislation and with political and social actors. This scenario cheetah driver It would be close to the well-known sentence “if we want everything to remain as it is, everything must change”. That is the most pragmatic scenario.

In the constitution-making scenario, the president calls for a popular consultation to restart the political game through a Constituent Assembly that can change the issues of form and content of Montecristi’s constitution. This becomes a political space to process the Koreanism-anti-Koreanism conflict so that in 2025 we can start over with a new political pact and social contract. While this is happening, the president takes measures from the democratic-incrementalist scenario, but with a context in which the political dispute is more focused on the Assembly. This Ecuadorian scenario would end with the proposal of the twenty-first Constitution of the Republic, which would be decided in a referendum, along with general elections in 2025. It is a risky scenario with no guarantees of success, but, perhaps, necessary for the medium term.

It seems to me that Daniel Noboa’s presidency will be closer to the democratic-incrementalist scenario, but with popular consultation and a referendum. For a short-term government, it is a conservative strategy that may not contribute to the strategic goals of the country or the president-elect. (OR)