The UN International Conference on Financing for Development opened in Monterrey on 18 March (Telam photo) 
	
	
 Monterrey, Mexico--Choked, hushed voices, some of them astounded, are not guessing correctly about the dilemma of the chicken or the egg into which the Argentine crisis has become converted, almost grotesquely: will the International Monetary Fund (IMF) endorse concrete aid to the country, apart from the presumable good intentions of its board members and technicians, without the approval of George W. Bush? 
	
	
 "Certainly not," was the comment made in a private dialogue with La Nacion by a diplomatic source from the United States who, with a legion of colleagues, is attending the United Nations Conference on Financing for Development that opened yesterday in Monterrey, Mexico. 
	
	
 And, while striding hastily through the large facilities of the International Business Center (Cintermex), he sketched an explanation: "Argentina is the leading case of an era in which everyone pays dearly for his mistakes, and somehow manages as best he can. If someone earns 1,000 and spends 1,500, he will inevitably succumb to bankruptcy. The same thing is happening to the countries now. However, since this is a new concept, there may be room for negotiation." 
	
	
 Apparently not in Monterrey, where Bush will have a full agenda, and without contacts with other chief executives, except for Mexico's President Vicente Fox, and Canada's Prime Minister Jean Chretien, since they are trading partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). "Well, one never knows," slipped in the source, becoming lost on an escalator. 
	
	
 Eduardo Duhalde's agenda, during his first departure from the country since he assumed the presidency, calls for a key meeting on Friday with the IMF's managing director, Horst Koehler, (which he will attend accompanied by Economy Minister Jorge Remes Lenicov), and two occasions on which he will have the floor, addressing the world (for five minutes on one, and three minutes on the other) concerning the topic under discussion; the Monterrey Consensus: or greater assistance from the developed countries to those that are underdeveloped, which in fact will be approved by consensus. 
	
	
 As soon as he arrives on Wednesday, Duhalde will meet with Fox, perhaps spearheading the explanation of the Argentine situation to Bush: a possibility that is not entirely clear among the Mexican officials, especially since, in principle, the virtual plan will have to take place step by step. "First I listen, and then I will see," commented one of them to La Nacion. It was learned that Foreign Minister Carlos Ruckauf and Foreign Secretary Jorge Castaneda may already have talked about this. 
	
	
 More Political Than Economic 
	
	
 It is common knowledge, among most of the small groups, that the Argentine crisis is more political than economic, and that, as one Latin American diplomat accredited to the UN remarked, the formula in question does not hold much mystery: "A rapprochement with the United States is indispensable, because it is the only one that can extricate them from this." 
	
	
 Very well. How? With a strategy that would permit Duhalde, if he does not receive a clear signal from the IMF, not to call for elections in 90 days, for example, and to become a lame duck, waiting for his successor, he explained. 
	
	
 The source commented: "Argentine is in a position to be an alternative reference point for the United States, to the detriment of Brazil which, in view of the internal and external vicissitudes facing Fernando Henrique Cardoso, is, day by day, becoming somewhat weak." 
	
	
 These are geostrategic plans at moments when time is exerting pressure, and also pressing the speed at which the world turns. With 58 chief executives immersed in signing a document which, as La Nacion was told by the Argentine ambassador to the United Nations, Arnoldo Listre, gives a clue to the direction in which we are heading: "It shows a new organization in which the market economy is accepted as a fundamental factor for development and, unlike the cold war, is rid of the North-South confrontation." 
	
	
 In that document, the Monterrey Consensus, free trade, the amendment on the distortion with agricultural subsidies, and the treatment of the external debt as fundamental pivotal points, benefit Argentina. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan himself said, in his time, that the situation of indebted, undeveloped countries must be consideed, so as to avoid the repetition of a crisis such as ours. In the documents, Argentina ranks in 59th place for its per capita income: $7,440, according to the World Bank's report on development: a substantially devalued figure after the default and the end of the currency board arrangement. Despite this, it gives a clue to the gap that existed, and still exists, between the reality and the statistics of the international credit agencies. 
	
	
 According to some sources, the crisis is in a bind: the IMF is asking for more belt-tightening, and the government is asking for more money. Ergo: without belt-tightening there is no money, and without money there is no belt-tightening. Then what? A source from the United Nations observed ironically: "If Chile were Iraq, and if President Ricardo Lagos were Saddam Hussein, Argentina would have Bush's full support." Chile is not Iraq, nor is Lagos Saddam, fortunately, of course.