Clear answers and firm positions. That is what we need from the international community in order to pressure the US to move on the status issue.  Over the weekend, Former Mexican President Vicente Fox Quesada visited the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. During his visit, Fox gave two interviews in which he discussed Puerto Rico’s colonial problem.  Both interviews offered an opportunity for Fox to offer a clear vision of the future of Puerto Rico’s status.  Instead, Fox punted.

With Univision’s Carlos Weber, this exchange ensued:

CW:    I MUST ASK ONE LAST QUESTION WITH RESPONSIBILITY, MR. PRESIDENT. IF THE STATUS OF PUERTO RICO WERE DISCUSSED BY RESPONSIBLE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND YOU HAD THE CHANCE TO VOTE, WOULD YOU VOTE? HOW WOULD YOU VOTE IF PUERTO RICO REQUESTS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHANCE OF DECIDING THE COUNTRY´S STATUS ONCE AND FOR ALL?

VF:     Well, you see, I don’t think it would be one way or the other. I think that there are only two circumstances in our lives that we cannot change, and they are our birth and death. I believe we must define and build everything else. Consider the case of Hong Kong. Consider the case of Singapore. Consider the case being discussed, of Taiwan, and I offer many cases in which, far from of brandishing nationalism or far from thinking that what the people aspire to is complete independence and autonomy; we now are part of a global village. Consider the United States, excuse me, the European Union, where individual nationalities are practically coming to an end and people are citizens of the European Union nowadays.

I believe that Puerto Rico and the United States must find that magic formula that provides them everything that will contribute to development.

So I think that should be the focus of the debate. And it must be a pragmatic debate, in which the ideal balancing point is found. As I say, to me, in Mexico, well, part of our sovereignty is within the North American agreement. That is what we accepted voluntarily, that is what we signed. We can no longer make certain decisions with total freedom, just like European Union countries can no longer make certain decisions, which are subject to the superior body, and I think that is the way of the future, the creation of blocks and work, and I’ll conclude with that, the threat, and I wouldn’t even call it a threat.

There is talk nowadays about a power shift to the East, a shift of transfer of power, finances and the Asian markets. And that will take place. The Chinese economy will be larger than the American in just 10 years. So, what we must consider here is, will the values of Western civilization, as we know it, also be transferred? Will the values of democracy, freedom, the things we believe in, also be transferred? Well, there are many questions in the future, but the fact is that working together, working in partnership is much better than working individually.

Following that interview, Fox met with El Nuevo Dîa and gave this soundbite:

Puerto Rico… ¿estado de EE.UU. o país independiente?

Me parece que este no es un tema que se deba discutir ahora, sino cómo Puerto Rico puede tener una gran relación con Estados Unidos y ahí tienes el caso de China y Hong Kong. Esa es una relación ideal. En el caso de Puerto Rico y Estados Unidos, no hay que hablar de soberanía o independencia total porque entonces se perdería la enorme cantidad de ventajas que se tienen ahora. De la misma manera, creo que tampoco hay que seguir mamando de la misma ubre todo el tiempo y me parece que Puerto Rico puede manejar esto.

On one hand, I understand Fox’s hesitancy to meddle in this debate. Puerto Rico’s colonial debate can easily become a black hole given that any position automatically puts you at odds with half of the island. However, many South American leaders such as Venezuela’s Chavez, Ecuador’s Correa, Bolivia’s Morales, the Castro brothers, Nicaragua’s Ortega and former Panama President, Martin Torrijos have come out in favor of Puerto Rico’s independence. While Fox has no reason to tow this line, a clearer stance could better position this issue before the international community.

His comparison to Hong Kong is also code to the “pro-commonwealth” supporters that he supports a hybrid solution. Rather than favoring annexation or independence, the Hong Kong comparison points at a status solution in which Puerto Rico gains more autonomy, while keeping all the federal benefits it currently enjoys. It is a position that will surely be soundly rejected by US states who would kill for greater autonomy powers (Texas anyone?).

Bonus Note: Today, July 25th, is the celebration of the enactment of our “Commonwealth Constitution”.