Relationship with Maduro and war threaten Lula’s agenda – 03/06/2023 – World

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) has come to live in recent days with the risk that important fronts of his foreign policy suffer setbacks as a result of his own speeches and the offensive by Congress against the Ministry of the Environment.

The most recent stumble happened on Tuesday (30), when the laurels of bringing together for the first time in years leaders of South America, from different ideological currents, were overshadowed by negative reactions to their attempt to internationally rehabilitate the regime of dictator Nicolás Maduro, from Venezuela.

Planalto advisers claim that Lula works on four main fronts for his foreign policy. The main and most daring one is to use the country’s history of neutrality to try to negotiate peace in the Ukraine War. The Executive’s assessment is that major forces from the West, such as the United States and Europe, are somehow involved in the conflict, which would open space for Brazil to be a protagonist in the mediation between the parties.

Brazil’s ability to present itself as a neutral interlocutor, however, was gradually reduced, with controversial speeches by Lula insinuating that Washington and the European Union are interested in prolonging the conflict. He also came to be seen by the West as more leaning towards the Russian side. A summary episode of the current situation was the disagreement between Lula and the Ukrainian president, Volodimir Zelensky, at the G7 meeting in Japan — with each side blaming the other for the fact that the meeting did not take place.

At the regional level, Lula saw his quest to lead a new integration in South America questioned this week. The PT managed to attract all the presidents of South America to Brasilia for dialogue, but even government allies assess that mistakes undermined the positive image of the meeting.

Brazilians already anticipated resistance to the initiative to recreate Unasur, an organization associated with the golden age of the left in the region. The situation, however, worsened with the reception offered the day before to Maduro, who rehabilitated the Venezuelan dictator on the international stage. Lula gave special treatment to the Chavista, said that it was a “historic moment” and described as “narratives” the criticisms against human rights violations and the lack of democracy in Venezuela.

At the meeting between the South American presidents, which would be closed, the president of Uruguay, Luis Lacalle Pou opened a live on social networks for everyone to hear his condemnation of Lula’s speech. Nor did the leftist Gabriel Boric, from Chile, spare the Brazilian.

Interlocutors recognize that the meeting ended in an undesired way, with the Maduro subject contaminating the discussion. However, they claim that Lula’s lines were not the only mistakes.

First, the analysis is that the reception to Maduro should not have taken place before the meeting between the South American presidents. It provoked a reaction from critics of the Venezuelan and created an asymmetry between countries in the region, putting Lula’s impartiality in check.

Some advisers believe that Maduro should indeed be received, as a sign of the resumption of relations and dialogue with an important South American actor. However, they say that this should have been done in a meeting the day after the collective meeting, as happened with the Colombian Gustavo Petro.

Apart from Maduro, there is criticism of the format of the meeting itself, which should be less “open” and contain a concrete agenda for discussions. The view is shared by specialists in international relations. “The integration process is deadened. What can be achieved today is cooperation around common interests and ways of facing shared problems. Integration, if it happens, will be the result of a long process”, says Jorge Ramalho, professor at the University from Brasilia.

Interlocutors cite another clash involving Lacalle Pou at the meeting that highlighted the impasse. The Brazilian proposal foresaw future dialogues between “presidential emissaries”. The Uruguayan then opposed this format and defended that the negotiations were done through the chancellors. In this way, the rightist sought to prevent the leadership of the process from remaining with the Presidency’s special advisor for foreign policy, Celso Amorim —one of the architects of Unasur, when chancellor during Lula’s terms.

Another front of the president in foreign relations that has been threatened in recent days is the international trump card in the area of ​​the environment. One of the defeats in this area was the approval of the provisional measure that restructured the Esplanada dos Ministérios. The proposal ended up dehydrating the ministries of Marina Silva (Environment) and Sonia Guajajara (Indigenous Peoples).

The approval in the Chamber of the time frame for the demarcation of indigenous lands also harms Brazil’s image abroad. In addition, there is discussion about the possibility of drilling an oil well by Petrobras in Foz do Amazonas, an action that has the support of parliamentarians and even ministers of the Lula government.

The government seeks to place the responsibility for any damage to the country’s image on Parliament, highlighting the difficulties faced due to the strength of the ruralist group and the need to have a solid majority in Congress. On the other hand, even allied parliamentarians, at least in part, blame the Planalto for not marking with practical actions that the environmental agenda is a priority.

Another of Lula’s bets is to be able to sign the agreement between Mercosur and the European Union, which gained new complications with demands from both sides. This Friday (2), for example, the president said that a free trade agreement between the blocs will not be signed if the Europeans do not accept Brazil’s conditions, in addition to having stated that the current proposal for an agreement needs an adjustment .

One of the obstacles is government purchases — Lula has already warned that he will not give up keeping them 100% national. Some analysts mention that the Brazilian demand is a response to the new European demands for more guarantees of protection to the environment, which the government considers unreasonable.