Argentina has gone through as many presidents in the last month as the United States has gone through in my lifetime. Five men have held the title of head of state since the Argentine economy imploded late last year, and some have only been president for a few days. It seems a rodeo star may be better suited than a politician to stay at the riens in Argentina; at least a bullrider can stay on for eight seconds.

The Argentine crisis has many facets – a currency pegged to the U.S. dollar increased costs throughout the South American nation, and the currency devaluation led to a spiral of inflation, making Argentine pesos worth a fraction of their former value.

Argentina was heavily dependent upon foreign aid and loans from the International Monetary Fund, and when they committed the worst default in international loan history, no one wanted to throw more money into fishing Argentina out of their financial quagmire. The international aid and lending community made the conscious decision to let Argentina stew in its juices, declaring their only choice was to play hardball with the once-prosperous nation.

The situation is so bad that most of the provincial governments have run out of money completely, issuing IOUs to its employees. As if an IOU will go very far at the grocery store. People cannot access but a small fraction of their savings; new austerity measures allow them to withdraw just a little each week.

While the measures are designed to keep money in the banks rather than under the mattresses, skyrocketing prices throughout the country and scarce supplies mean that people are not always able to buy the products they need. As a result of all the uncertainty, protests and riots rocked the country.

The president d’jour, Eduardo Duhalde, is a member of the Peronist, or pro-labor party. One of his recent predecessors, Carlos Menem, was president in the 1990s when Argentine prosperity was at an all-time high. Argentina was not only privatizing many of the state-owned industries, but it was well-off enough to welcome thousands of refugees from around the world. These outward signs of development did not show the disaster at hand; millions of mis-directed and mismanaged loan dollars would bring the country to its knees in late 2001.

Now-President Duhalde was an up-and-comer during the Menem years, even serving as vice president for a time. However, Menem branded him as an incompetent.

The falling-out caused a schism within the pro-labor party. Now, Duhalde is at the helm of a country with a fragile government and fiscal impotence.

Former President Menem has been vocal in criticizing the two-week-old Duhalde presidency, complaining that the recent events would tarnish his legacy of national prosperity. While Duhalde may be a bitter political enemy, Menem is hardly in a position to criticize. Menem’s legacy, even though in led in an affluent era, is that out-of-control graft in his administration led to the economic downfall of his country.

Duhalde’s place in history was written before he took office.

A crisis of this magnitude would be synonymous with whomever was head of state when it was played out.

Unfortunately, Menem’s personal politics make Duhalde more desperate. Calling for unity in the face of the disaster, Duhalde is quoted as suggesting an impending civil war if the country doesn’t take up the common cause.

Let us hope that the personal attacks and division in the upper echelons of Argentine politics do not further jeopardize the potential of the rest of the nation to begin a peaceful recovery from its tragedy.

Rachel Faber Machacha is a graduate student in international development studies from Emmetsburg.