Allies and foes of
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
were unanimous in offering their solidarity to the President and in
attacking the Sunday New York Times report that accused Lula
of being a little too friendly to beer and other alcoholic beverages.
Brazil’s Senate should approve a vote of censure against the paper.
by: Émerson Luís
For José Alencar, Brazil’s Vice-President, the act was an "ignominy";
for the Lula administration’s Chief of Staff, José Dirceu, "it
was offensive to Brazil, to the institution of the Republic’s presidency and
to President Lula and citizen Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva." The
opposition leader in the senate was indignant against what he called "an
offense to the country’s dignity."
Allies and foes of Lula
were unanimous in offering their solidarity to the President and in attacking
the Sunday New York Times report that accused the Brazilian President
of being a little too friendly to beer, distilled spirits and similar alcoholic
beverages.
Written by Larry Rohter
and entitled "Brazilian Leader’s Tippling Becomes National Concern,"
the article set the tone of the piece in the first paragraph: "Luiz Inácio
Lula da Silva has never hidden his fondness for a glass of beer, a shot of
whiskey or, even better, a slug of cachaça, Brazil’s potent
sugar-cane liquor. But some of his countrymen have begun wondering if their
president’s predilection for strong drink is affecting his performance in
office."
Alencar told reporters,
"President Lula is an honorable man and all of us Brazilians have to
fight back. This text is disrespectful to our President." Dirceu, the
President’s Chief of Staff, announced that he has been talking to Attorney
General, Álvaro Ribeiro and Justice Minister, Márcio Thomas
Bastos to decide whether to sue the paper responsible for the attacks against
Lula:
"It’s evident that
we live in a democracy in Brazil and in the United States, and I respect the
right to freedom of press, but I consider the report offensive to the country,
to Brazil," said Dirceu adding: I believe that all Brazilian men and
women have to repudiate that."
"Lula is a not an
absent President, he is dedicated to the government’s decisions," commented
Antonio Palocci, Brazil’s Finance Minister. "Lula is involved in the
administration and such a report makes no sense." Palocci called the
New York Times story "very irresponsible." But he didn’t
seem to believe that the article would influence negatively the Brazilian
economy.
For Planning Minister,
Guido Mantega, the Times article is part of a bigger picture or conspiracy:
"The New York Times is held in high regard and wouldn’t slander
the President without a broader purpose. Behind all of this there’s the intention
of weakening President Lula, who gave the country a new international position."
José Genoíno,
the President of PT (Partido dos TrabalhadoresWorkers’ Party), the same
party of Lula, called the Times text "bad journalism mixed to
slander and defamation in a political attempt to go back to old times when
prejudiced and unfounded accusations against Lula were the norm." Genoíno
called his colleagues in Congress to the fight against the New York paper:
"We offer our solidarity to companion Lula and we have to take the necessary
measures in court. I believe that the Presidency of the Republic was assailed,
but if it becomes necessary, the PT will also take measures."
Vote of Censure
The President of the Senate,
José Sarney, from the allied party PMDB (Partido do Movimento Democrático
BrasileiroParty of the Brazilian Democratic Movement) revealed that
he was in favor of a vote of censure to be taken against the NY Times,
this Tuesday. The proposal to censor the Times was made by Ideli Salvati,
the PT’s leader in the Senate. Most of the Senate debate on Monday was related
to the American paper’s polemic article.
The opposition leader
in the senate, Arthur Virgílio, from the PSDB (Partido da Social Democracia
BrasileiraParty of the Brazilian Social Democracy), talked about the
intention of his party to take the high ground despite their determination
to continue o "hitting hard" the administration:
"In this episode,
however, President Lula can be sure that our party is not going to hit low
or use personal attacks. I am not going to help to tarnish the President’s
image or to add to his undoing." Virgílio classified the article
as an "offense to the country’s dignity".
In São Paulo, State
governor Geraldo Alckmin, also from the PSDB, offered his solidarity to the
President: "The piece is unfair and malicious and the federal government
is entirely right in its indignation."
Professor Luizinho, the
government’s leader in the House, went for the attack mentioning the international
scandal that became the discovery that the New York Times reporter
Jayson Blair was fabricating his stories. Luizinho said that the American
newspaper should have learned a lesson from that episode and confessed that
he was mystified by the idea conveyed by the newspaper that "there is
a climate of national commotion due to the President’s behavior."
"What’s baffling
is that the reporter knows the role that the President has in Latin America,
he knows about the opening of the markets with the Arab countries, and China
and Russia, he knows about the negotiations in the FTAA and the Mercosur.
Maybe that’s the problem. Why so much hate, so much rancor and prejudice in
so few lines?"
Another PT Representative,
Arlindo Chinaglia, called reporter Larry Rohter irresponsible: "He assumed
the role of spokesperson for a coup movement, but here in Brazil we have an
established democracy. I wonder whether he is defending some economic interest."
Writing in the Folha
de S. Paulo, Gilberto Dimenstein, veteran columnist for that daily, commented
that the government was right in getting upset at the Times story,
but added. "Where there’s smoke there’s fire." Dimenstein observed
that the subject Lula and drinking is nothing new and it has been talked about
frequently among the Brazilian political and economic elite.
"He frequently appears
holding a glass," wrote the journalist , "which would not mean anything
at all if it weren’t for the fact that he had in the past a more intense familiarity
with alcohol.
"It also doesn’t
help that he has been seen in private meetings ingesting alcohol in an amount
that might bring about innuendoes. The damage is done. From now on, Lula will
have to take better care of his image, being aware that when an individual
is President, appearances and words have special weight."
Official Reaction
The official response
from the Brazilian government was swift. On Sunday, the same day that the
New York Times article appeared, Lula’s spokesman, André Singer,
released a note calling the Times report "an example of the worst
possible kind of yellow journalism."
The note went on to say:
"We were surprised to see this type of thing in The New York Times;
it has no factual basis and infringes upon the most elementary norms of journalistic
ethics.
The Brazilian ambassador
in Washington has received instructions to contact the newspaper and transmit
the Brazilian government’s indignation and surprise at allowing such gratuitous
insults to be directed at the President of Brazil.
President Lula exercises
the duties of his office with total responsibility and dedication. His work
day is more than 12 hours long, which is easy to prove just by talking to
anyone who works with him, including journalists who work at the Palácio
do Planalto."
The note hinted at the
end that the Brazilian government was considering legal action against the
paper: "The Brazilian government is studying legal recourse to defend
the honor of the president of Brazil and the country’s image abroad."