Cristina Fernández Kirchner's victory in the Argentine presidential election is the handiwork of a savvy politician who has traded on her

husband's luck over the past four years. She won some 45 per cent of the vote, twice the total of her nearest rival, and will not need to face a run-off. Her campaign was dominated by Argentina's significant but fragile economic recovery, by the spectre of rising crime, and by valid concern that too much power may now be concentrated in the most powerful dynasty since the Peróns.

Inevitably, comparisons have been made with other forceful wives of presidents: with Eva Perón, Imelda Marcos and Hillary Clinton. Mrs Kirchner rejects any attempt to define her by such stereotypes. But the similarities with all three are striking. Like Mrs Perón, she exploited, as First Lady, her husband's populism while cultivating an image as a feisty and decisive woman with a feel for the have-nots and the socially excluded: indeed, most of her support in the election came from the poor, including the millions impoverished by the 2001 economic collapse that left Argentina as the biggest defaulter of sovereign debt in history. Like Mrs Clinton, she has been an outspoken senator, a steely lawyer and her husband's political partner for years, with experience of government (unlike the hapless Isabel Perón, the dictator's third wife, who was thrust into office on his death and never found her feet). Like Mrs Clinton, however, she is perceived by many as arrogant and divisive. Less favourable still is the comparison with Mrs Marcos, which she has invited by her penchant for a glamorous wardrobe and a lavish lifestyle.

She ran largely on the record of her husband Néstor — who claimed credit for the global economic upswing that has cut unemployment, boosted growth to almost 9 per cent a year and allowed Argentina to repay its entire $9.5 billion debt to the International Monetary Fund.

It would be a mistake, however, for her to act in office as an echo of her husband. Several neglected challenges must be faced: an inflation rate approaching 20 per cent that could undo much of the recovery; the understandable refusal of foreign investors to return to Argentina; the ragged state of foreign relations, especially with America, due largely to her husband's lack of interest; and the foolish and populist attempt to cultivate close relations with President Chávez of Venezuela, whose country has bought $5 billion in bonds from Argentina and has exchanged diesel fuel for farm machinery.

Mrs Kirchner has shown more interest than her husband in the outside world. She urgently needs to consolidate the key relationship with Brazil, as well as with Europe and the US, all of which are essential if she is to shore up a recovery that is still far from assured; but her posture as a nationalist and leftist does not inspire confidence that she will allow pragmatism to govern her term. She would be advised to look north at the Brazilian example of President Lula da Silva, who has retained his popular appeal while carrying out moderate and business-friendly policies. Britain, for one, will be looking to Buenos Aires for less rhetoric and greater pragmatism over the Falklands. Succeeding a popular leader is always hard; moving away from the policies of her own husband is a challenge that few presidents have yet had to face.