|
 The lack of a political response is disappointing because it
shows the U.S. that it cannot rely on Brazil as an ally.
By John Fitzpatrick
The reaction in many countries to Tuesday's terrorist attacks in the U.S. has been of
genuine sadness and sorrow for the victims and the American people. Across most countries
in Western Europe, normal life stopped for three minutes on Friday as people paid tribute
to the dead. These were genuine acts from the heart by ordinary individuals, not staged
events organized by governments. One gathering in Germany brought together 200,000 people.
The British Parliament held a special session. Even Russia observed a minute of silence.
What did we see in Brazil? Virtually nothing. Most of our political leaders kept quiet
and the people appeared not to care. President Fernando Henrique Cardoso did condemn the
act a few hours after it happened, and offered support. However, he was quick to point out
that it could worsen Brazil's economic problems. None of the emotion the world associates
with Brazil has been on display.
As Brazilians continued to watch events unfold on television, political life went on in
its usual way. No terrorism here, just the usual soap opera of corruption, violence and
power mongering—beleaguered Senate President Jader Barbalho finally stood down, more
evidence piled up against former São Paulo Mayor Paulo Maluf—also facing corruption
allegations, and the Mayor of Campinas, a major city in São Paulo state, was shot dead.
Another development this week was the defeat of the anti-government wing of the PMDB
party, at a convention that elected São Paulo Congressman Michel Temer as the party's new
president. This was a blow to Minas Gerais Governor Itamar Franco, who may now seek
membership with another party to launch his presidential ambitions next year.
So there were plenty of things happening here, but why have the terrorist attacks in
New York and Washington, D.C. evoked none of the emotions among Brazilians which they have
among others elsewhere in the world? Obviously one cannot force people to feel genuine
sorrow, but the muted response has been puzzling and, to a non-American foreigner like me
who lives here, disappointing and distressing.
It is distressing because it puts Brazil out of line with the world's democracies, and
shows a lack of solidarity with a country where tens of thousands of Brazilians
live—300,000 in the New York City area alone. Around 30 of these Brazilians are
feared dead in the New York attack. It shows a lack of sympathy for a nation which has
suffered a devastating surprise attack. It shows the ignorance of the less educated
population, and the smugness of the better educated.
Of eight letters published in the daily O Estado de S. Paulo at the time of
writing this article, six are broadly anti-American, accusing the U.S. of reaping seeds it
has sown. One wonders if any of the correspondents wrote a letter of condolence to the
American ambassador. Another part of the same newspaper expressed relief that the U.S.
Consulate in São Paulo would be leaving the posh Jardins area soon for a new location,
and the well-heeled residents in the area would not have to endure the disgraceful sight
of people queuing up to get visas.
The lack of a political response is disappointing because it shows the U.S. that it
cannot rely on Brazil as an ally. By Saturday, President Fernando Henrique Cardoso had yet
to speak on the phone to President Bush, an incredible indictment of Brazil's failure to
understand the importance of these attacks.
The left-wing Worker's Party (PT) wasted no time in linking the attacks to U.S.
policies, making sure that its condemnation of the terrorist acts was part and parcel of
its condemnation of the U.S. One is as bad as the other in the PT's view. We should expect
this from the PT, but the parties in the governing coalition have been shamefully silent.
However, the U.S. is not relying on any muscular support from Brazil because it knows
it will not be forthcoming. During the Second World War Brazil let the Americans use its
territory, and even sent troops to fight with the Allies in Italy. This is not the case
now. It is obvious there is no support for an active role by Brazil in any future U.S.-led
anti-terrorism operations, and the terrorists are already winning with their intimidation
tactics.
Two examples prove this. For some time, Brazil and the U.S. have been discussing
allowing the Americans to use a Brazilian Air Force base at Alcântara, in Maranhão
state, to launch rockets into space. To be fair, there was a lot of political opposition
to this before the terrorist attacks hit the U.S., but the opponents are now adding fears
that the base could become a terrorist target to their reasons. The chairman of the
Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee of the Lower House says now is not the time
to discuss the matter, and "maybe it would be better to wait a little", meaning
put it on the backburner.
To his credit, Defense Minister Geraldo Quintão said the attacks should not interfere
with the discussions, but if this is the case why does the government not do something to
show its resolve? Would it not be heartening if, instead of equivocating and being
intimidated, Brazil announced, as an act of solidarity, that the U.S. could use the base?
Another example came from Foreign Minister Celso Lafer, who said immediately after the
attack that Brazil's relations with countries like Iran, Libya and Iraq might change. By
Friday he was eating his words, as the Foreign Ministry called in the ambassadors of these
states, all of which have links with terrorist groups, and toned down the minister's
comments.
It is interesting to compare Brazil's timid attitude with that of Argentina, where the
Peronist opposition movement is calling for Argentina to help the U.S. militarily. Unlike
Brazil, Argentina has suffered terrorist bombings against Jewish targets and even sent
troops to join the Gulf War coalition against Iraq. Cynics might say Argentina is only
offering military help in return for U.S. financial aid to overcome its current crisis.
They may be right, but at least Argentina is showing some mettle, unlike Brazil, which is
coming across as more of a gentle giant.
This article was originally published in Infobrazil (www.infobrazil.com), an E-zine on Brazilian culture
and current events.
John Fitzpatrick, the author, is a Scottish journalist who has been
based in São Paulo since 1995. His 26-year career in journalism includes stints as a
reporter in Scotland and England, deputy editor of an English-language daily newspaper in
Cyprus, news editor of a radio station in Switzerland, financial correspondent in Zurich
and São Paulo, and editor of a magazine published by one of Switzerland's largest banks.
He currently runs Celtic Comunicações, a São Paulo company which specializes in
editorial and translation services. You can reach him at Johnfitz@osite.com.br
Send
your
comments to
Brazzil
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed