Vicente Fox did his best work before he became president of Mexico. He was much more effective as a candidate than as the country's leader. But, for now, that's good enough for me.
Millions of Mexicans, like me, were born with the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI) in power and thought we were going to die with the PRI in power. Thanks to Fox, that did not happen. No matter what anyone says, Mexico is a better country without the PRI eternalized in power.
I believe, thus, that Fox's biggest political accomplishment was his electoral victory in 2000.
That triumph seemed impossible, even inconceivable, against a repressive, murdering, cheating, censoring and corrupt PRI. But it was achieved. Thanks to Fox. It was something that many Mexicans had waited for and dreamed of for 71 years.
But after that, Fox seemed to go downhill.
Vicente _ the rancher who wore boots and talked rough, the man who wasn't afraid of openly challenging PRI members _ seemed to shrink at Los Pinos (Mexico's presidential residence). Had he fought in the presidency like he did as a candidate during the campaign, we would have a different Mexico now.
That is not to say one man alone can transform a whole country. The so-called "president of change," however, changed almost nothing.
After winning the election, Mexicans had high hopes pinned on Fox. "Don't let us down," people shouted as he went by. And he smiled, and, with his long fingers, made a "V" sign. But in the end, he couldn't do it or didn't know how.
Fox was so popular in the first days of his administration that he could have made revolutionary changes. Everything would have been applauded.
But, he didn't do it. Corrupt figures remained out of jail, assassins were never brought to justice, those who hogged power and manipulated the media kept right on doing so, and the smallest segment of society, Mexico's elite, who receive half the nation's income became richer.
In his first interview after winning the election, Fox told me on July 3, 2000, that "what we have proposed is bold: to grow at a 7 percent rate ... we could actually create 1.35 million jobs a year." His promise was so bold, however, that he never accomplished it. Not even a third of that number. So many times he criticized the old PRI for failing to create decently paying jobs, yet he ended up falling into the same hole.
And Mexicans who didn't have good jobs began to leave.
Never before have so many Mexicans departed from the country as they did during the Fox administration. According to my estimate, at the very least 2 million Mexicans left their homeland to go north to the United States.
Fox's idea to negotiate an immigration accord with the United States never materialized. It was the central issue at the heart of his foreign policy, and it failed spectacularly.
We can blame it on the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, or on the failure of his aides to persuade each American congressional representative, one by one. But nothing, not a single thing, was achieved for the Mexican migrants.
At the same time, Fox also leaves behind a more dangerous country.
To walk on Mexico City or Ciudad Juarez streets is like taking your life into your hands and making a deal with the devil. Already, the rate of kidnappings in Mexico is similar to that of Colombia. Drug dealers easily overwhelm police in several regions. On top of that, the recent conflict in Oaxaca has highlighted a huge vacuum in authority.
The principal sin of Fox, during his administration, is that of omission. He stopped dealing with things.
There was never an explanation for Fox's lack of initiative (or even enthusiasm) to change things. And that passive attitude, made some people wonder if Fox's health wasn't at its best.
That led me to ask him in September 2003, when he was in New York, whether he was receiving treatment for depression. "No," he replied sharply.
My justification for the question was that the president's health is a matter of public interest. I was merely following the rule of renowned late journalist Oriana Fallaci who used to say that there is no question a journalist cannot ask. But to this day, I'm not entirely sure I did the right thing by invading Fox's privacy.
I'm bringing this up because Fox's critics agree that he was a reactive president, not a proactive one. He had the chance to do so much, but did so little. The aggressive, tough-talking rancher we were so fond of as a candidate, took off his boots as president.
"Are you going to take off the boots?" I asked him in that first interview as president-elect. "Never _ not even in the grave," he answered. "I'll be there with my beloved boots on."
Toward the end of his six-year term, I saw Fox at various events not wearing his boots, and I knew then that things were not going well. He had changed. Even his way of walking was different.
Conclusion: In spite of all his faults and omissions, Fox's balance sheet is a positive one. With him came a major change in power in Mexico, and, for the first time, the experience of a legitimate and fair election. With him, we threw out the PRI. And, for me, that alone is more than enough.