Posted By Tom Garofalo Thursday, March 25, 2010 - 4:06 PM Share
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's trip to Latin America
was for the most part a very ordinary visit with allies and a chance to firm up
relationships with newly elected presidents in Costa
Rica, Uruguay
and Chile. But when she arrived in Brazil, the agenda expanded to encompass
bilateral, regional and global issues - from regional security - Brazilian leadership in the U.N. Stabilizing
Mission in Haiti - to energy
and trade, as well as Iran's
nuclear ambitions and the U.S.
hopes to thwart them. The kinds of
discussions that are reserved for global powers.
For those who follow Latin America, the visit (postponed in
part to Senate delays in confirming the administration's Western
Hemisphere team) was overdue.
For a growing number of common allies in the hemisphere, the South
American giant has supplanted the United States as the indispensable
country. But more than Clinton's visit
to Brazil, it is Lula's foray into the geo-political cauldron of the Middle
East that indicates, as the Inter-American Dialogue's Michael Shifter noted
this week, that "the country of the future" has arrived.
Lula's visit to Jerusalem
and environs had all the trappings of a visit by a major power. But it was a
bit different, too. The president crisscrossed between Israel and the
Palestinian territories, spoke at the Knesset, and visited the Holocaust
Memorial of Yad Vashem. But perhaps emboldened by the recent U.S. confrontation of Israel
on settlements, he was not timid: after laying a wreath at Yasir Arafat's tomb,
he called for a halt to Israeli settlement construction and decried Israeli
violence against Gaza's
civilian population and the Israelis' separation barrier. Of the Palestinians
he only demanded that "brave steps" be taken toward peace. Apparently
the Israelis didn't consider Lula out of line. (Foreign Minister Avigdor
Lieberman did boycott the President's speech to the Knesset, but anyone who
follows Israeli politics knows that Lula can only be thankful for that.)
In fact, at Lula's request, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu agreed to biennial talks between their governments, and more frequent
meetings of economists from both countries.
And while business is surely a major motivation for this
visit and the forthcoming trips to Iran
and Syria, Lula and Brazil are also
staking out a global role in which they bear the responsibility that comes with
power -- including for peacemaking. The world, the president said, needs
"the intervention of new elements, and we can help with this."
Lula is right: the world does need "new elements"
to solve problems. As he said following his visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories,
"There is nothing in this world that cannot be fixed." This is no off-handed comment, and Brazil's
ascendancy is not a result of Lula star quality. Lula is following a tradition of leadership that
now spans decades in guiding Latin America's
richest and most populous country in an effort to drive pragmatic cooperation
and peaceful compromise throughout the region.
As its role in keeping the peace in Haiti before the massive earthquake
indicates, they enjoy the trust of neighbors near and far.
And now
Brazil has upped the ante with
a forward-leaning mediation role on Iran,
and Middle East peace as well. This is only to the good. With the other BRIC countries and the G-20
taking on a more significant role in world affairs (look for example at the
discussions around climate change in Copenhagen
a few months ago), we should welcome Brazil as a serious
peacemaker. Not that Lula will have a
huge impact immediately. But the Quartet
formula is evolving and may in time fade away.
And the U.S.
hoped for role as ‘honest broker' is very much hamstrung by a Congress that has
a different definition of that term. So,
as time goes on, why shouldn't Brazil
- in the U.S. view a wholly
more reliable partner than either China
or Russia
- play a prominent role? During Mrs.
Clinton's visit, she and Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim signed accords
on women's advancement, economic development, health care, social inclusion and
climate change. And adding domestic
support for Brazil's
responsible outreach in the region, there are nearly ten million Brazilians of
Arab descent, and a small but very vibrant minority of Brazilian Jews too.
Brazil is
an indispensable ally, and one to whom the U.S.
can't dictate, as their resistance to support sanctions against Iran
indicates. But they have a tremendous amount to offer the United States
on issues of global security and peace. The world is getting complicated just
in time.
Tom Garofalo is a consultant for
the New America
Foundation's U.S.-Cuba Policy Initiative and blogs at the Havana Note.
In what way does a.) supporting the Iranian regime's nuclear policy, b.) helping them counter the effects of the current sanctions, and c.) opposing new and stronger sanctions, qualify Brazil as having "a forward-leaning mediation role on Iran." If that's your definition of "forward-leaning" I'd hate to see what you consider "obstructionist" to U.S. policy in the Middle East.
"So they can spek [sic] very meaningfully to Iran." I see. That's why Brazil is meaningfully counseling Iran to abide by the numerous U.N. resolutions it is violating by continuing to enrich uranium, right?.... And I'm sure you believe that Lula's recent attack on Cuban political prisoners--calling them "common criminals"--is also the result of "having a brain."
Incidentally, your penchant for blaming Israel for everything--including my comments (!)--betrays an obsession that is weakening your ability to analyze world events. It's called IDS--"Israel Derangement Syndrome." I wish you all the best in overcoming it.
"Girlish"? "...living in one country but being loyal to another"? Congratulations, in one post you've managed to expose both your deplorable sexism *and* your rank anti-semitism. Thankfully, you do NOT represent American public opinion, which as the latest gallup poll points out, is solidly behind Israel with near record levels of support.
It also speaks volumes that you have nothing to say about Lula's support for the oppressive Castro dictatorship. But then I suppose that since the U.S. doesn't fund Cuba you can ignore its crimes and instead fixate on democratic Israel's attempts to *exist*.... A classic case of back-assward thinking if I ever saw one.
Read More
(3)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE