Brazil

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Fri May 31, 2024 1:26 pm

Brazil’s Flood of Austerity and Climate Catastrophe: The Twenty-Second Newsletter (2024)

In Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil), millions are suffering from extreme flooding. Amid the waters, the Landless Workers’ Movement is focused on providing emergency relief.
30 MAY 2024

Image
Padre Josimo Settlement

Greetings from the desk of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

From 28 April, heavy rains, strong winds, and widespread flooding have lashed the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul, killing over 160 people and impacting 2.3 million. The waters rose and rose again, rushing through houses and fields, erasing not only homes and the memories built there but also many crops in the country’s largest rice-producing state and agricultural powerhouse, the impacts of which are likely to reverberate across the nation.

Meteorological agencies and officials predicted the events with eerie precision. A week into the flood, experts pointed to the extraordinary rainfall as the primary cause. Estael Sias, managing director of the weather forecaster MetSul, wrote that this was not ‘just an episode of extreme rain’, but ‘a meteorological event whose adjectives are all superlative, from extraordinary to exceptional’. The seemingly unending rain, she wrote, ‘is absurdly and bizarrely different from what is normal’. It will take a very long time for this region of Brazil to recover from the flood.

Within the floodwaters are several encampments and settlements of Brazil’s Landless Workers’ Movement (MST), about which we published a dossier last month to commemorate the movement’s 40th anniversary. The MST was born from land struggles in Rio Grande do Sul, where it retains a strong presence and has become the epicentre of the MST’s agroecological rice production. These are the same fields on which the MST grew much of the 13 tonnes of food that it donated to the Gaza Strip from October to December of last year and the more than 6,000 tonnes of food that it donated to communities in need during the COVID-19 pandemic, as we write in our dossier. Many of these fields, as well as the facilities used to process their harvests, have been damaged by the flood. Residents of MST settlements such as Apolônio de Carvalho and Integração Gaúcha Settlement have lost immense amounts of their resources.

The images in this newsletter, taken from a report by Brazil’s National Institute of Colonisation and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) using satellite images from the Brazil M.A.I.S. Programme, Ministry of Justice and Public Safety, show some of the MST’s lands before and after the floods – lands now inundated with flood water that has washed toxic materials into the soil. The MST has focused its relief efforts not only on its own members, but also on the people of the region who have lost everything in the face of rising waters from which they cannot escape. If you wish to assist the MST in its flood relief efforts and to rebuild the settlements, you can do so here.

Image
Santa Maria Settlement

Last year, after a much less serious flood impacted Porto Alegre (the capital of Rio Grande do Sul), the Brazilian architect Mima Feltrin, drawing from the work of hydrology professor Carlos Tucci, warned that the state faced an imminent risk of flooding equal to or worse than the historic floods of 1941 and 1967. The analyses of scholars such as Tucci and Feltrin have repeatedly warned about the impact and looming threats of carbon emissions-driven climate change across the world as well as the deficiencies of policies put in place by reckless climate change denialist politicians.

As floodwaters rose in Rio Grande do Sul in 2023, so too did they inundate Derna (Libya), central Greece, southern China, southern Nevada (United States), and northeastern Turkey. The immediate explanation for these floods is that they are caused by carbon emissions-driven climate change, intensified by the refusal of Global North governments to contain their outsized carbon emissions. But the broader explanation is that the climate catastrophe is largely the product of reckless capitalist development, particularly in cities located within areas that are predictably dangerous to inhabit (such as lowland coastal settlements built next to savaged mangrove forests and badly managed river flow or beside forests that face long periods of dry weather). This reckless development is exacerbated by the rampant underfunding of environmental regulatory agencies and the deliberate slashing of budgets that maintain and revitalise infrastructure that is crucial to protect people from adverse climate events. With the flood in Libya, for instance, the state – already destroyed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s harsh bombardment in 2011 and pickled in confusion and corruption – neglected the crumbling dams of Derna. Much the same kind of attitude has been on display in southern Brazil for the past several decades.

Image
Sino Settlement

The two most recent mayors of Porto Alegre, Nelson Marchezan Júnior (2017–2021) and Sebastião Melo (2021–present), as well as the governor of Rio Grande do Sul Eduardo Leite (2019–March 2022 and then January 2023–present) spent their tenures eroding the basic institutions of their administrations. Governor Leite, for instance, undermined 480 rules of his state’s environmental code as part of the anti-environmental agenda pursued by the far-right President Jair Bolsonaro (2019–2022). Meanwhile, Mayor Marchezan Júnior ignored the need to fund flood prevention infrastructure, including the renovation of thirteen pump houses that were central to Porto Alegre’s drainage system, and his administration shut down the entire Department of Storm Drainage Systems (DEP), which had been set up in 1973 to manage drainage. Marchezan Júnior and Melo, along with their predecessor José Fortunati, each cut the number of employees in the departments that managed sewage and water systems.

People such as Leite, Marchezan Júnior, and Melo hold an attitude of disregard for the majority of the population and an attitude of the highest regard for the offshore bank accounts of the wealthy and their friends, the Western investor class. These people have been shaped by Brazilian big business, whose interests are consolidated by groups such as Instituto Liberal, set up in 1983 to further the neoliberal ideas of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, and by intellectuals of the military dictatorship (1964–1985) such as its economic ministers Roberto Campos and Hélio Beltrão. These ideas were brought into the mainstream by Brazil’s former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995–2003), whose Plan for the Reform of the State Apparatus (1995) used the idea of ‘modernisation’ to undermine state institutions and to start what Professor Elaine Rossetti Behring called a period of ‘permanent fiscal adjustment’. Cardoso, Leite, Marchezan Júnior, and Melo are Men of Austerity, proponents of a counter-revolution against humanity.

Image
Filhos de Sepé Settlement

When the catastrophe comes, as it has in Rio Grande do Sul, these neoliberal officials are quick to blame climate change, as if it were some sort of inevitability in which they played no part. However, when it comes to the climate, these people are the first to advance the agenda of fossil fuel companies and promote ideas and policies that amount to climate change denialism. Their denialism is not rooted in science, but in class interests that prioritise big business over people and the planet. They do not have any scientific arguments to explain the climate catastrophe, since there is no scientific basis for denialism, which seeks – with complete disregard for the fate of the planet – to ensure the upward distribution of wealth.

Image

From 1968 to 1980, the Brazilian poet Mário Quintana (1906–1994) lived in the Majestic Hotel in Porto Alegre, where he wrote beautiful poems of what he called ‘simple things’. Shortly before Quintana died, his supporters and friends built the Casa de Cultura Mário Quintana in the Majestic Hotel, which the state government purchased, restored, and transformed into a cultural centre in the 1980s. This hotel, Quintana’s home, became a haven for writers and artists to show their work. It was inundated by this year’s flood.

In 1976, from that hotel, Quintana wrote ‘A Grande Enchente’ (‘The Great Flood’), motivated by the floods of 1941 and 1967:

Cadavers of Ophelias and dead dogs
stopped momentarily at our doors,
though, ever at the mercy of the maelstrom,
they will continue along their uncertain path.

When the water reaches the highest windows
I will paint roses of fire on our yellow faces.
What does it matter what is to come?
The mad are spared all
and allow themselves everything.

Let us embark, spirit of the Gods.
Over the waters we glide.
Some say that we are merely clouds.
Others, the few, say that we are increasingly dying,
but I cannot see, down below, our dead.

And in vain I look around.
Where are you, friends,
from the very first and last days?
We must, we must, we must continue together.
And so, in one last, diluted thought,
I feel that my cry is but the gasp of the wind.


Warmly,

Vijay.

https://thetricontinental.org/newslette ... flood-mst/

******

Brazil Officially Withdraws Ambassador from ‘Israel’ (Genocide)
MAY 30, 2024

Image
The president of Brazil, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, participates in a breakfast meeting with journalists at the Planalto Palace on April 6, 2023. Photo: Mateus Bonomi/AGIF.

In an official bulletin issued Wednesday, May 29, the Brazilian government assigned its former ambassador to Israel, Frederico Meyer, a new position as special representative of Brazil at the Special Conference on Disarmament at the United Nations in Geneva.

The government of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva confirmed that it will not appoint another person to the position of Brazilian ambassador to the Israeli entity. The announcement further degrades relations between the two countries in response to the Israeli genocide in Palestine.

The Brazilian embassy in Tel Aviv will be headed by Chargé d’Affaires Fábio Farias, a diplomatic hierarchy below that of an ambassador, evidencing a downgrade in the diplomatic relations between Brazil and the Zionist state.

The background
Meyer was recalled for consultations by his government after Brazil and the Israeli colony exchanged harsh statements in February due to the Zionist state’s indiscriminate bombing of Palestinians in Gaza. Over 36,000 Palestinians have been killed in this campaign, most of them women and children. “There were no conditions for him [Meyer] to return” to the Zionist colony, a source said Wednesday.

Then, Lula declared that “what is happening in the Gaza Strip with the Palestinian people has no parallel with other historical moments,” and added that “in fact, it did exist when Hitler decided to kill the Jews,” in reference to Nazi war crimes during World War II.

Following his comments, Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz announced that the Brazilian president would not be welcome in the Zionist colony until he retracted his comments.

“We will not forget nor forgive,” said Katz. “It is a serious antisemitic attack. In my name, and in the name of the citizens of ‘Israel,’ tell President Lula that he is persona non grata in ‘Israel’ until he recants,” Katz said to the Brazilian ambassador on a TV program. Brazilian ambassador Meyer was then called for consultations in the Brazilian capital and has not since returned to Tel Aviv.

Zionist lobby attacks Brazilian government
Recently, a Zionist lobby entity, the Brazilian Confederation of Israel (CONIB), complained about the Lula administration’s unwillingness to condemn Iran’s retaliatory strikes attack against the Israeli entity.

“The democratic world and several Middle Eastern countries have joined Israel in condemning and fighting against Iran’s attack,” but “Brazil’s current foreign policy chose to side with the Iranian theocracy, deviating once again from our historical diplomatic line of condemning attacks of this type, wrote the president of CONIB, Claudio Lottenberg. “Unfortunate.”

Iran’s strike on the Zionist colony was carried out in retaliation for the illegal and unprecedented Israeli bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria.

After the Iranian attack on Israel was confirmed, Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a statement in which it expressed “concern” and support for efforts by the international community to prevent an escalation.

(RedRadioVE) by Victoria Torres

https://orinocotribune.com/brazil-offic ... -genocide/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 17, 2024 2:25 pm

Brazilian experts warn of the risk of western intervention in the Amazon region

Raphael Machado

June 17, 2024

The concern of Brazilian experts and representatives specializing in defense and international relations is that Western greed in an era of transition and geopolitical crisis could turn against Brazil.

On June 11, an important debate took place in the Brazilian Congress which could have some interesting repercussions. The event, called the “Debate on National Sovereignty in the 21st Century,” was held within the scope of the Foreign Relations and National Defense Committee of Congress, organized at the request of Representative Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança.

The debate, held within one of the most important committees of the Brazilian Congress (as it deals precisely with fundamental state issues), included the participation of important specialists in military and intelligence matters, such as Commander Robinson Farinazzo, officer of the Brazilian Navy, the defense analyst Albert Caballé, and Professor Ricardo Cabral, former professor at the Naval War College, among others.

Referring to statements by former NATO officers, presidents, and prime ministers of various countries connected to the Atlantic Alliance, Farinazzo highlighted the fact that the fate of Brazilian territories, especially the Amazon region and its rainforest, is discussed in summits held outside Brazil, without the representation of Brazilian interests.

As an example, Farinazzo recalled a draft resolution in the United Nations Security Council, dated 2021, which aimed to categorize general climate issues as “security threats” that could be discussed, overseen, and operated within the framework of the Security Council. This draft was vetoed by Russia and India and did not have the support of China, which abstained.

Although the draft did not specifically mention the Amazon or Brazil, it is impossible to ignore the numerous references to the “internationalization of the Amazon,” seen as the “heritage of humanity,” in the context of the radicalization of ecoglobalist discourses created within the centers of knowledge and public policy of the Atlanticist West.

As jurist Carl Schmitt said, “whoever invokes humanity is trying to deceive.” Behind humanitarian discourse lie all the most brutal and nihilistic projects of the liberal Western elites. To prove this, we just need to look at how the narratives of “humanitarian intervention” were used in Libya, Iraq, and the Balkans over the past 30 years.

Indeed, in August 2019, American political scientist Stephen Walt published an article within the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs speculating on the possibility of military actions legitimized by environmentalist discourse of defending “humanity” from “climate threats”. According to Walt, in the future, major powers might try to halt situations of environmental degradation through armed interventions in weaker countries, specifically mentioning Brazil as an example.

Less than a month later, The Guardian published an article by an author named Lawrence Douglas, in which he argued that the same logic applied to humanitarian interventions, such as the “Responsibility to Protect,” a globalist concept enshrined at the UN in 2005, should serve to legitimize the use of force against the geopolitical enemies of the Atlanticist West with a humanitarian/environmentalist veneer.

Indeed, at the event held in the Brazilian Congress, Stephen Walt’s article was specifically mentioned, along with many other pieces of evidence. It is necessary to recall, as Farinazzo did, that James Stavridis, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former SOUTHCOM Commander, claimed that fires in the Amazon Rainforest represented a security risk for the U.S., legitimizing their intervention in Brazil. Emmanuel Macron (who was warmly welcomed by Lula in the Amazon a few months ago) and Boris Johnson, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, have also publicly stated that the Amazon region does not really belong to Brazil, but rather is a “common good” of so-called “humanity.” David Milliband, Secretary of the Environment under Tony Blair’s government, even went so far as advocate for the privatization of the Amazon Rainforest in 2006.

All this was presented to the Foreign Relations and National Defense Committee of the Brazilian Congress with abundant evidence and sources.

If the issue of Amazon fires was the most “weaponized” against Brazil during the Bolsonaro government, now the topic that generates the most furious reactions from environmental NGOs in Brazil, as well as “concerned” comments from foreign bureaucrats, is the exploration of oil in the Equatorial Margin, as pointed out by Professor Ricardo Cabral in Congress.

This is a topic that is linked, as he pointed out, with the entire history of efforts to prevent or hinder the exploitation of Brazilian mineral and energy resources, usually under allegations of “environmental damage” or “violations of indigenous peoples’ rights” – narratives that put pressure for the loss of sovereignty over parts of Brazilian territory, which should, as the narrative goes, be under “international tutelage,” in a more refined and postmodern version of the old British privatization proposals.

The problem, as analyst Albert Caballé pointed out, however, is that the Brazilian defense industry is in crisis; a crisis that has lasted for several years already.

If until approximately the 1980s, Brazilian companies in the defense sector not only supplied most of the national military needs but were also exporters, especially to the Middle East and Africa, the neoliberal avalanche of the 1990s in a post-Cold War context led to a gradual dismantling of the sector and its denationalization, with several of the main Brazilian defense companies, such as Ares and others, coming under the control of multinational companies – almost always from the same Atlanticist countries that show interest in the “internationalization” of the Amazon.

The hypothetical scenario discussed in the Brazilian Congress for an interventionist action against Brazil, as presented by Farinazzo, mentions the possibility of a blockade of the main Brazilian ports by Atlanticist naval forces, in a sort of “anaconda strategy” (a tactic that is part of the manual of Admiral Mahan, the father of American geopolitics).

The concern of Brazilian experts and representatives specializing in defense and international relations, therefore, is that Western greed in an era of transition and geopolitical crisis could turn against Brazil – and that Brazil, if it does not quickly wake up to the contemporary risks and dangers, may not be able to face this challenge.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... on-region/

Make no mistake, whenever our capitalist masters advocate the environment it's because they stand to profit greatly. Otherwise they don't give a damn.

*****

Feminists in Brazil mobilize against bill that equates abortion with murder

The Chamber of Deputies surprised many by pushing forward the discussion on a bill that equates abortion with murder and prohibits abortion even in cases of rape

June 14, 2024 by Peoples Dispatch

Image
Abortion rights demonstrators mobilize in Brasília (Photo: Matheus Alves / Mídia NINJA)

On Wednesday, June 12, Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies approved the urgent discussion of a bill that equates abortion with murder. Officially named Bill 1904/2024, it will now be voted on by the plenary of the Chamber of Deputies, without first going through the relevant committees.

The bill could result in prison sentences as long as 20 years for those who administer abortions after 22 weeks of pregnancy.

The Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, Arthur Lira, of the Progressive Party, put the matter on the agenda without informing the federal deputies and without announcing the bill’s number. He asked Pastor Henrique Vieira of the left-wing Socialism and Freedom Party about the position of party members on the matter under consideration, but he did not respond. Lira considered the urgency of the matter approved in symbolic voting, in which each deputy’s vote on the electronic panel isn’t recorded, which lasted just 23 seconds. In general, symbolic voting occurs when there is already agreement among parliamentarians on the matter on the agenda.

The bill adds articles to the Penal Code to make the penalties for simple homicide the same as those for abortions carried out after 22 weeks of gestation, even in cases where the practice is legally allowed. The text also prohibits abortion even in cases of pregnancy resulting from rape, if there is fetal viability.

At the time of the vote, there was no reaction in the plenary. On social media, however, members of the progressive spectrum attacked what they called Lira’s “maneuver”.

“Lira has just struck a blow against women’s rights. He approved an emergency request without even announcing the vote. The request allows voting on the bill that forces girls and women who suffer sexual violence to have the child of a rapist,” wrote Natália Bonavides of the Workers’ Party.

Congresswoman Sâmia Bomfim of the Socialism and Freedom Party also spoke out on social media. “Using a maneuver, Lira approved the urgency of the Child Pregnancy Bill, so the bill can go to a voting at any time in the plenary,” she posted.

The Nem Presa Nem Morta (Either Jailed nor Killed, in a rough translation) Campaign, which defends the decriminalization of abortion in the country, called Lira’s stance “cowardly.”

The National Front for the Legalization of Abortion described the urgent approval as “dishonest and undemocratic.”

Protesters across Brazil denounce “Child Pregnancy Bill”
On Thursday night, many Brazilian cities saw feminist protests against Bill 1904/2024, dubbed the Child Pregnancy Bill for the impact it could have on young girls who are victims of sexual violence.

The Front Against the Criminalization of Women and For the Legalization of Abortion led protests in 17 Brazilian cities and engaged in mobilizations in many other places.

Brasília foi pra rua pra dizer: tirem as mãos dos nossos direitos!

A aprovação da urgência do PL 1904/24 é uma afronta a todas as conquistas das mulheres. Crianças não são mães, estupradores não são pais.

Isso não pode seguir. PL DOS ESTUPRADORES NÃO!

Fotos: Matheus Alves /… pic.twitter.com/R18I7Yt6Gw

— Mídia NINJA (@MidiaNINJA) June 14, 2024


Hundreds gathered at the Republic’s National Museum in Brasília for the protest. According to Thaísa Magalhães, Women’s Secretary of Brazil’s Central Workers’ Union of the Federal District (CUT-DF, in Portuguese), the protests show that women listened to the call of many feminist and social organizations. “Women expressed their solidarity with the urgency of going to the streets to say no to the Child Pregnancy Bill,” said Thaíssa.

According to Brazilian pedagogue Leila Rebouças, the discussion of this agenda in the Chamber of Deputies represents a negotiation over women’s bodies. She also points out that in election years, such as 2024, when municipal elections will be held, conservative agendas are, once again, debated in Congress. “This is yet another strategy to put these agendas forward to negotiate votes,” she said.

Mulheres ocupam a Av. Paulista contra o PL 1904. Chega de tanto ódio às mulheres! ✊🏾

Vídeo: @igorrgi / @seremosresistencia pic.twitter.com/azQvLnLppX

— Mídia NINJA (@MidiaNINJA) June 14, 2024


In São Paulo, the demonstration took place at the São Paulo Museum of Art (MASP, in Portuguese) on Paulista Avenue, and brought together hundreds of demonstrators. According to Ana Paula, an activist with the National Front Against the Criminalization of Women and For the Legalization of Abortion, the demonstrations are women’s response to the attack on a right already legally guaranteed.

“It was a moment of revolt for women and all pregnant women about the urgency for the Bill 1904/2024, which was done without any decent consultation with parliament, because it wasn’t even announced. In 23 seconds, Lira has ruined the lives of thousands of girls and women who have access to a legal right guaranteed by the Penal Code, which dates back to 1940: abortion in cases of sexual violence and risk to life. This is truly revolting and led to this movement,” she says.

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2024/06/14/ ... th-murder/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Sun Jun 30, 2024 2:09 pm

YouTube’s monetization jeopardizes Brazilian sovereignty

Bruna Frascolla

June 29, 2024

The sheer fact that Brazilians dispend so much energy on social media, thinking that it is politics, is, in itself, a delay for the country.

Year after year, a youtuber who has more than a million of subscribers live-streams several promises to the retirees, e. g.: this year they will receive a fourteenth “salary”. In December, retirees receive from Brazilian government a thirteenth salary, not a fourteenth. No serious media outlet ever stated that the government would pay them a fourteenth salary. However, such a story is too good to be false, and the retirees keep watching her on YouTube, hearing the promises of an extra money that is about to enter into their bank accounts.

Immediately thereafter, they make a phone call to their credit broker because they want to know how much money they can borrow with such an extra income, and won’t believe when the broker says that there is no fourteenth salary. When January comes, and there is indeed no fourteenth salary, the youtuber says that she wrote a letter to UNO, asking for a fourteenth salary for Brazilian retirees. It was not a quackery, the fourteenth salary was retained from them for some revolting reason, so it must draw international attention.

Why does this youtuber acts like that? For what reason would someone spend years lying to thousands of gullible old people? The answer is quite simple: because of monetization. With a gullible audience, a liar earns money from YouTube just by telling her lies.

A lot of Brazilian New Right’s dynamics is explained by YouTube’s monetization. So much so that, in order to destroy Bolsonarismo, one of the measures adopted by Justice Alexandre de Moraes was the demonetization of popular YouTube channels. He made it by his own court orders. Alexandre de Moraes, also known as Xandão, is the greatest villain for Bolsonaristas now – maybe even worst than Lula.

Just like the retirees’ youtuber, Bolsonaristas’ youtubers always have some clue that something really good is about to happen. Their newest factoid was produced with international aid: Congressman Chris Smith, from USA, made a document in which he commands Alexandre de Moraes to answer a number of questions within 10 days. The only effect of this document (a sheer letter by a foreign congressman) is to serve as a talking point for a lot of live-streamings, in which youtubers swear that soon Brazil will be free from Xandão – or else the Uncle Sam will impose sanctions on Brazil because of human rights violations. Of course, if USA would sanction Brazil, it would put the country in a greater proximity with the “communists” of BRICS. But it should not bother the youtubers: unless Brazil creates some firewall à la Chinoise, a firm adherence to BRICS would give a lot of talking points to New Right’s youtubers, who have already moved into USA in order to escape from “communism” and exert their free speech. Of course, no one among them speaks about Julian Assange.

This situation displays the consequences, both foreseeable and unforeseen, of YouTube over the social life of nations. The case of gullible retirees has a smaller influence, for they usually loose nothing but time. However, the idea of a foreigner platform paying (or refusing to pay) people on the basis of audience has deleterious consequences for national politics, consequences that were quite foreseeable. The least that one could hope to have in a sovereign country is that algorithms’ criteria were always transparent for national public authorities. If not, USA can tamper the algorithm in order to privilege friendly propagandists, even before monetizing them.

Finally, the sheer fact that Brazilians dispend so much energy on social media, thinking that it is politics, is, in itself, a delay for the country. Regulation of social media is a pressing issue, but there is a lack of politicians who want to make it using sovereign criteria. What we have is a Justice, who theoretically is not a politician; and the congressmen who deal with regulation just want to impose a woke western censorship.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... vereignty/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 25, 2024 1:58 pm

Brazil’ MST: How Long Do We Have To Wait for the Changes To Begin?
JULY 23, 2024

Image
Forest next to the limits of the Kaxarari indigenous territory, in Lábrea, Amazonas state, during the 2020 burning season in the Brazilian Amazon. Photo: Christian Braga/Greenpeace.

XTelegramRedditWhatsAppLinkedInFacebookThreadsMessengerWeChatMastodonEmailPrintCopy LinkShare
By João Pedro Stedile – Jul 2, 2024

Crimes and environmental tragedies are repeated in Brazil with increasing frequency. Droughts in the Amazon, floods in Maranhão and Recife, fires in the Pantanal, deforestation and lowering of the water table in the Cerrado, the water reserve of the three largest river basins in the country…

The tragedy in Rio Grande do Sul is just the tip of the iceberg of so many attacks that affect millions of people and forces society, and, above all, governments, at three levels, to reflect on the need for urgent changes.

It was a tragedy announced. The scientific community has long been warning that grain monoculture and pastures lead to an imbalance in the distribution of rainfall.

Changes to the Forest Code, defended and approved by the ruralist group in the 2000s, reduced the size of vegetation cover areas on the banks of streams and rivers and exempted the replacement of deforested areas. Without any supervision, it was a free-for-all.

The government of Rio Grande do Sul also changed hundreds of articles of the state environmental law. Everything to help agribusiness, which doesn’t even leave wealth in the state, because it exports agricultural commodities without paying a cent of ICMS, thanks to the Kandir Law, of the FHC government.

Added to this shamelessness are the predatory actions of mining companies, in every corner, from sand removal to large iron mines, in addition to the crimes of gold miners.

Finally, the use of pesticides is perhaps the greatest attack on nature. Brazil is the country that uses the most pesticides, including products banned in Europe, which eliminate biodiversity, alter the balance of nature and contaminate the water table. But who cares if this is controlled by half a dozen transnational companies, which don’t pay taxes but finance politicians?

The crimes are there, in the open. And those most affected are always the poor, who pay with their lives. They are residents of unsuitable locations, pushed by real estate speculation from cities to hillsides; they are the riverside people; they are family farmers.

What to do? We no longer need to cut down any trees to plant crops or raise livestock. Zero deforestation needs to be extended from the Amazon to other biomes, such as the Cerrado, the Atlantic Forest and the Pantanal. This policy must be combined with a major national reforestation plan in these biomes, in cities, on roadsides and on the banks of streams and rivers. State companies should create nurseries and distribute seedlings of native and fruit trees.

Image

We need to put limits on the advancement of agribusiness, on the predatory model that only enriches transnational exporting companies and a handful of farmers.

Only family farming can “cool” the planet, protecting biodiversity and combating hunger.

To achieve this, we must encourage the polyculture of healthy foods, with a large agroecology program that distributes necessary inputs to family farmers, with a reindustrialization policy that provides adequate agricultural machinery and organic fertilizers.

Agrarian reform is a fundamental policy to guarantee access to land for farmers who do not have it — many expelled by the advance of agribusiness — and to relocate those affected by climate change. In cities, it is essential to guarantee decent housing in places with security and a future.

All of this costs a lot of money, but it is better to prevent and save lives and nature than to cry afterwards. Rio Grande do Sul will now need R$60 billion just to replace losses.

Are we going to continue chasing repairs or are we going to prepare for a better life for everyone?

(Friends of the MST)

https://orinocotribune.com/brazil-mst-h ... -to-begin/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Thu Aug 22, 2024 1:44 pm

Brazil Must Choose: Sovereignty and the Multipolar World or Subordination to US Interests
Posted by Internationalist 360° on August 16, 2024
Quantum Bird

Image

According to S. Glazyev, in his seminal essay “Sanctions and Sovereignty”, didactically discussed in the excellent interviews here and here, the opportunity of the century would consist of the possibility of definitively freeing oneself from the imperialist harassment of the Collective West through the construction of a multipolar world order based on the exercise of sovereignty and win-win multilateral arrangements.

The journey towards multipolarity is complex and imposes some arduous tasks, such as the formulation of architecture and financial instruments suitable for economic growth and income redistribution, ideally immune to the dollar – the main weapon in the Hegemon’s arsenal. It also imposes the need to formulate new multilateral forums and entities, without the vices of the existing ones, which were largely designed and imposed by the Hegemon, for its own benefit, after the Second World War.

In addition, operating in a multipolar environment also presupposes that each country seeks the ability to articulate its own interests from a sovereign perspective, but without ignoring or offending the interests of partner countries.

And this obviously includes absolute respect for the domestic policy of others.

Having said that, we recall that since the inauguration of the current Brazilian government we have pointed out how Brazil has pursued an erratic foreign policy, which oscillates between a supposedly obsolete strategic ambiguity and an echo chamber-style representation of certain interests of the collective West. Our focus on the current government is justified because it was under Lula’s first terms in office, in the early 2000s, that Brazil became a founding member of the BRICS and one of the driving forces behind the G20.And it is precisely this point that prompts our first question.

Is there, or has there ever been, a sincere interest on the part of Brazil in the BRICS and multipolarity?

The doubt is well-founded because, despite all the rhetoric and enthusiastic propaganda about the BRICS and multipolarity that the Brazilian president exerts around the world to an international audience, Brazilian attitudes towards its partners in the Global South seem to suggest not. Simply put, Brazil’s engagement seems insincere, and is certainly inconsequential. The history of evidence has become too overwhelming to ignore.

The list is long, but a few episodes stand out:

First there was the bizarre position of the Brazilian authorities in relation to the Russian Special Military Operation in Ukraine, in which Lula emulated Montezuma.

Then there was another bizarre episode, decorated with cowardly overtones, about Israel’s ongoing genocide of the Palestinians of Gaza.

And more recently, we have been following the Brazilian government’s deplorable and irresponsible stance regarding the elections in Venezuela, in a graphic intrusion into that country’s domestic politics, which has only served to legitimize the imperialist position of the US and its European vassals and further weaken the stature of Brazilian diplomacy.

Moreover, still on the subject of the ongoing crisis in Venezuela, we have just learned that there are discussions in government circles, led by the presidential adviser for international affairs, Celso Amorim, to make Brazil’s recognition of the Venezuelan government conditional on new elections being held in that country.


Regardless of whether or not this proposal is formalized, the effort to avoid a domestic resolution of the crisis and Brazil’s desire to promote regime change in Venezuela, in line with US interests, are now completely exposed. Furthermore, by worrying about popularity ratings, indirectly corroborating the hegemonic media’s narratives on Venezuela, Lula is missing the opportunity to raise his stature and politically educate the Brazilian population, as well as further alienating the remaining left-wing militancy.

At this point, it’s worth asking an additional question. Is Brazilian leadership in Latin America nothing more than a myth fabricated in the corridors of Itamaraty?

In another news item, we have the appointment of a Brazilian ambassador (a first-class diplomat) to Taipei, Taiwan, and the omission of the link between that diplomatic mission and the Brazilian embassy in Tokyo. The nuances of development did not go unnoticed and can be interpreted as raising the status of the diplomatic mission to the same level as the one in Beijing, which would indicate the perception of Taiwan by the Brazilian authorities as an independent political entity. In other words, a potential diplomatic blow to a BRICS partner, which happens to be the world’s largest economic power and one of Brazil’s biggest trading partners.

Furthermore, if confirmed, it would be another case of the Brazilian government emulating another feature of US foreign policy.

Considering all of the above, would it be premature to conclude that Brazil is slowly giving up its engagement in the BRICS and multipolarity, while reaffirming its colonial status quo in the field of the collective West?

I asked this question to a very dear friend, who is widely known and read around the world. His answer:

“Get ready for KAMALULA !”

Brazil vs Venezuela: A Question of Loyalty
Quantum Bird

Image

Of all the aspects that define the ethical and moral stature of a politician and his or her legacy, Loyalty is perhaps the most decisive because, in general, it is the ability to exercise loyalty that makes a politician trustworthy and useful in the most difficult of times. Loyalty manifests itself on several levels: to the electorate, to one’s partners on the road and to one’s companions in the ideological camp, i.e. those who don’t bargain for support in order to extract advantages in times of difficulty.

Yesterday, President Lula said that Brazil will not recognize the victory of Nicolas Maduro,, and then indicated the need for new elections in Venezuela. The decision came before the conclusion of the appeals trial processes underway in the Venezuelan courts. Our geopolitical reading of Brazil’s position has already been expressed. Today we would like to comment on this development from a slightly different perspective.

There are no records of attacks on Lula or Dilma Rousseff by Hugo Chavez or Nicolás Maduro. Quite the opposite. Chavez and Maduro have always been at the forefront of defending sovereignty and democracy in Latin America. In fact, Maduro was Dilma Rousseff’s most vocal defender in South America, and relentlessly denounced the white coup d’état that led to her impeachment as president of Brazil in 2016. Maduro also always denounced the illegal imprisonment of Lula by Lava-Jato.

Basically, we have no record of Maduro asking Lula, or Dilma, for proof of their innocence before supporting them in the countless cases of fraudulent accusations, lawfare and international sabotage that have always targeted Brazil under the administrations of the Workers’ Party. Nor have Chavez or Maduro intervened in Brazilian domestic politics to enable imperialism’s interests in the region.

We believe that every genuine left-wing activist – whether they voted for Lula or not – as well as every decent Brazilian should be ashamed of the graphic disloyalty shown by the Brazilian president. We fear that for them, Lula’s words no longer matter.

Could it be that the kind of “leadership in the region” that the Brazilian ruling class aspires to – Lula and Celso Amorim included – is analogous to that which the bush captain exercised in the cane fields?

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2024/08/ ... interests/

******

Lula da Silva's missteps
Aug 21, 2024 , 10:49 am .

Image
Ambiguity and improvisation have characterized Brazilian foreign policy towards Venezuela in recent days (Photo: Eraldo Peres AP)

Lula's recent statements on Venezuela, in which he proposed holding new elections or forming a coalition government, have once again highlighted the Brazilian president's lack of a clear and consistent strategy in his handling of foreign policy.

The ambiguity and improvisation that have characterized the diplomatic moves made from Brasilia in recent days weaken the geopolitical position of the South American country in the regional and global context, called upon to play a leading role in the construction of a new international, multipolar order.

the pliers
The combination of pressures exerted by liberal circles, both inside and outside his government, as well as by Bolsonarism at home and by the United States in the international arena, has been the main reason why President Lula has abandoned his initial position of neutrality with respect to Venezuela, which expressed a treatment within the threshold of strategic autonomy.

Clearly, this approach was not sustainable over time and although his proposal for repeat elections does not grant Washington the illegal recognition of Edmundo González as "president-elect", a perception of weakness and lack of geopolitical influence to impose his criteria and interests over and above pressures has certainly taken hold around Lula.

Since the beginning of the post-election conflict, the entire spectrum of the establishment , within the government itself, the opposition to the PT and groups affiliated with Bolsonaro have used the narrative of alleged electoral fraud in Venezuela to their advantage in view of the municipal elections in October 2024 in Brazil.

For these sectors, attacking Lula for acting as a mediator in Venezuela corresponds to a strategy that seeks to erode the image of the Brazilian president's candidates in the main cities such as Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, which were decisive in these elections.

Likewise, the opposition in general and Bolsonarism in particular from the Senate continue to press the Brazilian executive to establish a period of time for a statement on the results of June 28 and the possible recognition, or not, of Nicolás Maduro as re-elected president.

On the other hand, the intense international campaign carried out through multiple diplomatic channels, mainly by the United States, contributed to Brazil changing its position in the Organization of American States (OAS).

The Brazilian delegation to the OAS finally signed the August 16 resolution that sought to escalate diplomatic pressure against Venezuela, a sign of a radical change in the attitude that advocated respect for Venezuelan institutions that characterized its first statements.

short-sighted geopolitical vision
Lula appears to have chosen not to follow the geopolitical reasoning of the BRICS+ countries. His main partners in the bloc, China and Russia, recognised Maduro's victory and appealed to the principle of non-interference and respect for national sovereignty.

The president's ambiguity is determined by limited domestic political calculations and the maintenance of his lines of understanding and cooperation with the United States and Europe.

Brazil's historic aspiration to become an independent regional power has thus been undermined by a foreign policy that is broadly aligned with the Western Pole.

The path that Lula has taken in relation to Venezuela sheds light on whether he is really capable of ensuring that Brazil becomes a benchmark of geopolitical autonomy on the international stage.

Its stance contradicts the principles of sovereignty and multilateralism defended by the BRICS+ bloc, and weakens its ability to challenge the unipolar world order.

By giving in to external pressure, Brazil would not only lose influence within this group but would also compromise its credibility as an independent factor in the international arena.

In this context, Itamaraty's pro-Western worldview has been decisive.

Internal and external tensions activated the ideological and practical springs of the institution, which gave a new impetus to its general objective of weakening Brazil's role as a leader of the Global South, and thus framing the country within the Western architecture, with a foreign policy independence restricted to economic and commercial matters.

A SHOT IN THE FOOT
Regardless of the reasons behind President Lula's radical change of perspective regarding the Venezuelan post-electoral context, the high costs of such hesitation are evident in a scenario where Brazil could have played a leading role in line with its aspirations to be an emerging power with global projection.

The image of his leadership as strong and determined in Brazil has been compromised. His government, in a time of extremely high political polarization, is burdened by major weaknesses manifested in the need to seek internal consensus that guarantees the governability of the country.

This vulnerability compromises Brazil's autonomy and hampers its ability to play a leading role in global affairs.

Lula decided to jump on the bandwagon of questioning Venezuelan institutions, despite the fact that his own presidential victory in 2022, with a difference of only 1.8%, was reaffirmed by the Superior Electoral Court of Brazil, after the challenge by Jair Bolsonaro.

Right now, in light of the Venezuelan issue, the president faces a decisive crossroads in his foreign policy: align with Washington and Brussels in defense of the declining "rules-based" liberal order, or prioritize relations with the Global South to promote a multipolar order from the BRICS+, based on respect for sovereignty and non-interference.

Lula's actions so far suggest that he would feel most comfortable with the first option.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/lo ... a-da-silva

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Sun Sep 08, 2024 2:33 pm

Brazil: Internal and Regional Crossroads To Traverse
By Julian Cola - September 6, 2024 1

Image
Raul Jungmann, Brazil’s former Minister of Defense and ex-Minister of Public Security. [Source: folhapo.com.br]

“This pact exists throughout Brazil. It’s not privileged to Rio de Janeiro. Truth be said, it’s a very organic, structured relationship between Rio de Janeiro politicians, militia groups and the police.

How does it function?

Militias control growing amounts of territory. Approximately one million to 1.9 million people (in Rio de Janeiro) reside under the dominion of militia groups that control these territories. They also control how people vote to elect representatives to parliament or state congress or the legislative assembly or even federal congress.

Once politicians are elected, they’ll seek to place their representatives within the executive branch, otherwise, within Rio de Janeiro’s government. That’s to say, we have elected parliamentarians chosen by militia groups. They in turn nominate allies, their cronies, to assume positions within the public security apparatus.

This is what I call the heart of darkness…By controlling territories, they (militias) control how people vote. Consequently, they can offer votes to politicians who participate in this alliance.

Similarly, politicians defend the interests of militia groups by affording them political positions…like in the public health care or social security sector. Criminal factions and militias benefit this way because they don’t exist, exclusively, by means of coercion or the imposition of force or violence. They also exist by being able to provide benefits to poor communities.

This is what I refer to as the organic alliance between the police, militias and politicians, as well as the so-called crime bureau, which is tasked with eliminating those who run afoul of these criminal associations. They have captured the better part of Rio de Janeiro’s state government and its public security apparatus.”


Raul Jungmann, Brazil’s former Minister of Defense and ex-Minister of Public Security

Word on the Streets

“We’ve always had dialogue with left-wing governments, however, we haven’t been able to halt the state’s machine gun by one single centimeter.”

—Débora Maria da Silva (coordinator and founder of Mães de Maio)

Word on the streets, at least in some corners, is: What Brazil really needs is a “revolutionary government.” Any resolution(s) to Brazil’s “heart of darkness” that lingers short of a “revolutionary government” must be weighed against the forces outlined by Raul Jungmann.

His comments were made in respect to the abrupt end to the Marielle Franco homicide investigation, an inquiry that resulted in the detention of a sitting congressman (Chiquinho Brazão), his brother and audit court adviser (Domingos Brazão), and an ex-police chief and former director of Rio de Janeiro’s Homicide Division (Rivaldo Barbosa), as the masterminds and financiers of the hit.

By comparison, and taking into account the recent first and second-round approval of Bill 2.234/2022, a proposal to legalize casinos and other forms of gambling, by Brazil’s congress and the senate’s Constitution and Justice Commission, Jungmann could have been describing a prelude to Havana in the 1940s and much of the following decade.

An eyebrow raiser for Brazil’s establishment left, calls for a “revolutionary government,” one that preceded Luíz Inácio Lula da Silva’s third presidential term, is prefaced by a clear and detailed identification of centuries-old internal issues and whose lives are at stake in the struggle between the country’s past and whatever future it holds. Last year (2023), Brazilian police forces killed 6,393 people. Of the total number of victims, 82.7% were people of African-descent, despite this majority group making up just over 50% of the population. Also last year, over 69% of Brazil’s 850,000 prison population were black people.

Image
Last year (2023), Brazilian police forces killed 6,393 people. [Source: bradonegro.com]

In total, 46,328 people were killed across Brazil in 2023. “Approximately 3% of the world population reside in Brazil, however, the country is responsible for roughly 10% of all homicides committed on the planet”, said Renato Sergio de Lima, president of the Brazilian Forum of Public Safety.

The report also revealed that in six cities, Brazilian police forces killed more people than armed gangs and criminals last year. Those cities include Angra dos Reis and Niterói (Rio de Janeiro); Itabaiana and Lagarto (Sergipe); Guarujá (São Paulo); and Jequié (Bahia).

Yanomami and Other Indigenous Nations
Yanomami Indigenous nation remains engulfed in a humanitarian crisis. It resulted in the deaths of 363 Yanomamis in 2023. Casualties, including infant deaths from preventable causes, exceed the number of deaths recorded during former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro’s last year in office (2022), which reached 343 fatalities. The deaths are the result of an invasion by thousands of illegal gold miners, loggers and land prospectors upon Yanomami nation.

Image
An ongoing health crisis in Yanomami nation has resulted in the deaths of 363 Indigenous people last year. The state of emergency has been provoked by the invasion of illegal gold miners, loggers and land prospectors. [Source: radiobrasiliatual.com]
In December, Brazil’s parliament passed Law 14.701, the infamous Marco Temporal (Time Marker). The measure prohibits government-authorized demarcations of Indigenous territories that, for whatever reason, were unoccupied by Indigenous people on the day Brazilian lawmakers ratified the country’s 1988 Constitution.

“We support this government; however, we’re well aware that it’s a joint administration, one that’s not 100% aligned with our demands,” said Kleber Karipuna, coordinator at the Articulation of Indigenous People of Brazil (APIB), the largest Indigenous organization in the country. “There are government ministers opposed to certain Indigenous agendas. Dialogue remains open but the outlook will be one of greater demands.”

At this year’s 20th anniversary of Acampamento Terra Livre (Free Land Encampment), an annual event where Indigenous nations gather in Brasilia to demand their rights, Lula was not invited, as he was in previous years.

Image
Kleber Karipuna [Source: agenciabrasil.abc.com]

Apart from and potentially more damaging than the Time Marker law, is bill, PEC 59. The proposal aims to transfer the role of demarcating indigenous territory from Brazil’s executive branch to the legislature. For Karipuna, the move would signal “the end of demarcations” altogether. “Even worse, it even runs the risk of rescinding indigenous territories already certified (by the government).”

At this year’s 20th anniversary of Acampamento Terra Livre (Free Land Encampment), an annual event where indigenous nations gather in Brasilia to demand their rights, Lula was not invited as in previous years.

Right-Tide over Pink
With the political bar and Brazil’s international image lowered to basement levels during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency, Lula’s return as head of state has proven good. It has triumphed over lawfare, foreign right-wing interest groups providing moral and financial support to Lula’s political rivals during the 2022 presidential race.

The former Trump adviser and founder of Breitbart News, Steve Bannon, stated the election represented the “second-most-important election in the world,” adding confidently, “Bolsonaro will win unless it’s stolen by, guess what, the machines.” The media mogul has maintained close relations with Bolsonaro’s son and congressman, Eduardo Bolsonaro, since 2018, designating him as representative of his conservative international movement in Brazil.

The government is going to have to “learn how to cope with the ascension of the far right,” Finance Minister Fernando Haddad said earlier this year. In an apparent response, Lula stated that, “instead of reading books,” Haddad should “spend more hours in Congress” lobbying on behalf of government proposals and policies.

Two Grave Institutional Problems:
The melodramatic breakthrough into the not-so-shadowy figures behind Marielle’s assassination could not have come at a more opportune moment. Similar to the popular saying, “Um negócio pra boi dormir” (“to lull the bull to sleep”), comes another aphorism: “para o inglês ver” (“for the English to see”). Both sayings refer to when somebody, a group of people or an entity, says something—not necessarily a lie—to give a warped account of reality. Magically, they transform—like Brazil from slaveholding colony, to empire, to republic—criminality of the highest order to something more respectable. It was Brazil’s former Minister of Finance, Ruy Barbosa, who ordered all of the country’s official archives and documentation related to chattel slavery to be burned on December 14, 1890. In the official statement, Barbosa argued that the government was compelled to make “the last vestiges of slavery disappear,” thus obligating officials to “destroy” the archives to maintain the “honor of the country.”

A Dedicated Right-Wing Military
Antiquated red hysteria is an ideological mainstay for Brazil’s armed forces. In an effort to clean house of untrustworthy military authorities operating within the executive branch, Lula relieved dozens of Institutional Security Office (GSI) officers of their duties following the January 8, 2022, attacks in Brasilia. The organization is responsible for the security of the president, vice president, and their official workplace and residence.

Lula also sacked general Júlio César de Arruda as head of Brazil’s armed forces. The move, according to an unnamed source in Brazil’s military high command, caused “disaffection” within the company.

Despite personnel removals, “The government remains hostage to the military,” says historian Priscila Brandão. “Our biggest problem involves the 1979 amnesty law and its interpretation by the supreme court in 2010 when it accepted the military’s interpretation. The military maintains an effective veto (against any charge of crimes against humanity during the dictatorship or revisions to the amnesty law) ever since the transition to democracy in 1985. While the mere possibility of discussing crimes committed by the dictatorship doesn’t exist in this country, nobody believes punishment will exist.”

A Spy vs. Spy Ring
More than a year into his third term as head of state, Lula sacked Alessandro Moretti as deputy director of the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN). His removal came one week after Brazil’s federal police launched Operation Close Vigilance, which cited Moretti as a suspect in their investigation into an illegal “counterintelligence” cell operating within ABIN. The web is accused of targeting opponents to Bolsonaro, his sons and close allies.

Popularly known as the “Parallel ABIN,” the spy ring formed during the previous government and is accused of tapping the mobile phones of at least 30,000 people, including congressional and senatorial representatives, supreme court justices, journalists, lawyers, police officers and others.

A Crossroads?

Yesterday’s meal doesn’t calm the child

(Boasting of past successes will not resolve today’s problems) — African proverb


Brazil’s pink tide success story during Lula’s first two terms as president are undeniable. Millions were lifted from poverty. The country was removed from the UN hunger list. A thriving, more equitable economy emerged. Quotas were afforded to Indigenous and African-descent people to attend universities, just one of the many institutions they’d been historically excluded from. So on and so forth. However, if one single Bolsonaro term can reverse the gains of 13.5 years of progressive governance (Lula and his presidential successor Dilma Rousseff, both members of the Workers Party) as quickly and thoroughly as it did, then the pink tide should have turned blood-raging-red by now. But it hasn’t. And the chips keep rolling against their hope for a return to the days of old.

Having assumed control of the Argentinian and Peruvian embassies in Caracas following Venezuela’s recent presidential election, Brazil’s foreign policymakers are being pushed to the test in a political row extending beyond regional geopolitics. Them on August 8th, Lula, acting in diplomatic reciprocity, expelled Nicaragua’s ambassador to Brazil, the Honorable Fulvia Patricia Castro Matu. The source of tension derived from Lula’s discussions with Pope Francis and the Vatican’s Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin, over imprisoned catholic priests and bishops in Nicaragua. Also notable was the absence of an official Brazilian delegation at the 45th anniversary celebrations of the Sandinista Revolution on July 19th.

On-the-ground in Venezuela is Celso Amorim, special advisor to president Lula. The mission for Brazil’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs and ex-Minister of Defense is to keep lines of communication between Nicolás Maduro’s government and the opposition open and help reach a consensus between both parties. However, with a Brazilian pink tide divide over the affair (a divide that weakens their hand and benefits the right), home to a military that frowns heavily upon Venezuela, and a right-wing dominated media constantly insinuating or calling Lula a communist, socialist, and/or Chavista sympathizer, is it any wonder why Brazil’s leadership straddles the fence best they can?

Meanwhile, internal issues in Brazil have not thawed from one executive administration to the next. Last month (July), Rio de Janeiro’s state government unleashed a massive police incursion into ten favelas in the city’s west zone. It involves approximately 2,000 military and civilian police, as well as special forces. The operation, scheduled to go on indefinitely, is stated to “bring an end to the war between drug=traffickers and militias,” according to governor Cláudio Castro. “It’s an area where we know the CV (Red Command – the main armed rebel group in Rio de Janeiro) has been attempting to reclaim territory from the militias.”

Earlier in July, a police operation into the City of God favela in Rio resulted in the deaths of six people.

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2024/0 ... -traverse/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 21, 2024 2:50 pm

The Fall of Brazilian Progressivism
Posted by Internationalist 360° on October 19, 2024

Image
Observatory on Communication and Democracy (OCD) – Foundation for Latin American Integration (FILA) [Image: The moment when Lula da Silva and his companions ascend the ramp of the Planalto Palace on January 1, 2023 to proceed to the inauguration of Lula as president of Brazil. Credits: Ricardo Stuckert]

Lula’s government does not have a future project for the country while the dissonance between what the government and progressivism think and how it acts with the spirit of our times is evident.


Sunday, October 6, 2024 ended with some victories and many defeats to the Brazilian left and/or progressivism, which are compelled to combine the dispute of the second round with the balance of results. Without any doubt, the first round was a defeat for the progressive parties and for Lula da Silva’s government.

The conservative parties, only with the result of the first round, will already command the absolute majority of the country’s prefectures. Perhaps it is not a case of despair or defeatism for the progressive camp: Guilherme Boulos reached the second round in Sao Paulo, even at a disadvantage; the PT will compete in four other capitals in the second round and has already secured 252, in a slight recovery of the accumulated losses, which have made it fall from 638 in 2012 to 182 in 2020.

In the general framework of the country, the big winners were the center-right parties. Founded in 2011, the PSD has become the strongest center-right party in the country, overtaking the MDB after two decades.

The PSD won 867 prefectures, compared to 656 in 2020.

The MDB appears with 832, against 793 four years ago.In third place comes the PP, with 734 mayors elected in the first round. In 2020, it had elected 682. The Republican party went from 213 prefectures to 419. The PL grew, electing about 500 mayors, but fell short of its goal of 1500 prefectures.Lula’s PT went from 182 municipalities won in 2020 to 238 in the first round.

There are different types of defeats, there are numerous aspects and variables to consider, including tactics adopted and wrong forecasts.Now it is time to draw lessons from the first round and win the second round.

A fight goes on: the first round has just ended.

Will there be self-criticism? The municipal election is one thing, the presidential election is another, say the politicians. But when the parties that support the federal government do worse in a municipal election, something is not working. Either the population is not happy with the results of the government or the government is communicating very poorly with the population.

Likewise, the country is facing another phenomenon that the left has not evaluated as a determinant in its fall in popularity: the moral agenda, also known as conservative hypocrisy, propagated in an alliance between the extreme right and evangelical fundamentalism.

The moral panic established in society, through the call for a struggle of good against evil, having communism as the devil that corrupts young children and encourages them to change sex, consume drugs and vote for the left, the poor individual who earns little, forgets that his main fault is financial, embraces the divine cause of the moral defense of society and Christian values.

It is a fact that the most voted councilors in the main cities of the country are from the extreme right. Three million six hundred thousand votes.

This is the sum of the voters of the right and the extreme right in the city of Sao Paulo.This figure represents more than double the votes of Guilherme Boulos in the first round.

While a large part of the progressive camp continues to treat the Brazilian and peripheral population as intellectually poor, the extreme right is making this same population feel increasingly participative and decisive in the country’s electoral processes. The political articulation capacity of Brazilian fascism has been causing the left to lose important voters and votes with each universal suffrage.

In a country where education is deliberately discarded so that the poorest will not develop a critical sense and capacity to evaluate the social scenario in which they are inserted, all this sounds arrogant and presumptuous to their ears. And they respond at the ballot box without understanding the “academic” messages of progressivism.While Bolsonarism, the ultra-right, settles and wants all the power.

Bolsonarism

Since bolsonarismo emerged in Brazil, it became quite evident that the political phenomenon went beyond the character that gave it its name. Ineligible until 2030 for having committed electoral crimes, although it is not known if he will be in jail, former president Jair Bolsonaro is beginning to fear that bolsonarismo may even dispense with him.The warning came from a new figure named Pablo Marçal, who burst into the dispute for the mayoralty of São Paulo.

It is not known if there will be a further bolsonarismo beyond Jair Bolsonaro, since the space for a change of leadership or a process of inheritance in its social base and electoral capital has not been opened. The organizational form of the extreme right in Brazil is a combination of an ecology of political entrepreneurs that intersects with the logic of institutional politics to become pyramidal. At the highest point, the main figure functions as an intermediary between the ecology and the logic of institutions.

Is there a left?

The so-called left has no programmatic alternatives to the prosperity theology of the evangelicals and to the discourse of entrepreneurship in the peripheries.

Nor did they advance in the new approach to public health, articulating urban life with ecology, in the viability of common spaces for multiple activities and connections in the offer of local products and services, in the offer of spaces for the development of the city, in the creation of new public services, in the creation of new public spaces, and in the creation of new public spaces for the development of the city.

The left also failed to grasp the potential that digital technologies can offer in terms of innovations in public services, articulation of local economies in neighborhoods and peripheries, in the articulation of a collaborative economy and common good, in the structuring of new decentralized health services.

The leftists present proposals as formalistic and empty recipes of content. They are no longer the parents of the compensatory social programs of the Lulista governments: any party adopts them and applies them in their administrations.Nor did they advance in the new approach to public health, articulating urban life with ecology, in the viability of common spaces for multiple activities and connections in the offer of local products and services, in the offer of spaces for the development of the city, in the creation of new public services, in the creation of new public spaces, and in the creation of new public spaces for the development of the city.

In Sao Paulo, the logic did not work out: a second round was predicted between the “leftist” Guilherme Boulos and the neo-Bolsonarist Pablo Marçal. The right-wing Ricardo Nunes had made a mediocre administration, and the people of São Paulo wanted a change.But Marçal himself self-marginalized himself from the second round by publishing a false report on Boulos, and received a lot of attacks from all sides.The difference between Nunes and Marçal was about 80,000 votes….

Over the years, the left has given more importance to marketing and less to strategies. This has produced mediocre campaigns and poor results.To change this panorama, more incisive, more combative, more confrontational and more mobilizing campaigns are needed.

The left has lost the capacity to produce new leaders in line with our times. Just as they ignore the impacts of the digital transition, few applications have given centrality to the climate crisis and the ecological transition, issues that affect the universality of people, says Aldo Fornazieri, professor at the School of Sociology and Politics.

The left is also unfamiliar with the notion of technopolitics, understood as a set of activities that project new ways of doing politics through digital technologies, involving persuasive strategies with the use of political psychology and neuroscience, new forms and discursive languages to optimize persuasion and the construction of narratives that consider the impacts of the politics of affectations.

Technopolitics allows the design of new leaders and new political and social actors through digital media.It is no longer only in the territory or in the specific social or union movement that leadership and power are projected. The right has been noticing the projection potentials of digital technologies for a long time.

It is true: there is no direct relationship between the results of the municipal elections and the issue of the general elections and the presidential succession in 2026, when Lula will most likely not compete.

But the loss of programmatic and narrative substance of the left is worrisome mainly because of its inability to communicate with the people. The federal government, in the hands of Lula da Silva, could even take advantage of the favorable economic moment the country is experiencing… but it did not succeed in doing so.

Perhaps the problem is more serious: Lula’s government does not have a future project for the country while the dissonance between what the government and progressivism think and how it acts with the spirit of our times is evident.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2024/10/ ... ressivism/

******

Is Brazilian Democracy Stunted By its Military and Intelligence Apparatus?
By Julian Cola - October 17, 2024 0

Image
[Source: Arquivo Nacional/Jornal da Cidade]

Private interests and foreign influence helped to pave the path toward Brazil’s military dictatorship (1964-1985). The armed forces is not an institution separate from society…It’s a reflection of that violent and authoritarian society. However, they are more dangerous because they have the prerogative to legally use firearms.

—Priscila Brandão


An Interview with Priscila Brandão, author of They Are Illegal and Immoral: Authoritarianism, Political Interference and Corruption Throughout Brazil’s Military History

On March 31, 1964, Brazil’s home-grown, foreign-supported military coup began. President João Goulart (Jango) had not abandoned the country, as was falsely announced by Senator and congressional leader, Auro Moura Andrade; Rather he retreated to the state of Rio Grande do Sul after a failed attempt to rally support against the armed takeover.

Lock, stock and barrel with the coup plotters, O Globo, Brazil’s largest media conglomerate both then and now, was left virtually unscathed by two decades of ensuing round-ups, torture, forced disappearances, and assassinations; indeed, the paper championed the unfounded, foreign concept of a “domino effect” extending from the shores of revolutionary Cuba to the South American giant and other regional countries. Meanwhile, dictatorships mushroomed across the continent to stave off communism. So did Operation Condor.

In place of Jango’s government, an administration that proposed modest economic and agrarian reforms, came 20 years of strong-arm military rule, along with the military police which persists across Brazil to this day. Traditional Brazilian political history teaches that civil society movements, not to mention underground resistance organizations, rendered the weakening of the dictatorship, forced democratic presidential elections, and reclaimed democracy. The end process saw Tancredo Neves elected (via an electoral college) president in 1984.

However, just one day before assuming office, Neves was hospitalized. Thirty-nine days later, after seven surgeries and other medical procedures, Neves died on April 21, 1985, from what was eventually reported to be stomach cancer. Coincidence or not, one day after Neves’s death, his butler, João Rosa, died after being hospitalized for 16 days due to poisoning. While this fueled doubts over Neves’s official cause of death, added misgivings loomed in light of his presidential replacement, Congressman and ex-governor of Maranhão José Sarney. At the time of his swearing in, Sarney held a military post, not to mention his staunch, long-standing support for the military rulers he was slated to replace.

Image
José Sarney (left) and Tancredo Neves (right). [Source: wikipedia.org]

Awash in favelas, ghettos, landless rural workers, and oppressed Indigenous nations, such as the Guaraní-Kaiowá and Yanomami to name a few, the idea of Brazil’s “re-democratization” in 1985 was debunked long ago. Last year (2023), for example, Brazilian police killed 6,392 people, 82.7% of whom were Black people. In six cities the police killed more people than armed gangs and crime.

Do Brazil’s security apparatus and intelligence agencies function, by and large, as they did during the military dictatorship? To gain more insight, I reached out to public security specialist and historian Priscila Brandão, author of They Are Illegal and Immoral: Authoritarianism, Political Interference and Corruption Throughout Brazil’s Military History. This book has not been translated into English. Brandão’s work focuses on the South American country’s military dictatorship, military history, federal police, secret services and the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN). She coordinated Brazil’s first Specialization Course on Intelligence and Public Safety, and served as a consultant for the federal government and various state administrations to develop intelligence and security policies. Here are excerpts from that interview.

Image
Priscila Brandão is author of the book They Are Illegal and Immoral: Authoritarianism, Political Interference and Corruption Throughout Brazil’s Military History. She coordinated the country’s first Specialization Course on Intelligence and Public Safety, and served as a consultant for the federal government and various state administrations to develop intelligence and security policies. [Source: analisepoliticaemsaude.org]

JC: What was the impetus of your interest in the areas of intelligence and state security?

During my university studies I started researching the military’s repressive system and practices. I then turned my attention to a specific group called the Group of Eleven, which was organized by Congressman Leonel Brizola at the end of 1963 to resist the possibility of a coup. From there I completed my master’s degree at the Federal Fluminense University, where I studied with Professor Maria Celina D’Araujo. She selected me to undertake research about the closure of the SNI [National Information Service]. I recorded testimonies from military personnel as part of a groundbreaking project of the CPDOC. I even interviewed former [military] President Ernest Geisel, a trifecta figure due to his involvement with the “years of lead,” the coup, and the re-democratization process. Being from Belo Horizonte, I made contact with Marco Aurelio Cepik, a lecturer at Minas Gerais Federal University (UFMG). He worked with intelligence services from a public policy perspective and was completing a Ph.D. with a focus on intelligence service reforms in the United States. My contact with Marco transformed my work profoundly because I started to focus more on the ABIN rather than the SNI, as well as reflecting about the intelligence apparatus as it relates to public policy. Since 1998, I have worked a lot with Marco Aurelio. Today he is the director of the ABIN.

JC: Re-democratization is a keyword in Brazil’s political and educational affairs. Apart from the conspiracy theories, how do you analyze what happened in 1984/85 with the re-democratization process and the rise of José Sarney, a man who held a military post and supported the military dictatorship, to the presidency?

Re-democratization is a strong term. Just the other day we discussed this issue…during a meeting here at ABED [Brazilian Association of Defense Studies] in Belo Horizonte. We were discussing Guillermo O’Donnell’s statement that authoritarian processes have ended. Well, that doesn’t mean re-democratization. We’ve never went through—rather, Brazil’s never had a democracy in the strictest sense. Ever since the end of the Brazilian Empire at the end of the 19th century to the establishment of the republic, what was created was not a democracy. They established a liberal government that completely concentrated powers and fomented inequalities…I don’t think we can speak about democracy in the strictest sense. Our democracy is more delegating. In no way does it have anything to do with Sarney.

JC: How does the military exert influence and even power over present-day Brazilian politics?

Think about the power of Leônidas Pires Gonçalves [Minister of the Armed Forces during Sarney’s presidency] and what the military did concerning the constitutional process. All of the lobbying they did. Honestly, considering the other questions you’ve asked, the military’s had an articulation capacity that derives from the constituent assembly period. Their representation capacity is absurd within the legislative branch. They even have representation at the municipal level, within the assemblies, congress, and senate…Their interference is immense. They also control many things. For example, at the ABED, an organization that we academics established to hold public discussions, they [military representatives] came along, opened their own section while knowing everything we intended to research, and refused to provide us space. They are completely against civilians fomenting any type of discourse or developing teaching materials for military training. Their level of control and dressage is absurdly complete.

In Brazilian politics they [the military] have veto power. At the end of 2023, three of my former students, all of whom are pursuing Ph.D.s, and I published an essay discussing the military’s authoritarianism within the Brazilian republic… We’ve never had a democracy. At its limits, our democracy is always conditioned to the interests of the military. They can put on the brakes at any moment. They are the limit. If the power of the president always stumbles before the autonomy of the military, then we can’t speak about democracy. As you can see, President [Luíz Inácio] Lula [da Silva] did not allow any public [or governmental] processions critical of the 1964 coup. Why not? To appease the military. It is a reflection of military politics, including what happened on January 8 [2022, when Bolsonaro supporters attacked the three branches of government in Brasília]. So they [the military] still have plenty of power. Lula is completely pressured by them.

JC: Did the National Truth Commission, established in 2011 to seek answers, justice and reconciliation for criminal acts committed during the dictatorship, fulfill its mandate?

The National Truth Commission [NTC] was an entirely late response [to the military dictatorship]. As you see, Chile, at the end of its dictatorship, albeit much more tied down and conditioned compared to Brazil, instituted their truth commission much sooner. Brazil’s NTC cannot legally try anybody. So our transitional justice [re-democratization] is incomplete.

This past week, during a debate at the ABED, Cepik and I participated in the release of a two-volume book about the [Brazilian] republic and the military. It was organized by Professor Lucas Rezende [UFMG] and Celina D’Araujo…I wrote about intelligence activities within the military. We said that while we don’t bring an end to the liability left by the dictatorship, while the military does not submit to transitional justice or admit to their wrongdoings during the dictatorship, Brazil will never have an efficient intelligence agency. Why? Because the military believes it must keep an eye on the MST [Landless Workers Movement] or spy on a soldier who lives in a favela to ascertain if he is involved in “drug-trafficking.” A poorly resourced [intelligence] agency, as long as ABIN continues spending funds on matters it does not need to, it will keep neglecting its actual purpose. It must be efficient. So, if the intelligence agency is really going to be intelligent, its work must be directed toward its real purpose.

Why does [former Brazilian President Jair] Bolsonaro have so much appeal and fertile soil here? Because our society is authoritarian, violent and racist. There is no acknowledgment that the military operates contrary to how it is supposed to. That is why people believe: Oh well, that person who got beat up was not beaten up so badly; not so many people were killed; a good thief is a dead thief. It has a huge impact on our society. The NTC did not fulfill what it needed to fulfill. It should have investigated further. It should have uncovered more. The NTC is just the beginning, not the end. It failed to do many things.

JC: What is the Parallel ABIN and how are the investigations going?

There is no such thing as a Parallel ABIN. For example, if today, during Lula’s administration these people were operating, then you could say there is a Parallel ABIN. However, as these people operated during Bolsonaro’s government, it is not parallel. Numerous federal police were assigned to ABIN and they operated under the command of ABIN’s former director, Alexandre Ramagem. Ramagem was subordinated to [former Secretary of Institutional Security] Augusto Heleno. Ultimately, Heleno was subordinated to Bolsonaro. So it was not a parallel organ. It was ABIN operating legally, operating with legal technology for which it had no mandate. There is nothing parallel about it. What must be understood is that the ABIN of today has nothing to do with this. Investigations are proceeding and many people are who had nothing to do with this are being investigated. Among staff there is a state of utter frustration, melancholy, discredit and a sense of devaluation even though ABIN’s school, personnel examination and training processes, operational definitions, missions, and a separation between its internal and external sectors are undergoing radical structural reforms.

I can tell you that I have seen a revolution because Marco Cepik is heading the agency now…He has studied intelligence operations for over 30 years, traveling to China, India, United States, Britain. He has operated in various sectors and he has brought forth all of our criticisms and proposals, about professionalism, institutionalism and transparency. It is quite impressive to see the transformations he has made this year. Just having reformed the intelligence doctrine is impressive. I spent two years attempting to reform the public security intelligence doctrine, coordinating with various military personnel, some of whom served as part of the dictatorship. I could not make any advancement. The current public security doctrine is a product of the military dictatorship’s National Security Doctrine. However, the doctrine ostensibly published by ABIN and is publicly available is completely different. It is a phenomenal advance and I really hope it influences the public security intelligence system.

JC: In 2013, it was revealed that the U.S. government spied on former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, some of her top advisers, and Petrobras. Has ABIN or another intelligence agency implemented counter-intelligence measures to thwart such activities?

The U.S. government has always done this. At times they do it conspicuously, other times not so much. For example, the DEA and CIA have operated within the federal police and the CDO (Operational Data Center) for years. The CIA financed the installation of 15 CDO centers where every last computer was furnished by them. By claiming they wanted to test an officer’s degree of trustworthiness, the CIA used a polygraph test to evaluate federal police officers at the CDO. In fact, they used these polygraphs to test a person’s level of obedience or malleability when given orders by the CIA. For years they financed these offices in Brazil.

The safeguarding of knowledge not only in terms of patents but also organic security is of great concern to ABIN. They host many awareness campaigns in these areas. However, ABIN’s budget is minuscule and since it is an organization that is being discredited more and more, whenever the government wants to cut spending, it cuts ABIN’s budget. That is a big problem.

JC: What is the solution?

It is difficult because you are not sure what comes first, the chicken or the egg. ABIN must produce positive effects that are visible to society. This work is currently under way. However, it is taking place precisely when ABIN is at the peak of a crisis in which the media are constantly looking for reasons to discredit the agency based on what happened during the previous administration. So, ABIN is experiencing a positive moment while, simultaneously, receiving bad media coverage. Unfortunately, this is very bad. If you interviewed me a year and half ago, of course, I would have said shut down ABIN, during Bolsonaro’s administration. That was a mafia.

The law that created ABIN is bad. A decree was recently passed which better regulates ABIN. However, there is no chance to even attempt to change the actual law because, with Brazil’s overloaded, right-wing congress, the situation can only worsen. It would be foolhardy to submit ABIN’s legislation to a rewrite because congress is dreadful.

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2024/1 ... apparatus/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Thu Nov 21, 2024 2:56 pm

The twists and counter-twists of Lula's diplomacy
Nov 18, 2024 , 2:11 pm .

Image
The reformatting of Lula's speech regarding Venezuela denotes a shift in his geopolitical positioning regarding global disputes and, in the best scenario, threatens his aspiration for regional leadership (Photo: Archive)

The recent steps – and pauses – of President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva in the diplomatic arena reveal that something in Itamaraty (the country's Foreign Ministry) is out of control, which according to analysts has resulted in "a confused, fearful foreign policy, lacking strategic vision."

This week, its diplomatic profile will have to be put to another test at the G20 Summit, which begins with uncertainty about whether the United States, soon under the leadership of Donald Trump, will honour its agreed commitments, given its tendency to weaken multilateralism.

There is also uncertainty regarding the differences among the participants on how to address the war in Ukraine with a view to reaching a final consensus document.

The president has had to re-form his political connections after openly supporting the presidential candidacy of Democrat Kamala Harris. He ended up congratulating — and, as is his custom, lecturing — Trump after he won the election.

One sign of this reconfiguration has been the reverse direction of its discourse towards Venezuela, but there are other signs that denote a shift in its geopolitical positioning with respect to global disputes that, in the best scenario, threatens its aspiration for regional leadership.

Stumbling around regarding Venezuela
After the government headed by Lula prevented Venezuela from being accepted as a partner in the BRICS, some details in this regard were revealed by the Venezuelan president himself, Nicolás Maduro, who explained that during the private conversations prior to the Summit held in Kazan last October, the Brazilian Foreign Ministry "clearly and directly stated that it did not veto Venezuela."

During the Summit, the Brazilian representatives acted in a contrary manner and hindered Venezuela's entry, which generated friction between the two governments. Even more so when Lula's special advisor for international affairs, Celso Amorim, attributed Brasilia's "discontent" to President Maduro's "unfulfilled promise" to publish the minutes that support the official result of the July 28 elections.

This was done at the end of last October during a public hearing of the Foreign Relations and National Defense Committee of the Chamber of Deputies of Brazil, confirming the shift of Brazilian diplomacy towards Venezuela and making clear its alignment with the permanent interventionism of the United States and the European Union.

The response from Caracas was to call the Venezuelan ambassador in Brasilia, Manuel Vadell, for consultations ; and to summon the Brazilian chargé d'affaires, Breno Hermann, in order to "express their strongest rejection of the recurrent interventionist and rude statements by spokesmen authorized by the Brazilian government."

Meanwhile, President Maduro urged Lula to speak out about the situation, while the former Brazilian trade unionist remained silent until, after Trump's electoral victory, he declared that "Maduro is a problem for Venezuela, not a problem for Brazil."

He also made clear the nature of his "counter-spin" regarding the results of June 28, which were ratified by the Venezuelan Supreme Court, by saying: "I have no right to question the Supreme Court of another country because I do not want any country to do the same with mine."

The corporate press reiterated that Lula "had lost patience" with Maduro. However, at the time the Venezuelan president said : "I prefer to be cautious and wait. I am not innocent, but I am a good person. I prefer to wait for Lula to observe, be well informed of the events and for him, as head of state, to say what he has to say at the right time."

The facts indicate that the key was to wait for things to develop; Lula's turnaround showed the consequences of a stumble. In the scenario that the Trump administration commits acts of interference and encourages coups against him through various means, the Brazilian leader does not have the stability of his government assured.

Among other critical factors is the coalition that brought him to the Planalto Palace, made up of "center-right" and "center-left" parties that could betray him as they did against Dilma Rouseff in 2015.

These are the Brazilian Democratic Movement (MDB, with the largest representation in the Lower House of Congress), the Social Democratic Party (PSD), the Progressive Party (heir to Arena, the party of the military dictatorship), the Green Party (PV) and the Brazilian Socialist Party (PSB), to which its vice president, Geraldo Alckmin, belongs.

Asked whether Trump's victory could strengthen Bolsonaro, Celso Amorim, Lula's top adviser, said : "The Brazilian economy is getting stronger. Lula knows how to lead in a way that does not radicalize his opponents."

The misstep with the United States
Relations between Brasilia and Washington are expected to be acrimonious for one more reason: beyond Lula's open preference for a Democratic government, there is the close relationship between the far right of former President Jair Bolsonaro, his opponent in the last Brazilian elections, and a sector of the Republican Party.

Among other things, it is worth highlighting the fact that Jair's son, Congressman Eduardo Bolsonaro, was at the "war council" meeting on January 5, 2021, an event where the takeover of the Capitol in Washington was supposedly planned. He is also the representative of South America at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

Another important element is that the Workers' Party (PT) won 248 municipalities, more than the 182 in 2020, but far from the 624 in 2012. Meanwhile, Bolsonaro's Liberal Party (PL) won in 510 municipalities, which confirms an advance of the right and outlines an eventual rise to power of that sector, which remains divided.

Furthermore, by referring to Venezuela and its judiciary, the president could be expecting the consequences of the recent legal dispute between the Supreme Court and tycoon Elon Musk, Trump's sponsor and a candidate to form part of the US cabinet.

The court's decision to force Musk's social network X to remove certain accounts, pay fines and appoint a legal representative in Brazil could be another card up its sleeve against the Amazonian country's institutions.

The US House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Republican Jim Jordan, published an interim report entitled "The Attack on Free Speech Abroad and the Biden Administration's Silence: The Case of Brazil", in which it accuses the Brazilian state of a "campaign of censorship" and "presents a striking case study of how a government can justify censorship in the name of stopping so-called 'hate' speech and the 'subversion' of 'order'," the Committee's website says.

Hesitations regarding the BRICS
Another area where Lula's foreign policy has been lacking is the BRICS. The veto on Venezuela has exposed how, while Lula claims to be aiming for multipolarity, an eminently technical body to advise the government, such as Itamaraty, has been adopting increasingly independent political positions and even against the president's speech.

Brazil's position regarding the entry of new countries into the group has been cautious, if not negative. This has contrasted with that of China and Russia, which have sought to ensure that the bloc grows and that many countries can develop without depending on the West.

The geopolitical conception of Planalto and Itamaraty contemplates a gradual shift towards multipolarity, but without breaking Brasilia's strategic ties with Washington and Brussels, hence the recent position regarding Venezuela's participation in the BRICS.

An analysis by the Lowy Institute highlights that Brazil, along with India, does not want the multipolar bloc to become a vehicle for confrontation with the West but rather sees it as a way for the Global South to navigate the rivalry between China and the United States.

Meanwhile, Brazilian media Globo published an interview with Amorim in which he ruled out Brazil joining the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and spoke instead of "synergy" of projects. This generated controversy and, according to analysts, was poorly received in China.

The word "synergy" was repeated by Finance Minister Fernando Haddad to analyst Miguel do Rosário in a conversation, which denotes an alignment from the government spokesperson, but is also described as "a strategic setback, of enormous proportions and geopolitical consequences, in Brazil's relationship with China."

The fact that the progress of projects with China is limited to bilateral relations denotes, as Evandro Menezes de Carvalho says, that "China has a more integrated vision and execution of foreign policy in South America than Brazil itself."

The South American country is perplexed by the pseudo-nationalist outbursts of some diplomatic officials, because if there is one thing that the Chinese doctrine of international cooperation is known for, it is its almost non-existent level of coercion.

There are other elements to add to the geopolitical drift that Brazil is experiencing: the Venezuelan government revealed the actions of Ambassador Eduardo Paes Saboia, Secretary of Itamaraty for Asia and the Pacific, through a statement issued at the end of the Kazan summit.

According to the text, the Itamaraty representation, led by the Brazilian official, "decided to maintain the veto that Bolsonaro applied to Venezuela for years, which reproduces the hatred, exclusion and intolerance promoted by Western power centers to prevent, for now, the entry of the Homeland of Bolívar into this organization."

Paes Saboia is famous for having visited , in 2015, the fugitive from a murder conviction, Leopoldo López, when he was in the Ramo Verde military penitentiary. He is also famous for having cooperated in the escape of the then Bolivian senator, Roger Pinto Molina, convicted of corruption and accused of several crimes in his country.

The ambassador is known for his anti-Brics and anti-China stances. This has been described as "totally counterproductive, almost irrational" for the strategic importance of the position he holds. The main Brazilian negotiator in the bloc, the same one who represents Brazil with China, is known for his reactionary political positions, which is why he was appointed to the post by Bolsonaro.

The United States and Europe have sought to reaffirm unipolarity through the dominance of financial capital, even though BRICS leaders such as Lula and Russian President Vladimir Putin have stated that they are not targeting anyone and only want to achieve development for their member countries.

As is well known, no body can withstand continuous tension, which leads to rest or total disintegration. These may be the options for Lula's diplomacy in trying to force a balance in the face of the unilateral positions that are looming from the cabinet formed by Trump.

It is possible that by closing doors to governments that could be allies, we may end up opening doors to reactionary alternatives that would turn Brazil into the protectorate that Washington has always dreamed of.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/lo ... ia-de-lula

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 12684
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Brazil

Post by blindpig » Fri Nov 22, 2024 2:34 pm

Brazilian Police Accuse Bolsonaro and Military Officials of Plotting a Coup Against Lula

Image
Far-right politician Jair Bolsonaro. X/ @el_pais


November 22, 2024 Hour: 8:15 am

There was a coordinated plot aimed at keeping in power the far-right leader despite his loss to Lula in the 2022 election.

On Thursday, Brazil’s Federal Police filed charges against former President Jair Bolsonaro and 36 others, including high-ranking military officers and former ministers, for attempting to orchestrate a coup d’etat against President Lula da Silva, following the 2022 elections.

After two years of investigation, the police concluded that there was a “coordinated” plot aimed at “keeping in power” the far-right leader despite his loss to Lula in the 2022 election.

Bolsonaro, who is already subject to precautionary measures, including the retention of his passport, was allegedly involved in the coup conspiracy along with former ministers and senior Armed Forces officials, according to the police.

Charges have been filed against all of them for “violent abolition of the democratic rule of law, coup d’etat, and criminal association.” Combined sentences for these crimes could amount to 30 years in prison.

The report states that the plot “was structured” into various groups tasked with spreading fake news, inciting military action, seeking legal loopholes, carrying out coup activities, and conducting intelligence operations. The 700-page document was submitted to the Supreme Court, which will forward it to the Attorney General’s Office. The latter will decide whether to formally press charges.

The Attorney General has a 15-day deadline from the date of receiving the report to file a formal complaint, although this timeline could be extended if additional information is requested from the police.

This is the third time Bolsonaro has faced police accusations. Earlier this year, he was charged with the alleged misappropriation of valuable jewelry meant to be part of the state’s assets and with falsifying COVID-19 vaccination certificates. Additionally, the Electoral Court disqualified him last year from holding office until 2030 for undermining democratic institutions.


The Key Figures in the Plot

Besides Bolsonaro, the accused include Walter Braga Netto, a retired general and former minister of the presidency and defense during Bolsonaro’s administration. Braga Netto also ran as Bolsonaro’s vice-presidential candidate in 2022.

Others implicated are Almir Garnier Santos, former Navy commander, and retired generals Augusto Heleno and Paulo Sergio Nogueira, who were part of Bolsonaro’s cabinet. A pivotal figure is Bolsonaro’s former aide, Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid, who has signed a judicial cooperation agreement.

Charges have also been filed against commissioners Alexandre Ramagem, former head of the Intelligence Agency, and Anderson Torres, former Minister of Justice; as well as Valdemar Costa Neto, president of the Liberal Party (PL), to which Bolsonaro belongs.

During the investigation, drafts of decrees to declare a “state of siege,” annul the election results, and intervene in the Electoral Court were discovered. One draft was found at Anderson Torres’s home, and another in Bolsonaro’s office at the PL headquarters in Brasilia. Various testimonies also accuse Bolsonaro, a retired Army captain, of reviewing and modifying the document to finalize the coup. Suspicions are further supported by phone calls, messages, and financial transactions involving the accused.

Bolsonaro denied the accusations, attributing them to the “creativity” of Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing the case.

“De Moraes conducts the entire investigation, manipulates testimonies, arrests without charges, casts wide nets to fish for evidence, and has a rather creative advisory team,” Bolsonaro stated on social media.


A Plan to Assassinate Lula

Alongside the plot in official circles, there was also an effort to force the coup through public actions. This week, the police arrested four military personnel and a police officer accused of planning the assassination of Lula, Vice President Geraldo Alckmin, and Justice De Moraes.

According to the investigation, the goal was to kill all three and establish a military “crisis committee.” The plans reportedly included poisoning as a method to eliminate the president. One of those arrested in the operation was retired General Mario Fernandes, who is also among those named in the charges disclosed by the police.

During these tumultuous months, there were roadblocks, camps outside military barracks calling for a “military intervention,” and serious unrest in Brasilia, including an attempted bombing of a fuel truck near the capital’s airport.

The culmination occurred on January 8, 2023, one week after Lula’s inauguration, when thousands of far-right activists stormed the Supreme Court, Congress, and Presidential Palace, attempting to incite the military to overthrow Lula.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/brazilia ... inst-lula/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply