Brazils Rise and Its Effect on the Globe - Case Study Example

Brazil’s rise and its effect on the Globe Inserts His/Her Inserts Grade Inserts 23/11 Introduction: This thesis is based on the effect of Brazil’s rise and it’s affect on the globe with regards to foreign policy and diplomacy. Brazil is one of the emerging economies of the world along with Russia, China and India. Brazil’s sustainable economic development and regional clout has enabled it to further its ambitions in the world on the diplomatic front. Regionally, Brazil has economic and political supremacy which has led to conflicts with a few neighboring countries. Brazil aims to promote regional integration and focuses on a south-south dynamic rather than a north-south one. Brazil’s relations with USA have generally been favorable but it pursues its own objectives and interests rather than aligning them with those of USA. Brazil’s future in global arena is dependent on it increasing economic clout which is further increasing due to it being the largest producer of sugar ethanol. Brazil’s foreign policy background Brazil has been active in the international front since the 1920’s. Brazil was one of the countries that founded the League of Nations as well as the United Nations. Brazil is a member of various international treaties and organizations including IMF, WTO, Organization of American States, WTO and ADB among many others. Brazil has been prominent in UN peace keeping missions and as growing economic power aims to acquire a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. (A.Hudson) Brazil is the largest country in South America and this makes it one of the most important countries in the continent. Brazil’s relations with its neighbors have been complicated due to its size, economic development and increasing power. Brazil’s major border issues were resolved by the early twentieth century however; border issues with Columbia, Venezuela, Bolivia and Paraguay are unresolved. Brazil has always been at the forefront of regional cooperation and security. It offers credit transfers and scholarships to Latin American students at some of its universities. Brazil held the conference where the Rio Treaty was ratified in 1947. Among other initiatives, Brazil participated in the inter-American peace force in 1965 and in 1991 the Treaty of Asuncion, led to the end o the rivalry between Argentina and Brazil after 160 years of hostility. (A.Hudson) US-Brazil relations have been fraught with complexities. USA was the first state to establish a consulate in Brazil in 1808. After 1945, the USA became a major trading partner of Brazil. It became an avid supporter of Brazil’s economy, policies and growing prominence in the continent and in the world. Brazil’s relations with the United States were dependant on the policies of the reigning government. Brazil’s foreign policy has always been independent, pursuing Brazil’s interests rather than being aligned with the United States. In the 1960’s economic problems and political and economic nationalism affected the relations adversely although President Goulart made efforts to maintain them. In 1964 Brazil among other South American countries refused to vote Cuba out of the OAS which strained Brazil-US relations. Thus the US actively supported the overthrow of President Goulart in 1964. From 1964 to 1970 Brazil was the third largest recipient of US aid. In the Nixon period however, aid dwindled and Brazil established a policy of friendly relations combined with a non-aligned foreign policy which was evident by its refusal to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. In the period on 1969-1979, Brazil expanded its horizons by increasing trade with China and developing friendly relations with the country. The Nixon administration made efforts to win back Brazil as they considered it to be a promising country that was sympathetic to US interests. However, Carter’s presidency resulted in the stagnating of relations between the two countries. In 1975, a general report on Human rights conditions in countries that received US military aid criticized Brazil’s performance in subtle terms; this resulted in the end of the US-Brazil Military Assistance Agreement ( since 1952) which was never re-instated. The 1980’s caused conflicts in relations due to economic issues specifically Brazil’s trade restrictions and Brazil’s arms exports to Libya and Iran (both anti-US states). In 1985, Brazil was put on the blacklist by the USA, which restricted access to US technologies. From the mid 90’s onwards Brazil has largely given into US pressures regarding missile control by signing the MTCR, drug co-operation, and the adoption of patent protection laws. (A.Hudson) Brazil’s relationship with its neighbors Brazil is the largest country in South America, and it relations with its neighbors are evolving. Due to the opening of economies, closer ties have been developing between the South American countries. Another reason for the change is the emergence of social movements in the continent. These movements resulted in populist governments that changed weak institutions and brought positive change. This specifically affected Bolivia and Venezuela. Brazil’s president Lula was the implementer of Brazil’s new found political assertiveness through his foreign policy. He often reiterated the need for developing countries to band together and demand better conditions from the developed countries. Brazil’s Worker Party’s ideologies were similar to the Worker parties of Bolivia, Venezuela and Cuba thus developing an affinity between the countries. In recent times, Brazil’s relations with Cuba took a sour turn when Cuba requested UN to investigate on ethanol. Venezuela’s Chavez had also become a burden for Brazil which resulted in an argument between the Brazilian minister of communication and the Venezuelan ambassador over media limits on Hugo Chavez. Bolivarian initiatives that were spearheaded by Chavez were thus met with hesitance and hindered the integration of South America. Venezuela’s addition to MERCOSUR, despite its nonconformance to the rules of democracy and integration of market economies has caused ripples in the Brazilian Senate. Venezuela also started amassing arms such as military aircrafts, helicopters and Kalashnikovs which threatens to initiate an arms race in the region. (New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations) President Lula’s second term brought changes in the foreign policy by changing the focus in South America to Peru and Chile. The regional policy dropped Venezuela as strategic partner due to Chavez’s unsuitability, reasserted itself with Bolivia and focused on repairing MERCOSUR. There is hope for South American integration on the basis of energy. However, there is a difference of ideologies and vision even regarding this matter. South America is divided in three fronts: FTAA ( Peru, Chile, Columbia, Paraguay and Uruguay), MERCOSUR and the Andean Community ( Brazil’s perspective) and the Bolivian initiative which is spearheaded by Venezuela and supported by Morales. Energy has the most potential in being the basis of South American integration, however the divergence of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador have the energy surplus as well as the uncertain governments whereas Brazil and Chile have energy needs. Although these differences between Brazil and other countries may have hindered economic integration, trade continues to grow. Trade with South American countries grew more than 60% in the period 2001-2006. Direct investment in neighboring countries has grown as well and the ultimate goal remains integration. (New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations) Brazil’s rise and its effect on South America Brazil’s rise as an economic and political power has led to international aspirations. However, in the race to international acclaim Brazil has at times neglected regional issues and policies. Brazil’s policies towards South America have been largely reactive rather than proactive. In involving itself in the international arena it has not established itself in South America despite being the largest economy in the region. In order to take a leading role in the region, Brazil needs to place more importance on regional issues. (Oppenheimer) In recent years there was a great increase in direct investment to neighboring countries, by 2005 Brazil had invested $71 billion in South America and was the largest FDI investor in the region. In addition to FDI, Brazil’s expansionist policy led to claims of ‘imperialism’ and increase in resentment towards Brazilian companies in the region. Brazil’s use of South America as a launch pad has led to deteriorating relation between its neighbors and troops had to be deployed in some areas to protect Brazil’s interests. Uruguay: Uruguay is a small country which has been changed by Brazilian corporations. About 20% of Uruguay land has been sold to Argentinean and Brazilian corporations according to an estimate in 2008. Brazilian corporations consist of half of the largest exporters in Uruguay and out of these four are meat processing plants. Due to the wide acceptance of Uruguayan safety standards in various markets it is a prime place for Brazilian meat processors. Apart from meat processing, 90% of rice exports go to Brazil and this sector has also seen a great influx of Brazilian capital. Brazil’s control over Uruguay’s meat processing, rice production, exports and foreign investment gives it power over the small country. This has led to fears of monopoly and price fixing and although no conflicts have taken place, Uruguay feel extremely vulnerable in this position. (Zibechi) Bolivia: About 20% of Bolivia’s GDP is controlled by Brazil through soybean and natural gas production. Bolivia’s Evo Morales and Brazil have not been on the greatest terms due to conflicts in energy, Morales’ affinity with Chavez and the issue of dams. This has not deterred Brazil’s investments in infrastructure, mining and energy which have resulted in resentment from Bolivia. The construction of Dams on the border between the two countries has been a major source of conflict. The dams will lead to flooding and diseases In Bolivia but Brazil is adamant on their construction. This led to resistance and an application to Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the basis of violation of the freedom and rights of Bolivian indigenous population located near the Madeira River. Another issue that caused resentment was President Lula’s interference in Bolivian affairs by suggesting Morales negotiate with dissenting groups in Bolivia’s half-moon states. (Zibechi) Ecuador: Brazil’s relationship with Ecuador has deteriorated due to conflicts between Ecuador and Brazilian transnational corporations. The relations between the two countries have always been marked with conflict largely due to energy issues. As Brazil has increasing energy needs and Ecuador has an energy surplus Brazil’s investments in this sector have not turned out favorably. Brazilian company Petrobras was sued by the indigenous population and had to give up its reserve. Similarly other conflicts occurred in this manner. In 2007, a hydroelectric dam built by a Brazilian corporation Odebrecht was inaugurated, however it faced structural problems and Ecuador refused to pay back the loan of $243 million received from the Brazilian National Economic and Social development Bank. The Brazilian ambassador was called back and all diplomatic relations with Ecuador were frozen. Paraguay: Brazil’s relations with Paraguay have often involved military action. Paraguay being the weakest of Brazil’s neighbors feels exploited by Brazil due to many reasons. Brazil owns a substantial share of Paraguay’s rich soy bean lands which were the property of peasants and families; leading to resentment for Brazil. The Itaipu Dam treaty is another source of conflict as it has not been renegotiated; the Itaipu dam has a capacity of 8,250 megawatts of power out of which Paraguay consumes only 5% while the rest is exported to Brazil at cost. The price paid to Paraguay is much lower than the international price and barely covers the production costs. The negotiations were deadlocked due to Brazil’s stubborn stance and Paraguay’s determination to achieve a price increase. This issue creates a considerably cause for Paraguay to feel exploited by Brazil. Brazil deployed 10,000 soldiers to protect its borders and Paraguayan plantations and resolved to send a tough message to the country however, Paraguay believes that a relationship based on inequality and dominance cannot be maintained. There were many instances of burning Brazilian flags and excesses against Brazilian-Paraguayans. President Lula in 2009 endorsed the National Mobilization System which advocates military action when Brazilian sovereignty, corporations or individuals are confronted with ‘foreign aggression’ regardless of whether it is confined to Brazilian borders or outside them. This has been received as an important assertion of Brazil’s emerging power by the countries in the region. However, it will not have a favorable affect on regional; cooperation. (Zibechi) Brazil and the USA The BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are emerging countries that are experiencing high economic growth and are getting actively involved in world affairs. Brazil and USA relations have run hot and cold since the early 1950’s. In President Lula’s first term, foreign policy did not focus on developing ties with the USA but rather regional and international counterparts. The Us and Brazil differed on issues such as UN reform and the enlargement of the Security Council, Iraq and environment and human rights. Brazil and the US were on opposing sides in the IDB, WTO and OAS. Regionally the USA favored FTAA consisting of Peru, Chile and Columbia whereas Brazil’s own initiative was MERCOSUR and the Andean Community. However, Iraq deadlock and Brazil’s dead end in relations with Venezuela and Bolivia resulted in a closer relationship between the USA and Brazil. (New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations) The second term of President Lula focused on better relations with the USA resulting in dialogue on many issues and the establishment of bio-energy projects. The USA has identified Brazil as one of the emerging international powers due to political stability, economic growth and assimilation into international institutions and frameworks. Brazil and USA are the top ethanol producers in the world and they signed an agreement to promote trade in ethanol, they also have increased joint efforts on controlling the drug trafficking situation in Latin America. (New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations) Brazil’s emergence as the new economic leader in the western hemisphere has led to increased complexity in relations between the USA and Brazil. Brazil has refused to put the American led FTAA on its political agenda causing heated debate in Bush’s time. In the recent Honduran dispute which Brazil was pulled into, Brazil questioned the US’s resolve in Honduras. Most importantly, in 2010 Brazil with Turkey helped broker an agreement with Iran regarding shipments of its nuclear fuel. This was seen as a step by Brazil to establish itself on the global domestic front. This has resulted in concerns from the USA. Secretary of State in response to the Brazilian efforts on diplomacy towards Iran stated that they disagreed with Brazil over the issue but were looking to strengthen ties with Brazil. She stated that there could not be agreements on every issue between the two countries and Brazil was a partner and friend to the USA regionally as well as globally. She praised Brazilian efforts in the Haitian earthquake and its lead role in the UN peacekeeping forces. (Gollust) According to Consul General Kelly in Sau Paulo, the emergence of Brazil as an economic power has led to the bi-lateral relationship developing to a strategic level in issues such as education, trade, bio-energy and social issues. These statements provide an insight to the US approach to Brazil. The USA considers Brazil a future force to be reckoned with and realizes from past policies that it will not be a submissive ally. Thus, it tolerates the challenging attitude and moves forward in forging greater cooperative ties with Brazil. (The U.S. and Brazil: Diplomacy for the 21st Century) In addition to the Iran overtures, Brazil has also challenged the USA on issues such as climate change and trade and the embargo on Cuba. Although the efforts with Iran failed, Brazil’s determination to become a major player took centre stage. In indirectly challenging the USA, Brazil is rejecting US ideologies and approaches in exchange for a Brazilian approach. Over the years, Brazil has always pursued an independent foreign policy that is focused on its interests regionally and globally, presently as well it is not anti-American but does not align its interests with the USA either. Brazil opts for a ‘soft’ power approach rather than the American ‘hard’ power. Brazil follows its own strategic interests without opposing other countries’ interest. It criticizes the USA on certain issues without adopting a hard-line attitude. (Burton) However, Brazil cannot be compared to the USA as a global power even though it intends to. The USA has military prowess and economic and institutional might that commands allies over the world. Although, Brazil’s economic growth and growing significance helps achieve international prominence, it still does not have the might of the USA. USA’s interests in South America can be promoted through better relations with Brazil as Brazil is the leading state of the continent. Most South American countries at present are anti-USA and good relations with Brazil can rectify that issue. Economic co-operation and closer political ties with Brazil will mean a strong standing in South America that the USA needs as currently Brazil is focusing on the South-South dynamic rather than the North-South dynamic. Brazil has been more focused on regional integration and cooperation rather than relations with the USA as they will be more beneficial. The role of Brazil in the international arena After sustaining high economic growth and maintaining political stability, Brazil aspires to gain diplomatic prowess at the international stage. Brazil has over 1700 diplomats, 120 embassies and 68 consulates. President Lula’s national strategy was determined to put Brazil on the map in world politics. This was achieved without military action and confrontation but with a multi-lateral vision of the world arena. Brazil’s president Lula always advocated reform and the banding together of developing countries to negotiate better treatment from the developed countries. Brazil has expanded ties with China and African countries. Brazil has also met with Middle East leaders in a summit on trade, investment and energy. Brazil is also to host the 2014 FIFA world cup and the 2016 Summer Olympics which will turn all eyes on the country. (foley) Although Brazil’s emergence has occurred due its adoption of international frameworks and standards developed by major economic powers such as EU and the USA, Brazil’s ideals and institutions diverge from Western ideologies. Brazil differs on the role of the state in the economy and international intervention from the West. Brazil’s core value is national sovereignty which is apparent in its international diplomatic missions as well. Thus Brazil’s aim of attaining a permanent seat on the Security Council or increased IMF quotas is contrary to the West’s. Although Brazil will probably keep positive relations with the West, to bring the two ideologies closer it will be vital to extablish Brazil as an international power Conclusion Brazil’s economic developments have enabled it to pursue global political and diplomatic roles that it aspires to. Brazil is the leading country in South America and has initiated regional cooperation movements with mild success. But the economic dependence of it neighbors on Brazil has given it immense clout in the region. Brazil needs to pursue closer ties with Chile, Peru and Argentina and improve relations with its smaller neighbors. Brazil has been using the South American platform to reach out globally. It needs to focus on issues and diplomatic relations regionally such as the Venezuela-Columbia conflict and the Chile and Peru territorial dispute. After establishing itself as a regional player further involvement in the global arena would be warranted. Brazil’s emergence as a new economic power has bestowed political credibility internationally. Brazil is actively involved in the international organizations and its voice is heard. The relations between USA and Brazil have been positive but not close. Brazil has always adopted an independent policy that does not align with US interests. However, the USA and Brazil cooperate regarding trade, narcotics issues and bio-energy. In recent times, Brazil diplomatic intervention in Iran strained US and Brazil relations but regardless of the failure of the talks they established Brazil’s emergence on the diplomatic scene. Brazil’s diplomacy focuses on dialogue and openness and promises to be successful as it is backed by a strong economic and regional performance. Bibliography "A Battered Brazil Is Bruising Its Neighbors." 22 3 1999. Business Week. 21 11 2010 . A.Hudson, Rex. "Brazil: A Country Study." Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1997. ALEXEI BARRIONUEVO, GINGER THOMPSON. "Brazil’s Iran Diplomacy Worries U.S. Officials." 14 5 2010. The NewYork times. 21 11 2010 . Amorim, Celso. "A new world map and Brazils foreign policy." 26 8 2010. The Hindu. 21 11 2010 . "Brazil Foreign policy." 2003. Encyclopedia of nations. 20 11 2010 . "Brazils foreign policy: An Iranian banana skin." 17 06 2010. The Economist. 22 11 2010 . Burton, Guy. "Iran, Turkey, Brazil and the USA." 13 9 2010. Global Affairs. 22 11 2010 . Downie, Andrew. "Brazils diplomacy on Iran points to larger ambitions." 22 5 2010. LA Times. 21 11 2010 . Fazio, Dalai. "Note to Self: Learn Portuguese." 15 10 2010. Diplomacy and power politics. 21 11 2010 . foley, Conor. "Brazils new diplomacy." 7 8 2009. Guardian.co.uk. 21 11 2010 . "Foreign policy overview." Embassy of Brazil- wahington DC. 21 11 2010 . Gollust, David. "Clinton Criticizes Brazils Iran Diplomacy." 27 5 2010. Voice of America. 21 11 2010 . Gunter, Janet. "Mozambique/Brazil: “Ethanol diplomacy” meets criticism ." 22 7 2010. Global Voices. 22 11 2010 . John Thompson, William C. Gruben, Carlos E. J. M. Zarazaga and Erwan Quintin. "Global economy: Latin American update." 2002. FRB Dallas. 22 11 2010 . Langevin, Mark S. "Dateline Tehran: Brazil’s Big-League Diplomacy (Part I)." 19 5 2010. The Globalist. 22 11 2010 . Manhusen, Christer. "A busy time for Brazilian diplomacy." SwedCham Brazil. 21 11 2010 . Mead, Walter Russell. "Brazil drops out." 21 6 2010. Via Meadia. 22 11 2010 . "New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations." 28 9 2007. Foreign policy at Brookings. 21 11 2010 . Oppenheimer, Andres. "Brazil diplomacy needed closer to home." 20 5 2010. The Miami Herald. 21 11 2010 . Patrick, Stewart. "Brazil seeking Security." 7 7 2010. The National Interest. 22 11 2010 . paul, Randy. Beautiful Horizons. 2010. 21 11 2010 . Perspectives. "Brazil’s expansion tests smaller South American neighbors." 18 02 2009. 21 11 2010 . porter, Keith. "The Relationship of the United States with Brazil." 22 11 2010 . Schirm, Stefan A. "Brazil’s Rise as an Emerging Power: Implications for the U.S. and Europe." 2009. 21 11 2010 . "The U.S. and Brazil: Diplomacy for the 21st Century." 2010. United States Diplomatic mission to Brazil. 22 11 2010 . Tim Padgett, Andrew Downie. "Brazil reluctantly takes key role in Honduran Dispute." 20 9 2009. Times. 21 11 2010 . Zibechi, Raul. "Is Brazil Creating Its Own "Backyard" in Latin America?" 16 2 2009. Americas program. 22 11 2010 . Read More