Putting human rights at the core of her foreign policy has, ironically, caused President Dilma Rousseff nothing but trouble. This week Rousseff was subject to apparent complaints by Iran that she had done too much, and by Human Rights Watch and Cuban dissidents that she has not done enough.
Brazil’s foreign minister Antonio Patriota insists until he is blue in the face that there has been broad continuity in foreign policy from Lula da Silva (2003-2010) to Rousseff. That is a little disingenuous. The fact that Patriota was brought back from the US embassy in Washington DC in the first place signalled a shift in focus. The shift is subtle, but perceptible nonetheless. The main problem, however, is that there is still an inconsistency surrounding Brazilian foreign policy that undermines its ambitions to get a seat at the top table in forums like the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Part of the ‘problem’ is that Brazil has a non-interventionist foreign policy written into its constitution. And, though it may well be the case that Brazil is being held to rather higher standards than some of the UNSC permanent members themselves, Rousseff at least seems to have grasped that Brazil needs to engage in some realpolitik in order to be taken seriously by the powers that be.
This new attitude has apparently been noticed in Teheran. Ali Akbar Javanfekr, the personal spokesman for Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, complained to the daily Folha de São Paulo this week that Rousseff has “struck down everything Lula had achieved. She’s destroyed years of good relations.”
The Itamaraty (Brazil’s foreign office) was clearly taken aback. Faced with a flurry of requests for a response, Patriota avoided a direct comment on the Iranian’s statement, stating: “I have had normal contacts with the Iranians. At the UN General Assembly the Iranian foreign minister asked to see me. He telephoned on 7 September to wish me well. At the WTO [World Trade Organization] ministerial meeting I met Iranian officials and identified an interest in good political and commercial relations”. Patriota added that President Ahmadinejad has been invited to the Rio+20 conference on the environment and sustainable development in June (Patriota admitted that he did not yet know whether the Iranian would attend). Ahmadinejad’s failure to include Brazil on his recent Latin American tour did not go unnoticed, especially in the US.
Patriota likewise refused to comment on reports that Brazilian products like poultry and beef are being stalled at Iranian borders of late. According to Folha, the Brazilian Poultry Union (União Brasileira de Avicultura) says that chicken exports have been subject to “unjustified inspections” since October 2011, while the Brazilian food multinational JBS also claims that thousands of tonnes of beef have been held up at an Iranian port for three weeks.
The Rousseff administration claims that its treatment of Iran has not changed. Yet in March 2010, Brazil notably supported, for the first time, a vote at the UN Human Rights Council to send a human rights rapporteur to Iran. In December 2010 (then president-elect) Rousseff had also condemned (in an interview with the Washington Post) the stoning of an Iranian woman. However, last week, Patriota publicly reiterated to the UK’s visiting Foreign Secretary, William Hague, Brazil’s doubts about the effectiveness of sanctions on countries like Iran.
Libya and Syria
In March 2011 Brazil voted against the UN resolution to impose a no-fly zone over Libya, citing concerns about citizen safety. The Itamaraty later waited several months before recognising the Libyan National Transitional Council. It has also urged the UN and the European Union to remain engaged with Syria, arguing that the UN resolution on Libya was used to justify months of excessive military force and should not be repeated. In October 2011 it abstained (along with India, Lebanon and South Africa) in a vote on a legally binding UN resolution threatening sanctions against the Syrian government. Russia and China used their vetoes against the resolution. At the same time, a well-known Brazilian diplomat, Sergio Pinheiro, is the head of the UN Commission of Enquiry into human rights violations in Syria.
This week the US-based NGO, Human Rights Watch (HRW), accused Brazil of an ideologically driven foreign policy, rather than one based on universal respect for human rights. José Miguel Vivanco, HRW’s Americas director, accused Brazil of fence-sitting over the Arab Spring, while Philippe Bolopion, the United Nations director at HRW, told the daily O Estado that “Brazil should not act in the same way as the West. In truth, Brazil should be consistent with its positions in defence of human rights”. He noted that Brazil “has international weight as a democracy. By abstaining from condemnation of a dictator, the Brazilian government ends up legitimising a repressive regime”. At the same time, though, Vivanco acknowledged that things had “notably improved” under President Rousseff (presumably in reference to Iran).
Brazilian academics take a more nuanced view, noting that Brazil not only acts in line with its non-interventionist stance but also in defence of its extensive commercial interests in the Middle East - which likely explained the delay in recognising the Libyan transition council, for instance. “At the end of the day, Brazil is following the UN principle of exhausting all pacific methods before an intervention,” points out one. However, there is a consensus that Brazil could be more active on human rights in the international arena, perhaps starting by adopting a more critical stance at the UN council of human rights.
Where does that leave Cuba?
President Rousseff will make her first presidential visit to Cuba on 31 January, bringing with her a commercial delegation. Rousseff will be under a lot of pressure to say something about human rights in Cuba. As a woman, a former political dissident and prisoner and a public defender of human rights, Rousseff risks looking hypocritical and cynical if she is not seen to say or do something in Cuba. Cuban dissidents, led by high-profile female activists, including the blogger Yoani Sánchez and the group Ladies in White (Damas de Blanco), have put in requests for an audience with Rousseff, to no avail.
Brazil did, however, grant Sánchez a 30-day visitors’ visa on 25 January. It is a symbolic and deliberately timed gesture of support (Cuba has never allowed Sánchez to travel) that should not go unnoticed in Havana. Sánchez, who petitioned Rousseff personally via a video message on her blog, wrote that she saw herself in a recently released photograph of Rousseff as a young political activist. “I feel like Dilma”, she wrote.
Unfortunately for Rousseff, she is going to Cuba just after the death of another hunger-striking political dissident, Wilman Villar, who died on 19 January, aged 31, after 51 days on hunger strike (see page 16). In a terrible irony, when Lula da Silva made his farewell trip to Cuba as president in February 2010, another hunger-striking dissident also died (Orlando Zapato Tamayo). Lula’s awkward refusal to comment at the time provoked outrage in Brazil and elsewhere.
Despite the pressure on her, Rousseff is likely to follow Lula’s example and make no public comment. The Itamaraty takes the view that talks should only take place in private and behind the scenes. But, as the conservative Brazilian daily O Globo editorialised on 26 January, “No-one expects that from one moment to the next the Brazilian government will buy into the Cuban dissidents. But the country has all the conditions to create a bridge between the old revolutionaries, the dissidents, the opposition and the more dynamic sectors in Cuba. Brazil has credibility for that much”.
Brazil’s powerful industrial federation Fiesp called for an audience this week with Argentina’s President Cristina Fernández to discuss new trade restrictions being imposed by Argentina from 1 February. Argentina ran up a trade deficit of US$4.24bn with Brazil in 2011, an increase of 20% on the previous year, despite increased Argentine protectionism, according to the Argentine statistics institute (Indec). Argentine imports from Brazil grew by 22% to US$21.94bn, while its exports to Brazil grew by 23% to US$17.70bn. Argentina posted an overall trade surplus of US$10.35bn in 2011, a decline of 11% on the previous year: exports totalled US$84.27bn; and imports US$73.92bn.
- Brazil-Cuba trade on the up
Brazil is investing US$800m in the modernisation of Cuba’s Mariel port via the construction giant Odebrecht and Brazil’s National Development Bank (Bndes). It has also offered Cuba technology to set up a local sugar-based ethanol industry, and is providing US$200m in credit for small farmers for the purchase of (Brazil-made) agri equipment. According to Brazil’s trade ministry, Brazil exported goods worth US$550m to Cuba in 2011, up 32% year-on-year and comprising basic and industrial goods. Imports from Cuba were worth US$91.2bn, up 25% year-on-year. Curiously, most of those (80%) were comprised of medical supplies and inputs.