Lucía Santa Cruz and her assessment of Kast's first months: "Perhaps the mistake was raising expectations"

The historian and advisor to the Libertad Institute, Lucía Santa Cruz, gave an assessment this Wednesday of the first months of President José Antonio Kast's government and suggested that one of its mistakes may have been raising expectations too high in the face of complex problems such as security, immigration, and the economy. In a conversation with the podcast Cómo te lo explico, hosted by journalists Paula Catena and Mónica Rincón, Santa Cruz maintained that the issues Kast placed among his priorities "are very complex, very serious problems, and none of them has a short-term solution." "Perhaps the mistake there was generating expectations that problems like, for example, illegal immigration, were a matter of political will, of courage, of being brave, and no, it is a very complex problem," argued the also member of the Chilean Academy of Social Sciences. Regarding the economy, she pointed out that its results require longer timeframes and are also subject to external factors. "The economy is long-term, or at least medium-term, and it is always contingent on things happening outside, as has been the war in Iran, which affects the plans the Finance Minister (Jorge Quiroz) may have, and alters and worsens them," she said. In her evaluation of Kast's first months, Santa Cruz also noted that the President has surprised her favorably, although she acknowledged that her initial expectations "were not that high." "I considered that the campaign had been quite aggressive, divisive, and I thought it would be a less inclusive government," she said, adding: "And the truth is I have been surprised by his tone, which does not correspond so much with his friendships. He is not a (Jair) Bolsonaro, he is not a (Javier) Milei, he is not a Trump." In that sense, the historian highlighted the importance he attributes to presidential rhetoric and maintained that "democracy is not compatible with a very aggressive, very divisive rhetoric that disqualifies the other." "It implies accepting the other as a legitimate contender with whom one argues and deliberates in a democracy. So his discourse gives me great reassurance, in the sense that he insists he wants to be president of all Chileans," said Santa Cruz. A "more authoritarian" right The historian was also asked about the type of right that Kast's government and his party, the Republican Party, represent, and suggested that it is a more authoritarian current, after placing it in a historical perspective. After recalling that the history of the right "has been a history of great concordances and great differences," Santa Cruz addressed its evolution from the conservative forces linked to the 1833 Constitution, through the relationship between Church and State, to the birth of gremialismo in the twentieth century. "I believe that certainly there is something that is never linear, but between that original group of the 1930s, anti-liberal democracy, the origins of gremialismo, and this new right, which I believe is more authoritarian, which is less sensitive to the restriction of civil liberties," she detailed. In that sense, she stated that "it neither surprises nor alarms me that these rights exist. But it would be like a somewhat more authoritarian gremialismo." Santa Cruz linked that characterization to the security constitutional reform presented by the Executive. "The presentation of the constitutional reform is somewhat the product of that. Instinctively, there is not that rejection that other rights feel toward excessive manifestations of authority," she explained. The same initiative had been questioned shortly before by the historian, who maintained that, "from whatever angle you look at it, it is not compatible with a Western representative liberal democracy." "It is the deprivation of rights by the simple arbitrary autonomy of a person, without mediation of the Judicial Power, without mediation of Congress, in which a group, for living in a certain area, is deprived of its essential rights," she argued. Santa Cruz called the presentation of the reform "a mistake" by the government and by Minister Martín Arrau. "A completely mistaken assessment of what this country wants and is willing to accept. But I consider that they have recanted, and I consider it very positive that the institutions and the culture have in some way been so categorical in saying that this is not acceptable," she added. The parallel between Kast and Boric Santa Cruz also referred to the more moderate tone that, in her view, Kast has adopted compared to other right-wing leaderships in the region and the world, and drew a parallel with former President Gabriel Boric and the evolution she observed during his term. "I believe one can make a comparison between what President Boric's presidency was like — he had a set of quite radical, very extreme ideas, and yet, in the exercise of power after the plebiscite that defeated the constitutional project, he changed his rhetoric; in fact he changed in the runoff," she said. From that comparison, she maintained that "there is something in the prevailing climate of opinion in the country that seems to be restraining the extremes." "But that does not stop people from thinking what they think. In other words, President Kast was heavily criticized for attending this Madrid Forum, which does not represent me, I would not have gone, but which he helped found. He believes in it, and his behavior within the forum met my expectations of moderation," she noted as an example. The historian Lucía Santa Cruz in conversation with the podcast Cómo te lo explico, hosted by journalists Paula Catena and Mónica Rincón. Screenshot. Santa Cruz maintained that, for her evaluation, the way rulers act is more relevant than their personal convictions. "So I believe there are people who say that what matters is what people think, more than how they act. Not me. I think that as people act, they create a reality," she specified. "The fact that President Boric moderated his position, his language, etc., was always disparaged. I appreciated it very much, because I believe these are steps that commit one to a path of moderation that I believe is the only one compatible with democracy," she added. Along those lines, she concluded by saying that "President Kast may continue thinking exactly what he thought during the campaign. But what matters to me is how he behaves." Chile Vamos and a possible alliance with the Republicans Asked about a possible alliance between the Republicans and Chile Vamos, Santa Cruz pointed out that, in her view, "power is a tremendous binding cement." "So I believe that if this government does well, it is very possible that the differences will be settled, that they will be better accepted," she said, then explaining that "if things do not go well for them, maybe we will have an absolutely unconventional scenario." In her view, "it is very important that this government does well if we want to maintain a somewhat more institutional logic of politics," also considering the existence of parties like the Party of the People, which "is a very unconventional party." Santa Cruz also referred to the leader of the PDG, Franco Parisi, and said she would not rule out that he could have a chance of reaching the Presidency, mentioning as one of his attractions "the easy promise." Shield of the Americas and the Falkland Islands The historian also addressed the government's entry into the Shield of the Americas, stating that the situation of organized crime and drug trafficking "is extremely serious; I am sure it is not something a country alone can resolve and that agreements are required." These agreements, she added, must be capable of "respecting and complying exactly with the rules of each nation. And in our case, respect for democracy in all its expressions." Santa Cruz said she was surprised that the agreement also included "clauses referring to the economic side" and pointed out that the matter should be viewed from a broader perspective. "The problem the United States is creating is not limited to Chile and is not limited to Latin America. (Donald) Trump has made the most shameful interventions in England's internal politics. He has decreed what freedom of expression is in England and what it is not," she detailed. She added that "he (Trump) has imposed the same tariffs and has manipulated free trade and the world order in Europe with greater brazenness than with us. And in the case of England they have had to concede a lot." "But that does not mean that that concession is infinite and that there will not come a moment when both Europe and Chile will say, no sir, this is my decision and this belongs to my autonomy," Santa Cruz affirmed. The historian also referred to Chile's position regarding the conflict between the United Kingdom and Argentina over the Falkland Islands, particularly the trade between Punta Arenas and the archipelago. "I believe there is something reasonable in Chile wanting to exercise that sovereignty by deciding with whom it can trade and with whom it cannot," she said, adding that "what the Defense Minister (Fernando Barros) said perhaps should not have been said, but he is confirming a fact." Santa Cruz reaffirmed that "Chile's position, I believe, is correct" and that the country "should not allow itself to be pressured by Argentina if it tries to limit the possibility of trading with the Falklands." "I believe one would need the responsibility of power and all the information to make a final decision. As an outside observer, I believe the Magallanes residents are right to claim their right to trade. In fact, what the Foreign Minister (Francisco Pérez Mackenna) said is that it is an agreement between private parties, that was the argument," she specified.