The outstanding feature of this tour has been, once again, the radicalization of discourse. In his first trip to Spain since taking office, the Argentine president joined Vox’s campaign for the upcoming European elections by stirring up the fear of a sector of Spanish society towards socialism, understood as a label applicable to any political current that does not idolize individualism and the market, stretching the definition to include Peronism. Milei described this orientation as “cancerous,” identified it with death, and decreed that it is contrary to human nature. It would be pointless to discuss the conceptual rigor of this classification. Because it is not intended to describe or explain a phenomenon, but to evoke an emotion. It is about fueling hatred because it is believed that anger mobilizes and groups much more than any program.
Milei went even further. He gained a coveted space on all Spanish news portals by embodying these miseries in the President of the Government. He said that Pedro Sánchez was clinging to power and touched on the alleged corruption of his wife, Begoña Gómez, who is under investigation for alleged influence peddling. Milei feels justified in this accusation because two weeks ago, the Minister of Transport, Óscar Puente, accused him of consuming prohibited substances. This furious exacerbation of messages is associated with another characteristic of the political struggle of these times. Leaders who use this style, whether left-wing or right-wing populists, prefer to act as chieftains of a faction rather than as heads of state. Milei defined himself before Vox’s congregation as a “propagator of ideas of freedom” who, additionally and secondarily, holds the Presidency of a country.
It is common for the leader of La Libertad Avanza to present himself as a prophet who assumes the mission of preaching a creed on a global scale. That is, he feels like the crusader of a “cultural battle”. This task has given him extraordinary popularity, which would be very difficult to achieve if his message were reduced to the routine tasks and problems of an administrator. His trip, therefore, was not conceived as a movement of Argentine foreign policy, but as a commitment to an international ideological brotherhood that gives him projection outside his country. This practice is becoming more and more common. The Vox convention was also the stage for Italian Giorgia Meloni or Hungarian Viktor Orban to temporarily suspend their public official character to present themselves as fellow believers of Santiago Abascal. A gamble to establish this “populist international” proposed by former Donald Trump’s guru, Steve Bannon. Milei only took this attitude to the extreme, as he not only embraced his friend but also aimed darts at Sánchez.
From this behavior emerges another characteristic of the game: a loss of institutional sense bordering on administrative irregularity. This was pointed out to Milei by Carlos Rodríguez, an Argentine ultraliberal economist who collaborated with him during the election campaign. The Argentine President said that he was a liberal in a country of “leftists.” And Rodríguez commented, “Those leftists, 50% of whom are poor and destitute, paid for his trip on the presidential plane to go say nonsense.” Rodriguez was referring to Milei and his entourage’s trip to Spain being financed with state funds, meaning taxpayers’ money, many of whom sympathize with the socialism which he went to denounce.
It is possible that Sánchez may have secretly welcomed Milei’s attacks. While in full proselytizing effort, it allows him to polarize public opinion with a recurring argument: we are victims of the far-right attack, which hates everything Spaniards appreciate, starting with social solidarity. On one extreme would be the PSOE, and on the other, empowered by Milei, Vox. And nothing else. Abascal also celebrates, as thanks to this conflict, he can envision regaining momentum in a declining trajectory. Sánchez’s and Abascal’s strategies are very suitable for one permanent goal: to disguise the existence of the Popular Party, which has a much larger electoral base than Vox can attract. Sánchez and Milei contribute to the same operation by sinking the center.
There is another symmetry. Milei is a president who attacks as the leader of a tribe. Sánchez is attacked as the leader of a tribe but responds as a president. This Sunday, the one who responded to the grievances was not the PSOE spokesperson but the Minister of Foreign Affairs, José Manuel Albares, who protested that Milei had not only attacked socialism, Sánchez, and his wife but “our democracy, our institutions, and Spain.” Albares announced that he had decided to recall the Spanish ambassador to Buenos Aires, María Jesús Alonso Jiménez, who, recovering from surgery, must travel to Madrid. The recall is the prelude to the withdrawal of an ambassador, that is, the rupture of diplomatic relations. Sánchez managed to give more substance to this institutional reaction when the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, the Spanish socialist Josep Borrell, issued a statement saying that “attacks against the relatives of political leaders have no place in our culture.”
Aware of the damage that this institutional victimization of socialism has on its electoral prospects, the Popular Party issued a statement stating that it did not have to endorse Sánchez’s stance since the attack was not against Spain or its institutions but the wife of a political party leader. The Popular Party spokesperson, Esteban González Pons, criticized the recall of Ambassador Alonso Jiménez. But he also reproached Milei for meddling in Spain’s internal affairs. A difficult balance, broken by Cayetana Álvarez de Toledo. In a distancing from her party’s bureaucracy, she issued this message: “The Government of Spain can call the President of Argentina a drug addict and the President of the Community of Madrid and her brother, whom no court is investigating for corruption, corrupt. But the President of Argentina cannot call the wife of the President of the Government of Spain corrupt, whom a court is investigating for corruption. Don’t try to fool us.”
The Foreign Minister Albares demanded that Milei apologize. Milei’s spokesperson responded that he shouldn’t expect him to do so. This is not surprising, as the Argentine president’s diatribes are not outbursts. They are premeditated. So far, he has only retracted motivated by some concrete interest. For example, when he had to ensure that his electoral rival Patricia Bullrich, whom he had attacked for months, orders to vote for him in the second round of elections. Milei’s failure to realize or consider that his controversy entails a general harm does not mean that this harm does not exist. It was evident during his visit to Madrid. On Saturday, at the residence of the Argentine ambassador, he met with a group of representatives of Spanish companies. Without diminishing anyone, it was striking, besides all being men, the absence of emblematic figures from Spain’s business community, especially company owners.
This lack may have been due to organizational deficiencies. But another reason can be suspected. When reading the reports of this interview in Madrid newspapers, it is noticeable the amount of justifications provided by the attendees, all off the record, to explain their attendance. It is very clear that today, getting close to Milei in Spain means moving away from the Socialist government. That’s why several companies have come out since Sunday taking a cautious distance from the Argentine president. Another material harm of this factional diplomacy appears. Not only are partisan adventures financed with resources of all taxpayers. Also, the management of investments is hindered, which is always harmful but much more so for a country with as many economic hardships as Argentina.
