Caracas Opposition Wants Brazil to Accept Venezuela in Mercosur to Rein In Chavez

    Hugo Chavez

    Hugo Chavez Antonio Lezama, one of Venezuela's main opposition leaders has been invited to address Brazilian Senate committees which are currently considering the long debated controversial incorporation of Venezuela to Mercosur.

    The metropolitan mayor of Caracas, Antonio Lezama will most probably address Senators from Foreign Affairs and Defense Committees on October 22 previous to the whole house vote a week later on the Venezuelan Mercosur protocol-adhesion papers.

    Lezama is expected to support Venezuela's membership of Mercosur in spite of the fact President Hugo Chavez has described him as a "most dangerous oligarch on the payroll of the empire."

    Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva sent a bill to Congress requesting the admission of Venezuela to Mercosur in March 2007. The Lower House after much debate and clashes between the ruling Workers Party and the opposition finally approved the initiative in December 2008.

    However, Lezama in a recent interview with Brazilian daily O Estado de S. Paulo, one of Brazil's most prestigious publications stated that Chavez "could turn out to be more dangerous if left isolated."

    The metropolitan Caracas mayor added that "for us, the opposition to Chavez, it is important for him to be incorporated to Mercosur and other international forums that can in some way put limits to his actions. That would be most positive for Venezuelan democracy."

    Senator Eduardo Suplicy from the ruling coalition anticipated that Lezama's testimonies before the upper house committees could be "very positive" and helpful in supporting the Venezuelan membership.

    The interview to Lezama had a big impact on Brazilian senators where there is a growing opposition to who is considered an "authoritarian" leader on the limits of some "dictatorship practices", and a menace to Mercosur democratic commitment clause, according to another important daily O Globo.

    The Foreign Affairs Committee rapporteur on Venezuela's incorporation to Mercosur, opposition Senator Tarso Jereissati has been repeatedly contrary to accepting "President Chavez Venezuela".

    The Senate is also under strong lobbying from the main Brazilian conglomerates which are waiting for a favourable vote to move into Venezuela, which has shown interest in projects valued at billions of dollars.

    Lawmakers from Argentina and Uruguay have already supported Venezuela's incorporation as full member of Mercosur with the Brazilian and Paraguayan congresses pending approval.

    Mercopress

    Tags:

    • Show Comments (17)

    • ch.c.

      Oooops…typing error
      Brazil is the friend and Nooooo one.

      should read

      Brazil is the friend to Noooo one.

    • ch.c.

      Brazilians forget as usual and on purpose that …..
      – BEFORE THE TUPI FIELDS DISCOVERIES……Brazilians were in LOVE with Chavez. Just scroll all the news and articles in this site from 2005 – October 2007

      – AFTER THE TUPI FIELDS DISCOVERIES…..Brazilians found EXCUSES to be Nooooo Longer in such LOVE.

      Fact remains, as I stated so many times…..NEVER EVER TRUST A BRAZILIAN !

      Sorry….sorry….but…but….but….SAD TRUTH !

      Brazil is the friend and Nooooo one.
      Just ask Bolivia, Argentina, Uruguay, Venezuela, Paraguay. Short memories of how UNFAIR you have been to them just during the last 3-5 years…during ROBBING HOOK REIGN ?

    • The Guest

      JoÀƒ£o and AUGUSTUS
      JoÀƒ£o:”During the Military regime, there were two important figures that represented the Northeast of the country. You must know their names….why is it in your opinion ,that those regions suffer from high level of poverty and poor education? “

      Because both of those individuals were not interested in the social development of their constituencies. Instead they used their position, and the one who is still alive continue to use his position, towards corruption, nepotism and the establishment of their dynasties upon the backs of the poor and uneducated. An educated voter casts an informed ballot. An uneducated voter casts a ballot based on patronage. Thus their constituencies remain poor and uneducated and Brasil suffers.

      JoÀƒ£o:If you recall, I was in favor of electing a good manager who puts the countryÀ‚´s interests before his through ballot and our armed forces have produced such leaders. What is wrong in doing so? Didn’t the U.S. elect Ike,JFK,JC,Bush Sr.? Even GWB served in the Texas Air National Guards, didn’t he?

      I have no problem with electing good exmilitary managers, but in Latin America when one of those individuals get in power they do not usually look towards the civilian politicians for guidance. Instead they look towards the military. I do not blame them. They go with what they know and is comfortable with, but that is not always good for the country.

      In the US the exmilitary men whom you mentioned had civilian governmental experience before they ascended to the presidency. Unlike in Latin America their military experience was in the distant past thus there was no established ties to the military, and most important of all the US has a constitution which is respected and which cannot be changed on a whim. The History of Latin America speaks for it self.

      AUGUSTUS:”What about my views on the horrific Hugo Chavez, any comments?”

      Your views are the same as mine. The idiot had a chance to elevate the lives of his “comrades,” instead he is leading the country into the abyss. Yet another reason why I have no desire to see exmilirary or current military strongmen in politics in Latin America. Whether from the right or left, the havoc they create is the same.

      AUGUSTUS: “…my family was never impacted – only recall feeling safe from crime while witnessing a lot of growth)…”

      I remember also during my initial visits to Brasil, but as an outsider looking in, there are several reason why I think crime has manifested it self besides the usual poverty and lack of education.
      1) Because of the trauma caused during the military dictatorship, civilian governments did not have the initial will to be heavy handed. This caused the cancer to grow and emboldened the crimminals.
      2) There is no need for a Civil Police and Military Police force in each state. Both should be joined together, weeding out the corrupt and enabling efficiencies which are now lost. The current system favors the Criminals.
      3) There needs to be on the federal level a Ministery of Security staffed with personnel from each of the state’s civilian police forces and the federal police. This agency will be a repository for all criminal information which trancends each state thus aiding in the fight of crime.

      AUGUSTUS: “I must unfortunately mention… “PITY” For as a youngster, I did manage to get some milage out of this particular endeavor.”

      I have nothing futher to say.

    • AUGUSTUS SEVERUS

      GUEST
      Firstly I must agree with you comments regarding the establishment of foreign bases. Yet, at a minimum, Brazil – which does not have any port in the Pacific ocean, should have at least one SMALL naval facility in either Chile (Arica) or Peru (Callao) as well as at least one SMALL AIR BASE in Central America (San Jose-Costa Rica) in order to do the job required by a Regional power.

      What about my views on the horrific Hugo Chavez, any comments?

      Regarding your views on the Military Government, I must confess that from time to time, I feel strongly inclined to favor their return. Yet, during my recent visit to Brazil, I purchased a few dramatic DVD’s about the time of the military regime (which incindently I also remember as a youngster, but my family was never impacted – only recall feeling safe from crime while witnessing a lot of growth), I did see the “other side of the coin” – those who suffered under the regime, and may therefore understand “some” objections.

      Finally on a completely personal matter, regarding your comment
      [quote] I did not spend my time chasing what was under the bikini in Rio, but instead travelling within the country[/quote]
      I must unfortunately mention… “PITY” For as a youngster, I did manage to get some milage out of this particular endeavor 😉 😉

    • João da Silva

      The Guest
      Hi Guest,

      I read your comments with great interest and I have a couple of quick questions for you, since you know about our history so much and the country so well:

      [quote]Also, the North and North East of brasil then and today continue to suffer from high levels of poverty and poor education. [/quote]

      During the Military regime, there were two important figures that represented the Northeast of the country. You must know their names. One is already dead and another switched his allegiance and continues to be in power. After the military left, there were more “leaders” from that part as well as the North. If you recall, the first two Presidents immediately after the Military regime were from the Northeast. Is spite of those regions being [i][b]heavily[/b][/i] represented in both the houses and considering the fact that the current “headman” is from that part of the country, why is it in your opinion ,that those regions suffer from high level of poverty and poor education?

      [quote]The main reason that I did not participate much in the polarization debate which was in full swing when I returned from work was because of the advocacy by some in the blog for the return of military strongmen in government in Brasil. Some participants seem to have short memories but I as a Non-Brasilian do not. It is my belief that in Latin America, military or exmilitary personnel do not have a place in politics.[/quote]

      If you recall, I was in favor of electing a [i][b] good manager who puts the countryÀ‚´s interests before his[/b][/i] through [b][i]ballot[/i][/b] and our armed forces have produced such leaders. What is wrong in doing so? Didn’t the U.S. elect Ike,JFK,JC,Bush Sr.? Even GWB served in the Texas Air National Guards, didn’t he?

    • The Guest

      JoÀƒ£o and AUGUSTUS
      The last two paragraphs should be in the order as posted the second time.

    • The Guest

      JoÀƒ£o and AUGUSTUS
      JoÀƒ£o: “We did a very good job of diversifying our economy during the military government, building a strong middle class which in turn helped the poor to come out their poverty level by creating jobs and giving dignity to the common citizens.”

      You are painting to rosy a picture here JoÀƒ£o. You are right to a great extent, but remember my relationship with Brasil goes back many years starting when I was about 8 years old. I know more about Brasil than most foreign bloggers on this site. Plus I first placed my feet on Brasilian soil before the end of the military dictatorship, and I did not spend my time chasing what was under the bikini in Rio, but instead travelling within the country.

      You are right about the educational system, none of the civilian governments continued to build upon the system that was left in place by the military. Thus, today it is worst than that which was turned over to the first civilian government. However to be fair, investment in social programs were prohibited by the economically unsound position in which the military left the country. Today there is no excuse for the lack of investment in education or health.

      Also, the North and North East of brasil then and today continue to suffer from high levels of poverty and poor education.

      Yes the military industrilized Brasil, but at the cost of bankrupting the country. Brasil was in economic decline with rising inflation when the military decided to transfer power to civilian government. However, I do not blame them. Who wants to be at the helm during bad economic times.

      The main reason that I did not participate much in the polarization debate which was in full swing when I returned from work was because of the advocacy by some in the blog for the return of military strongmen in government in Brasil. Some participants seem to have short memories but I as a Non-Brasilian do not. It is my belief that in Latin America, military or exmilitary personnel do not have a place in politics. The risk for the abuse of the populace is to high, and the region’s history speaks for it self.

    • The Guest

      JoÀƒ£o and AUGUSTUS
      JoÀƒ£o: “Do you honestly think that our current leadership is capable of leading the rest of the tribe in Lat America?”

      Yes, I do.

      JoÀƒ£o:Brasil has been traditionally a neutral country and our diplomatic corps is one of the best in the world.

      Neutrality is a state of mind not fact. Do you think the Swiss were really neutral during WW II? Ask the jews who lost their possessions to the Swiss bankers if they would agree.
      What is the use of having one of the best diplomatic corps in the world if it cannot be used to resolve problems. Brasil is in a much better position than most other countries in the region because of its respected diplomatic corps. It is time for Brasil to step up or shut up. Fearing the unknown is self defeating.

      AUGUSTUS:”In spite of its territorial size, economic strength, and growing influence/popularity, Brazil is unfortunately not ready to assume leadership of Latin America, for….”

      I disagree with you. In relation to leadership in Latin America, Brasil is ready.

      AUGUSTUS:…any country in such important role should have met a number of pre-requisites:
      -Military Readiness & Capability: not only a much large number of troops would be required, but also a far larger arsenal available with significantly more sophisticated; along with a significant larger number of naval and air bases at strategically positioned locations across the national territory…”

      I agree with you, and Brasil is currently working towards this capability. Lack of complete military capabilities should not hinder the diplomatic capabilities which are in place. Once again I ask, is Brasil impotent? If the answer is yes then Brasil needs to get off of the world stage.

      AUGUSTUS:…as well as in some crucial foreign locations throughout Latin America – at least in 5 strategically selected sites e.g. Port-au-Prince (Haiti), Punta Arenas (Chile), Callao (Peru), Georgetown (Guiana), and San Salvador (El Salvador).”

      Brasil does not need foreign bases, and should never seek the establishment of bases outside of its territorial borders whether they are welcomed by other countries or not. Brasil should learn from the mistakes of other countries that foreign bases are nothing but bottomless pits for money which Brasil does not have and eventual their presence leads to resentment among segments of the populace in the host countries. In addition brasilian bases on foreign soil will not aid its diplomatic corp.

      AUGUSTUS:”Needless to mention, such increased À¢€œmilitary strengthÀ¢€Â should be in place along with the necessary Political WILL to intervene whenever necessary…”

      I agree, but with a well trained rapid response force which goes in, does the job, and gets out before its presence is worn out. The will and ability to project military power along with diplomatic fortitude lead to solutions. Dominance leads to resentment and resistance.

      JoÀƒ£o:”In the first fiasco, we sent wrong signals to our trading partners China & India and the second one, we walked right into the trap set by Col.Chavez and are unable to extricate ourselves.”

      I agree with your first sentence, but mistakes happen and they are meant to be tools from which to learn. It is not the act of making a mistake that is the problem, but was a lesson learned and rectification quick.
      The second sentence you know I disagree with, thus there is nothing left to add except a resolution is coming soon.

      Yes the military industrilized Brasil, but at the cost of bankrupting the country. Brasil was in economic decline with rising inflation when the military decided to transfer power to civilian government. However, I do not blame them. Who wants to be at the helm during bad economic times.

      The main reason that I did not participate much in the polarization debate which was in full swing when I returned from work was because of the advocacy by some in the blog for the return of military strongmen in government in Brasil. Some participants seem to have short memories but I as a Non-Brasilian do not. It is my belief that in Latin America, military or exmilitary personnel do not have a place in politics. The risk for the abuse of the populace is to high, and the region’s history speaks for it self.

    • João da Silva

      [quote]Unless and until Colombia’s Uribe and Peru’s Garcia are willing to work with the other ten leaders of UNASUR,[/quote]

      UNASUR (UNASUL, in Porutuguese) is a still born baby! Why do you think Mr.Augustus Severus spent so much time and effort in writing an article titled “Polarization of Latin America”. Though many “pundits” like our good and esteemed friend “The Guest” think that we have to do something to avoid this “polarization”, it is inevitable. It is [i][b]not [/b][/i]the question of “whether it will or not happen”. It is “at what [i][b]pace[/b][/i]?”

    • AUGUSTUS SEVERUS

      Further reflection upon the comment indentifying Brazil as À¢€œbeing a friend to no other nationÀ¢€Â
      Given the fact that, since the earliest times of recorded human history (about 9,000 years ago), I cannot identify any clearly example of international selfless cooperation/assistance, could you perhaps indulge us with a verifiable historical instance whereby any existing nation (or former empire) selflessly PROVED to be the TRUE friend of any another, without taking into account important matters of NATIONAL INTEREST?

      With the possible exception of massive international efforts (since the past 100 years) designed to aid of victims of local cataclysmic events (which even Brazil often participates); since I fail to identify of any other illustration of SELFLESS INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP, perhaps ch-c would be in a position to provide us with a historically verifiable case where any given country has ever demonstrated having SELFLESSLY assisted any other WITHOUT (simultaneously) also meeting criteria which meet previously defined National Interest of the À¢€œhelping friendlyÀ¢€Â nation…

      In other words, even those countries which may have appeared to have heroically assisted certain “allies” in time of trouble are bound to demonstrate, after deeper analysis, that any such aid (or act of friendship) contained deeply concealed reasons for such assistance, whereby the country providing aid/support actually NEEDED to help another (at such given time) either to avoid trouble for itself at some point in the future, OR in order to undermine a common enemy.

      The unfortunate bottom line being that HUMANKIND – and not just Brazilians À¢€“ are not À¢€œnaturally friendlyÀ¢€Â to anyone, specially those in position of leadership, given our speciesÀ¢€™ proclivity to greed, self-interest, and fear of the unknownÀ¢€¦ Therefore, any attempt to depict situations/scenarios of unfriendly/selfish behavior as being typical of just a few isolated cases (e.g. Brazilians only) simply reflect certain characteristics of the individuals making such claims À¢€“ as possessing enormous levels of naÀƒ¯vetÀƒ© OR a huge amount of Hypocrisy!

    • João da Silva

      Augustus
      Hi Augustus,

      It is great to hear from you again and to know you are back in NYC safe and sound after your short and well deserved vacation. Thanks for supplementing my comments to “The Guest” with additional points that are very valid and must be taken into consideration while discussing about “Leadership” and “Polarization”.

      Hopefully, you will be able to participate in the forum frequently, in spite of your busy work schedule.

    • AUGUSTUS SEVERUS

      ch-c – please clarify
      I hope your Chavez remark is not in any way shape or form related to me, because i have always STRONGLY opposed the Chavez animal
      I KNOW FOR SURE that I have NEVER – EVER – made ANY remotely positive remark about that creature! Quite the opposite
      Hugo Chavez is a VILE dictator, who embadies the WORSE characteristics of the typical South American “caudillo” – AN EXTREMELY CORRUPT South American dictator who not only is an oppressor of his people, but the enemy of LIBERTY!
      KINDLY TRY TO BE SPECIFIC ON YOUR ACCUSATIONS GOING FORWARD
      I just had to MAKE SURE this point is made!!!!

    • Luke Weyland

      Unless and until Colombia’s Uribe and Peru’s Garcia are willing to work with the other ten leaders of UNASUR, EL NORTE will continue to seek to destroy whatever sovereignity the nations of Latin America may have.

    • AUGUSTUS SEVERUS

      Disagreement on the Venezuelan issue for several reasons
      Despite the pleads of the Caracas mayor and the (understandable) points earmarked by JOAO, there is NO WAY that Hugo Chavez could NEVER be contained for a variety of major reasons:
      -His nearly boundless personal/political ambition, which renders him the prototype of the traditional Latin American Populist À¢€œstrong-manÀ¢€Â
      -His unwavering determination to implement a Neo-Leninist state (controlled by a single political party) along with his gradual transformation of the Venezuelan economy along Neo-Marxist models
      -His increasingly more powerful position due to the acquisition of mostly dictatorial power, within a nation without independent press and TV networks, supported by his total reliance upon a sizable number of fanatical Thugs and mostly devoted population (most of which members of the lower classes)
      -His disposition to deliberately antagonize key leaders of Western nations (e.g. the President of the United States and the King of Spain À¢€“ to mention a few prominent examples), along with his deliberate willingness to associate himself with the most authoritarian (pariah) nations outside the region – such as IRAN & BELARUS)
      -His proven ability to manipulate the current Brazilian president (or any eventual successor elected in 2010, likely to emerge from within the Brazilian Labor party À¢€“ the hidden agenda of which is likely to include direct association not only with Hugo Chavez and his À¢€œpolitical partyÀ¢€Â, but also with the repressive Cuban regime).

    • AUGUSTUS SEVERUS

      JOAO MOSTLY CORRECT
      In spite of its territorial size, economic strength, and growing influence/popularity, Brazil is unfortunately not ready to assume leadership of Latin America for, any country in such important role should have met a number of pre-requisites:
      -Military Readiness & Capability: not only a much large number of troops would be required, but also a far larger arsenal available with significantly more sophisticated; along with a significant larger number of naval and air bases a strategically positioned locations across the national territory as well as in some crucial foreign locations throughout Latin America – at least in 5 strategically selected sites e.g. Port-au-Prince (Haiti), Punta Arenas (Chile), Callao (Peru), Georgetown (Guiana), and San Salvador (El Salvador). Needless to mention, such increased À¢€œmilitary strengthÀ¢€Â should be in place along with the necessary Political WILL to intervene whenever necessary (which could not be accomplished with a single aircraft carrier, just a few handful number of additional fighters and just 4 submarines À¢€“ a NO Bombers);
      -Superior Infrastructure: any leading nation, for a variety of reasons/purposes must have at its disposal a wide network of reliable roads, railroads, airports, and ports;
      -Significant simplified bureaucracy, capable of handling greater number of contracts/claims (of whatever nature À¢€“ as needed), to monitor far more sophisticated types of À¢€œservicesÀ¢€Â, À¢€œquality controlsÀ¢€Â, and À¢€œmonitoring bureaus throughout the nation (along with sizable presence in key foreign locations (for instance Caracas, Buenos Aires, and San Jose);
      -Larger Number of Professionals (ranging from legal, engineering and medical specialists along with the necessary, reliable technical support and specialized workers), which is dependent upon a FAR BETTER Educational system;
      -Even Stronger Economy containing stronger middle-class along with readiness/disposition to provide foreign aid: the economic wealth (and health) should far exceed the existing levels not only to have a mostly content (fed/educated/healthy) population (in order to be in a position to justify significant increase in military expenditure) but also to provide economic assistance (military & infrastructural) to much poorer regional partners, as needed (also taking into account the possible need of multiple simultaneous disbursements);
      -Capability to rely upon a more efficient Judiciary Branch, along with implementation of À¢€œmeasuresÀ¢€Â which might perhaps secure far LESS corrupt Legislative chambers.

      These are just the most fundamental needs with any significant, efficient, and respected Regional Power, none of which Brazil is currently in a position to boast.

    • João da Silva

      The Guest
      Hi Guest,

      Thanks for post specifically addressed to me. I deliberately withheld my answer to the question you asked before in the other thread, because I did not want to get into a polemic issue knowing full well that my opinion is not going to make any difference in the current scenario! Let me answer the following question with [i][b]another[/b][/i] question:

      [quote]This is where Brasilian leadership is needed and now is the right time. [/quote]

      Do you [b][i]honestly [/i][/b]think that our current leadership is capable of leading the rest of the tribe in Lat America? If you say, yes, you have your reasons. I have my own reasons to say “NO”.

      Brasil has been traditionally a neutral country and our diplomatic corps is one of the best in the world . Even during the Falklands war, we remained “neutral” (in a sort of way!). We did a very good job of diversifying our economy during the military[i][b] government[/b][/i], building a strong middle class which in turn helped the poor to come out their poverty level by creating jobs and giving dignity to the common citizens. Politicians like Cris Buarque always opposed and complained of anything the technocrats did or wanted to do. In spite of it, we managed to be “silent” and “aloof” leaders in this continent, minding our own business. Cris Buarque talks so much about education, but fails to mention about the accomplishments of his predecessors in the mid 60À‚´s to mid 80À‚´s and the job opportunities created for the “educated” as well as the “uneducated”.

      IMHO,starting from the 90À‚´s, Brasil has [i][b]lost[/b][/i] its leadership as well as credibility. The leaderships we have had are more interested in creating more problems (real and imaginary) without coming out with concrete solutions or alternatives, thus deviating from the key issues. Our leadership does not know what our role should be in the world stage. I want to bring to your attention two recent fiascos in our foreign policy. Our 180 degree turn in the last round of Doha talks and the recent involvement in Honduras. Unfortunately we got into problems,but are unable to find solutions. In the first fiasco, we sent wrong signals to our trading partners China & India and the second one, we walked right into the trap set by Col.Chavez and are unable to extricate ourselves.

      Whether we like it or not Col. Chavez is a strong leader (Augustus may get upset, but eventually he will agree with me) and for some reasons he reminds me of Vladamir Putin. He managed to hoodwink every other leader in the continent so far and did a purge in his own armed forces and eliminated all his opponents [i][b]not [/b][/i]by killing them, but retiring them off. He is blowing off his newly found “oil wealth” by buying all sort of armaments putting the fear of the “Yankees” into the heads of his “subjects”. It is so obvious that he is creating his own dynasty and his subjects do not seem to mind. Though he is supposed to hate the “Yankees”, is still doing brisk business with them!! Someday, when the “Yankees” get upset with him, he is fully capable of doing a deal with them like Col.Khaddafi did. Do you remember how respectfully GWB used to refer to Khaddafi?

      Then we have the Kirchner family in Argentina that owns the province of Patagonia, but the “champions” of poor and their real enemies are the “Clarin” group of newspapers!! Lugo, Morales, Chavez, Kirschner, etc; would love to see Brasil [b][i]not[/i][/b] to be the leader and in fact would like to see us in the role of circus clowns.

      Are we doing anything to become “leaders”? Another 14 months will give the answer. I am sure Ricardo Amaral and Augustus Amaral will agree with me about the time line. 😉 😀

    • The Guest

      JoÀƒ£o
      Below is my answer to you which I first wrote under the article titled “Lula to Honduras: Brazil Won’t Accept Ultimatum, Return Zelaya to Power!”
      You did not give me answer to my points then; thus, I am reposting it here since it is appropriate to the above article concerning Venezuela and Chaves.

      written by The Guest, October 02, 2009

      JoÀƒ£o: “There is a different between “Visionary leadership” and “Populist Leadership”. The question is what sort of “leadership”, Latin America needs at this moment and depending on the answer Brazil can chalk its destiny as a leader. ”

      The Guest: You are right, there is a difference between “Visionary leadership” and “Populist Leadership” and at this moment in Latin America a leader with a combination of both is needed. Are you telling me that Brasil is not ready to stand up to the challenge, and if not, why and when?
      In my opinion, Brasil should be concentrating on resolving conflicts within Latin America while at the same time minimizing Chaves influence and interference in the region. Forget the pipe dream of being a member of the disfunctional UN Security Council and concentrate on the backyard where leadership could effect change.

      JoÀƒ£o: “Why should we control the good Col.Chavez.? After all he is a great “amigo” of our President, isn’t he?”

      The Guest: Have you ever heard the the following phrases “Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.” and “With friends like these who needs enemies.” Remember, diplomacy is not written in stone.

      JoÀƒ£o: “Unfortunately, you didn’t participate much under the article written by August about “Polarization of Latin America”. I am of the opinion that it is inevitable and to the delight of Russians, Americans, French, British and German Armament Industries. Of course, my apologies for not including the Chinese manufacturers of consumer goods.”

      “If you do not understand what I am talking about, I suggest your reading the books recommended by Dr.Lloyd Cata. Especially the one titled “Last Plantation”

      The Guest: Polarization will only take place if we allow it to happen. We may not be able stop the “merchants of death” from selling us their weapons, but it does not mean that we have to use them against ourselves. This is where Brasilian leadership is needed and now is the right time.

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    comment *

    • name *

    • email *

    • website *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Ads

    You May Also Like

    Killing of Brazilian Shows London’s Police ‘Go for the Brain’ Policy

    Jean Charles de Menezes, the 27-year-old Brazilian slain by police last week in a ...

    Brazil’s Embraer Takes Its Wings to Aero India

    Embraer, the Brazilian aircraft manufacturer, will participate for the third time at the Aero ...

    Redepetro, Bahia, Brazil

    Small Oil Company from Brazil Looks Overseas for Business

    Representatives of the RedePetro Bahia recently participated in two international missions with the objective ...

    Jornal do Brasil

    119-Year-Old Jornal do Brasil Closes Print Edition and Goes Online

    Jornal do Brasil, one of Brazil’s best known publications, will discontinue its print edition ...

    AIDS Help: Brazil Rejects US Demands for Sex Abstinence

    The coordination of Brazil’s National Program for Sexually Transmitted Diseases and Aids (STD/Aids) reaffirmed ...

    Brazil Has About Face: No More Favorite in Bolivia’s Election

    Brazil tried to downplay President Lula da Silva’s words of support for the left ...

    Brazil’s Engevix Gets Nod from Bentley

    Engevix Engenharia, a Brazilian company specializing in technical consulting services, has been nominated for ...