Why Obama Should Bet on Brazil

Despite the well worn campaign slogan, so far Washington's new foreign policy under President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seems to embody a blend of both continuity and change, depending on the situation. By and large we have seen a reactionary series of policies, as the new president has been thrust into a game with the cards already dealt. However, with the visit to Washington on Saturday March 14 of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva -- the first Latin American head of state to be received by Obama at the White House -- a fresh hand is being dealt, giving the president a chance to define his administration and mark a clear departure from the policies of the past.

For years Latin America has been waiting for its day in the sun as a privileged partner of the United States; to be treated fairly, with respect, and joined in action toward the fulfillment of mutual goals for the Western Hemisphere. With the visit of Brazil, now graduated to the status of a true regional and global power, the administration should seek to support and enhance its role of responsibility, proving to the skeptics that we don't need or want a unipolar hemisphere, but rather a multi-lateral and institutional framework for stable and prosperous relations.

There are many compelling reasons for Obama to seek a close relationship with Brazil and establish a new partnership, one that would bring immediate benefits to both parties (while carrying very low risk and political costs). Despite being diplomatically stretched thin by Mideast conflicts, Brazil is a sure bet that Obama should not pass up.

The first reward of a new partnership with Brazil would be felt in terms of regional security. This South American nation of 196 million citizens is enjoying the benefits of four consecutive successful democratic governments, making it one of the top BRIC economies with a decade of growth and strong forecasts for the future, despite suffering the current woes of the crisis along with everyone else. The economic growth has been matched by proactive diplomacy, as Brazil has grown into a much stronger regional leadership role over the past 10 years.

In terms of military and defense matters, they are an essential player, having just overseen the historic first meeting of the NATO-like South American Defense Council of UNASUR (Union of South American Nations). When incidents arise between Latin American countries, such as the recent Colombia-Ecuador conflict, it is Brasilia, not Washington or the OAS, that is called in first as the trusted mediator.

The second imperative for Obama to give the Brazilians a red carpet welcome is economic. Amid the uncertain breakdown of global financial institutions, where governments find themselves learning how to be bankers, Brazil is ironically ahead of the curve. As noted by a recent article in the Economist, analysts such as Goldman Sachs have praised Brazil's state involvement in the banking sector, which combined with lower public sector debt and responsible fiscal policy has prepared the country for a better survival than most. Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive at Pimco, has even been quoted by Reuters as saying that China and Brazil offer better stock investments for the future than the United States: "The case for optimism comes from the fact that these countries entered today's global crisis with better initial conditions."

In terms of trade, the partnership is a natural fit with room to grow. The United States imports the most from Brazil and exports the most (about 15.7% and 16.1% respectively for 2007). Furthermore, if the Obama administration has any hopes of beating back a worldwide return to protectionism, Brazil's cooperation is essential. According to a new report from the Inter-American Dialogue, Brazil is now one of the most influential participants in the Doha talks and shares many U.S. objectives: "By eliminating critical stumbling blocks that have frustrated regional negotiations, a breakthrough in Doha on agriculture could facilitate U.S.-Brazilian bilateral trade discussions and perhaps set the stage for reviving hemispheric trade talks."

Energy and climate cooperation could also revolutionize the U.S.-Brazil relationship, however I am not confident that the Obama administration has the political will at this juncture to recognize that Brazil is the solution to energy independence -- at the cost of cutting tariffs and U.S. farm subsidies for ethanol. It is notable that Brazil is in the position of lecturing the United States on protectionism, and it would be a helpful first step for Obama to show that he is listening.

Nevertheless, if the security, economic, and trade benefits of this relationship were not motivation enough, there is also the fact that Lula is ideally positioned to help Obama handle the most challenging and dangerous threat to the hemisphere: President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. After more than a decade in power and several constitutional revisions to consolidate power and weaken democratic and legal institutions, developments in Venezuela are rapidly worsening. Private property seizures are accelerating (not just oil, but food companies), crackdowns against the opposition and media are intensifying, the state increasingly tolerates violent attacks against the student movements and the Jewish community, and President Chavez is holding a growing number of political prisoners beyond the reach of law (disclosure: I represent one such political prisoner, Eligio Cedeño).

We need to understand that Chavez is neither a dictator nor a model democrat, and any effort to improve the situation cannot be carried out alone. As Chavez has already empowered Lula to serve as an interlocutor to Washington, Brazil has the opportunity to become the most effective and pragmatic voice to speak to the Chavez government, helping to reign in the more destructive trends, if not subtly assisting the U.S. effort to isolate the world's foremost petrocrat (though friendly with Chavez, the Brazilians aren't thrilled about $6 billion in Russian arms coming into the region). Dealing with the regional problems presented by Venezuela is not about punishing Chavez or causing collateral damage to its citizens, but rather seeking engagement with Bolivia, opening the door to the new government in Cuba, and encouraging economic initiatives from Central America to the Andes. If Washington is able to run from the same playbook as Brasilia, Chavez will have a much more difficult time dismissing these efforts to promote stability and democracy as a malicious neoliberal agenda.

Lastly, there is an important synergy to the social context and visionary ambition of these two presidents. When Lula first became president in 2003, there were wild accusations and pessimistic predictions of the damage his "socialist" leanings would bring to the economy, a tone of criticism that is mimicked in the United States today.

For what it is worth, like Obama, Lula has risen to the country's highest office from very humble origins, riding a narrative of hope, possibility, and the sudden sense of enfranchisement of politically excluded groups. Overcoming the odds to reach the presidency, both Lula and Obama have sought to conquer fears of radicalism with measured pragmatism. Lula has successfully surrounded himself with capable advisors able to maintain good relations with countries as different as Venezuela and the United States, such as Minister of Strategic Affairs, Roberto Mangabeira Unger, who upon observing Chavez's attempt to use Moscow as a lever against the United States, told the New York Times "Unlike other South American countries we don't go around buying things, and we are not interested in some kind of balance-of-power politics to contain the United States."

So far the Brazilian strategic approach has been successful and constructive, and one that the United States should want to see replicated across the region. Among the young democracies of Latin America and beyond, two alternatives are currently on offer -- the traditional, lackluster offer from the United States, and the alternative coalition led by authoritarian petroleum exporters (Russia, Venezuela, Iran, and others), united mainly by anti-Americanism, and vaguely pursuing some form of non-institutional multilateralism. It should be no surprise that the latter is winning over many converts, especially in light of the fact that Venezuela is pouring three times the amount of aid into the region than the United States, whose paltry contributions to humanitarian projects outside of the war on drugs is negligible.

The time is now for Obama to launch a new partnership with Latin America's biggest and best democracy, and for once in history make the region a top priority for U.S. foreign policy. Unlike dealing with Moscow over Iran or meting out carrots and sticks in the Mid-East, with Brazil efforts are much more likely to be met with a serious and genuine response to achieve progress. It is certainly a bet worth taking.

Comments

[joebiz]

Obama should engage Brazil, no duh. Your basic thrust of the post is a tautology. However, Obama should engage Brazil but not because of the reasons you state.

The primary reason to engage Brazil is to protect US business interest in light of the left-leaning states of the region including Venezuela and Bolivia and the latest socialist win in El Salvador.

Yet, you state that Chavez is not a dictator??!! Then what is he? Consider the following:

*Chavez came to power through a coup, after failing to overthrow the government once before;

*Nationalized private industry, but claims to have a superior Boliviriano "economic model" but the only export Venezuela has is oil and low cost manufactured goods. In recent years, nonpetroleum exports have been growing rapidly but still constitute only about one-fourth of total exports. The United States is Venezuela's leading trade partner although Brazil is expected to surpass the U.S. by 2011.

*Corruption and crime are rampant under Chavez;

* Infrastructure and public hospitals are failing;

*He has not fulfilled his major campaign pledges with respect to labor and land reform;

*Government bureaucracy is in decay and in chaos;

*He has concentrated power of judicial and legislative branches in his hands,placing democracy in peril;

*Contrary to widespread public perception, Chavez has failed to raise the poor economically and socially beyond what is normal in the midst of an oil boom.

*Recently crammed a referendum to become Dictator for Life. A la Putin, Castro, Kim Jong Il.

[ZigZagZum]

Congratulations, great article. You just forgot to mention the Brazilian oil.

[IrisBittencourt]

And racism. Let's hope that Obama discussed the glaring racial divide in Brazil, where 50% of its population is excluded apartheid-style from enjoying the fruits and benefits of Brazilian society. It is time to shine a light on Brazil's devastating racism, as it is the last of the three bastions of racism that is left standing almost untouched: U.S., South Africa and Brazil.

[unclefesta]

Yes, it is astounding. To watch Globo, the major TV network, you could believe that afro-brazilians were a tiny minority rather than about fifty percent of the population. People with dark skin are considered not worthy of being represented.

[breakingpoint]

pesaroso, ciao ciao Brazil

Build and Buy American

[atoonce]

And of course we need to have a hemispherian summit to reform the insane war on drugs that is corrupting and devolving society in all countries!

[flamflurm]

OK, interesting enough, but I thought that now that we were realists we didn't care about 'democracy'.

[dpiyjrtmfr]

Thank you sir for the informative post. I agree that Brazil is the up and coming nation in South America. Hopefully, the President will take this opportunity seriously.

[cjo30080]

Lula is understandably frustrated with our agricultural subsidies which have hurt developing countries in South America and worldwide. In his speech to Congress recently, Obama promised to seek to reduce such subsidies (whether or not such reductions were included in the Omnibus bill he just signed weren't discussed very much in the media, and remain a mystery to me). As non-millionaire/non-farming Americans, if we want to improve our relationships with Brazil and the rest of South America, we can start by asking our representative in Washington to stop giving millions to millionaires in the form or agricultural subsidies.

[Henry]

cjo,
here is a link to the distribution of farms, a four page pdf from the 2007 cencus:

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Fact_Sheets/farm_numbers.pdf

[Gunga-Din]

I agree, Lula only demand one thing: lift the agricultural subsidies in USA

[juangault]

But does this mean that the next time a shuttle falls, I won't collect on damages to the soil, or some crops that pieces fell on? $60,000 in payment so that feds can walk over my rangeland looking for tiny parts is peanuts, sir.

[UltraClassic]

Every so often, but not often enough, common sense flows from the HP. This is a well thought out observation of a needed change in direction in our dealing with Latin America. The need for increased ethonal supply should be a top goal for this country and calling Hugo Chavez destructive and dangerous shows me that you are dealing with the real world and not beholden to some leftist pipe dream which is so often the case here on the HP.

[vietveter]

These are sharp people. I worked in Amizonia for a time. Once you realize that the
sweet smell is from combustion and not an antifreeze leak and actually look around
you see that ethanol is a viable fuel for everyone. I don't know that we have the water
that it takes for the ethanol production but I am sure that we have a lot that we could
learn from the Brazilian people.
Pay attention O, this is not a place to fumble the ball.

[SteveNichols]

Having spent a lot of time in Brazil, I believe it could be the most important partner in Latin American. There is great social changes in Brazil, the emergence of a middle class. I read some negative comments about the government. For the most part Lula da Silva has done a respectable job from an administration perspective. Of course there are problems, but isn't that true of all administration. Economically they have progress to become one of the new emerging markets. Where growth has led to a stable GDP for over 5 years now. The Brazilian people are hard working, ingenious and have an entrepreneurial spirit. They don't have the same recognition and self respect that other countries have in Latin American.President Obama has recognize the important of Brazil and I believe will take steps to nourish that relationship.

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

Great points in your article I agree.

[MacQ]

So he starts the process by "bumping" the Presidente down on his schedule (not to mention misspelling his name)
.
It's nice that he wants to play nice with our enemies, but does that mean treating our friends like trash?

So far he has insulted Britain several times, Canada, now Brazil.

The leaders of France and Germany don't have too high an opinion of him either.

Wasn't he supposed to make the world "like us again"? Not so much I guess.

[balickistan]

he is very popular with the people throughout the world. as for the leaders of some of these countries like france, germany or canada, who cares.

[Gunga-Din]

O Estado ( a great brazilian newspaper) cartoon: Lula packing 2 gifts for Obama: Venezuela and Cuba flags.

[Henry]

Gunga,
Do you think he should once again attack these countries or do you think our CIA should serrupttiously sneak in an murder officials? Just asking? The past does not seem to have worked so well for us.

[GeorgeP922]

As long as they keep kidnapped American citizens there, they prove they have no power and I have no interest.

Canada and Mexico wouldn't do that to us.

Also Brazil should lift it's ridiculous anti-abortion policy.

Are there any countries south of Mexico that can be called "Western", I don't mean political ideologies, but in society. Go to USA, Canada, and most EU countries and you see the same lifestyle social structures etc.

[SayWhatYouWill]

So, basically, you only have interest in other countries that implement laws and societal structures as only you, GeorgeP922, think are best? Genius!

Maybe you should get on a plane travel outside the United States and visit a "non-Western" country. It's time to grow up.

[ZigZagZum]

I think you need to travel a little bit more my friend. Your vision/knowledge of the world is too limited.

Just one more thing, about "keep kidnapped American citizens there" we should remember that we "keep kidnapped Cuban citizens here". Did you forget the Elián González case in 2000?

[iblogleft]

More anti-Chavez rhetoric.

If you actually read, you would see the results of both political systems, and the trade offs.

The main difference? "Free Market Capitalism" was expelled from Venezuela, and massively decreased the overall poverty level, at a cost to a small percentage of wealthy ex-leaders.

Capitalists cannot bare to let any government that is not a solid capitalist economy be seen as successful. There is no room to show the benefits of non-profit, people owned basic needs and services, as it threatens the concept of American business to profit off of anything and everything under the sun, no matter the cost to society.

[anandakos]

Lefty,

The word is "bear", although the point is basically correct. However, we don't really know the "costs" yet. Chavez has severely damaged the productive elements of Venezuela's non-oil economy by some of his more egotistical, hare-brained acts. Supporting peoples' co-ops is a great thing if it's not an excuse to debilitate the non-fascist private economy at the same time. Chavez is so hypnotized by his own delusions of grandeur that he loses sight of the fact that not all businesspeople are evil.

[flamflurm]

Chávez will be in trouble with low oil revenues. So sad.