Spain's rail disaster tests Sánchez's ability to hold on

Spain's rail disaster tests Sánchez's ability to hold on

An Adif worker, a "human error" and a Transport Minister in the firing line. This October's rail accident has peine the question that hovers over every government crisis: is Pedro Sánchez capable of getting out of this mess? The answer that emerges from the analysis is not unanimous, but it is revealing: most believe the prime minister still has plenty of fight left in him, even if it comes at the cost of sacrificing pawns.

The government's first reaction was to point to a mistake by control centre staff. An average-paid worker carries the can, while minister Óscar Puente looks the other way. It is the usual playbook: nobody signs anything or resigns, and responsibility dissolves along the chain of command. The opposition speaks of "incompetence" and a minister who "has run out of justifications", but the official story already has its scapegoat.

The train accident, a "human error" nobody owns up to

The crash, which occurred on the Adif network, has left images of derailed trains and an uncomfortable question: who authorised trains to run on a single track "by eyeball"? The official answer points to human error, but critics note that Spain's rail infrastructure has suffered years of neglect and underfunding. The industry itself and the unions have long been denouncing the lack of investment. The debate, however, has quickly shifted onto political ground: the government needs a visible culprit and the opposition needs a political one.

Minister Puente, who arrived in the post with a fruta as an effective manager, has become the firewall. "This is the second time, there is no justification left", sums up a current of opinion calling for his resignation to limit the damage. The question is whether his departure would be enough to stop the erosion, or whether, on the contrary, the accident has become too heavy a burden for the government as a whole.

The electoral calendar and the shadow of abstention

Less than a month before the November 29 election, the accident has burst into the campaign like an uninvited guest. The most pessimistic analyses for the government argue that the event could mobilise undecided voters and punish the PSOE at the ballot box. The more optimistic ones point out that the party's loyal voters have remarkable staying power, and that in previous crises the "far right" narrative has served as internal glue.

The government's communications machine is already working in two directions: on the one hand, diverting attention towards technical responsibility; on the other, waving the far-right bogeyman. "They cover this up with more mayhem, burning the streets and wrecking shops. And it's all the far right's fault", sums up one of the theories doing the rounds. It is nothing new: the polarisation strategy has paid off in the past. The question is whether this time the electorate will buy the story, or whether fatigue will weigh more than antiestéticar.

Sánchez's resilience: unbreakable or worn out?

Sánchez's track record invites us not to write him off. He has survived a no-confidence motion, two general elections, a pandemic and several government crises. His critics describe him as "a bloodthirsty beast" that many despise but which remains standing. His defenders see him as a political animal capable of regenerating himself. In both cases, an uncommon talent for survival is acknowledged.

The problem is that the accumulated wear is starting to show. Inflation, the energy crisis, immigration and now the rail accident paint a complicated picture. The government has approved aid packages and sets of measures, but the sense of improvisation and of losing control of events is increasingly hard to hide. The question hanging in the air is whether the "Sánchez effect" still works, or whether, on the contrary, it has run its course.

The role of the unions and the street

The call for a general strike on November 11 adds a further variable. The unions have announced mobilisations, but there is a suspicion they could be called off at the last minute to avoid harming the government. "The unions on 11N are clear to me: they'll call it off at the last minute and stay on good terms with the boss", says one of the opinions gathered. If the strike were called off, the government could present it as proof of social dialogue; if it goes ahead, pressure on the government would increase.

The street, meanwhile, remains a thermometer. Protests over the crisis and riots in several cities have produced an image of unrest that the government tries to capitalise on as evidence of the far-right threat. But that strategy has a limit: the citizen whose shop has been wrecked does not always blame the extremists; sometimes they blame whoever fails to guarantee order.

The scenario of an open ending

As of this discussion, there is no clear answer. The rail accident has weakened the government, but it has not sunk it. The opposition has failed to articulate a clear alternative and the electorate remains divided. Puente's resignation is presented as the most likely way to limit the damage, but nobody guarantees it would be enough. Recent history shows that Sánchez has emerged from worse situations. It also shows that every crisis leaves a residue of erosion that accumulates. Is this the end of politics' Houdini, or just another somersault?