A SPECTRAL BELT AND ROAD BEYOND THE BACKYARD AND BRICS: A light for Brazilians glimmers from Asia

As the pullout from Afghanistan unfolds into new geopolitical prospects for its powerful neighbors, the U.S. has once again centralized what it envisions for South America at State level. George W. Bush had inadvertently outsourced policy for the southern continent to then president Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva. In turn, Obama made it an affair of NSA surveillance, as Edward Snowden later revealed. Trump chose instead to bring the continent to heel by privatizing it through his own clones of approval. Biden’s difference is to do it in the name of the welfare of the folks back home.

The return of State-centralized operations for South America, and Brazil above all, can already be felt. The compromised anti-corruption and extra-judicial court of exception, Operation Lava Jato, had the prints of the DOJ on it from its creation in March, 2014. It is now known that classified information was funneled to its “task force” to wrench plea bargains from some of the country’s most powerful industrial executives. Exemption from embezzlement charges, both in the U.S. and abroad, was the tally for helping to indict political leaders of the Workers’ Party (PT) on corruption charges. Failing that, as fresh reports have revealed, arrangements for the purchase of Pegasus would do as well.

With the visit of CIA director William J. Burns and more recently National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to the southern continent, critics of the Bolsonaro regime who invested diplomatically and emotionally in a Biden victory have had to come to terms with reality. Biden’s staff will not belittle the far-right military government’s worn out Cold War rhetoric of fighting communism after all. The communist threat, warranting submission of Brazil’s dominant sector to the interests of the U.S., does exist after all – and it comes from Asia.

President Xi Jinping has repeatedly asserted his realignment of China’s political economic structure and policy planning with the principles of Maoism, whether neoliberal ideology is willing to concede that or not. Not that such short-sightedness reduces neoliberalism to a mere effect of parallax, though. The Maoist model is the first to admit how class struggle festers within the Chinese Communist Party and the last to claim it brings History to its end. Still, not even the mutual contempt the American and Brazilian presidents have for each other can revert what has merged into a common mission against China’s promise for South America.

The centralization of operations at the State level could also be felt at the last G7 summit. In its first in-person meeting since the beginning of the pandemic, Jair Bolsonaro was nowhere to be seen – granted nor was any other non-G7 head of state. While pundits are having a field day speculating over the shape of the post-pandemic economy, the G7’s insularity is all but suggestive of the changing times. As far back as the 1990s, its brand name had been loosening its grip. By the end of the century, after the GATT had become the WTO, an international free trade zone for the Americas was in the works.

As if to stimulate convictions that Empire had now become an ideal communications community, the G7 even opened a flank to absorb Russia. A further metamorphosis had the 7 bud into the G20. For a brief period, capital accumulation and wealth concentration started rippling outward in ways other than through IMF bailouts. The capitalist inflection in China had seemed to project the next phase.

Shortly into the current century, Brazil seized a window of opportunity to spark its own G group. Celso Amorim, foreign Minister during Lula’s two terms in office, had previously led his country’s team of negotiators at the WTO summits. In those broad discussions on the future of globalization, Amorim created lasting ties with the Chinese delegation.

With the U.S. scrambling to locate weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, George W. Bush divested interest in Latin America at a scale few if any previous resident of the White House had done. Brazil proved to be a trustworthy player on the commercial and diplomatic levels. It was given leeway to increase trade with China. Bush even attempted to use Lula’s clout in formerly non-aligned countries to repair the U.S.’s shattered image following the serial atrocities committed in Iraq.

The pieces were set for the creation of the BRICS, the new trade zone of economic cooperation between Brazil, Russia, Iran, China, and, later, South Africa.

THE POWER OF BRICS

That China would have even needed Brazil in what was a cooperative organization focused on commodity extraction underscores the crucial importance of the South American giant as a global feeder. Soya grew into yet another of Brazil’s historic monocultures after sugar, gold, coffee, rubber and citric products. Soya seemed tailored-made for mass exportation to its Asian partner. Until then, China’s primary interest in Brazilian natural resources was iron ore. Its need was so great China even complied to build steel mills on Brazilian territory in exchange for reserved megashares of the ore.

The BRICS was a successful deal for Brazil, with its economic growth spearheading to 7.5 percent in 2010. By absorbing even Chavez’s Venezuela, Lula dreamt of broadening the MERCOSUL economic community into a transcontinental trade organization, one predating President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road initiative. The backlash from the North was soon to come. Prior even to the 2018 detention of Huawei’s CFO, Ms. Meng Wanzhou, in Vancouver, Lula’s successor President Dilma Rousseff was ousted by a congressional coup d’état. Once that occurred, the BRICS was jettisoned.

What had given popular momentum to the coup stemmed from the exaggerated effects on the economy of the downturn in the commodities market. Brazil and Venezuela’s euphoria from oil production waned as a result. To foster instability, what was a bump in 2015’s first quarterly results was portrayed as a nosedive. Corporate media pulverized public opinion and economic confidence once Rousseff was invested in 2015 for her second term in office.

Pulses of fear regarding an impending recession were triggered, thereby pressuring Rousseff to scramble her domestic economic policies after her re-election campaign had been run on social change – made viable precisely from commodity-based revenues. Her measures to force private banks to shrink interest rates and electricity transmitters to slash fees ended up breaking the back of her coalition government. Meanwhile the Armed Forces’ four-star generals plotted to shut down the Truth Commission into military violence during the 1964-1985 dictatorship and unconstitutionally initiated their return to government.

By then, Xi Jinping had taken power and the leaked (and apparently legitimate) “Document 9” proved the BRICS to be outdated. Throughout the first decade of this century, China and Brazil had played musical chairs trading 6th and 7th positions in the yearly nominal GDP ranking. What later gave China its overpowering impetus was the 2007-8 Western financial meltdown.

Where China was able to keep Western banks afloat, it fell short of reverting their wrongdoings, even in take-over cases like HSBC. Not only were no financial executives indicted for the fraudulent practices leading up to the crisis, reforms led G7 finance ministers to strip labor costs and hedge recovery on intensified accumulation of capital and wealth concentration at a scale not seen since the early twentieth century.

Across the Pacific Ocean, Xi Jinping had a different vision for his country. Its economic planning set about to eradicate first misery and then poverty through broader distribution of China’s incredible returns. But its economic prosperity shook the image of communist integrity by producing over 600 billionaires, just shy of the U.S.’s 700, according to Forbes’s 2020 count.

Meanwhile in Brazil, measures to destroy wealth redistribution mechanisms have already done their deed. Although serving the interests of mega capital, who runs the power structure now are Brazil’s 17 four-star generals. Despite the BRICS’ fall from grace, China remains Brazil’s second most important trading partner. The blockage against Huawei and sabotage of the CoronaVac vaccine makes it plain the U.S. intends it to remain as such. In exchange, Brazil’s ultrarich class has grown to seventh worldwide, with over 80 billionaires reaping the riches from the privations in course and guaranteeing the country’s fame as one of the most unequal on the planet.

China’s two continental-sized trade agreements signed earlier this year the RCEP with Asian countries and the EU-China trade deal, include no Latin American countries. Regarding Brazil, China remains a mass importer of natural resources and agro-meat products, merely the most counter-productive contributions it can make to overhaul the neo-colonial nature of the domestic economy.

There again, preventing China’s reputation from growing in South America is part of the equation. If Chinese 5G telecommunications and high technology can be fended off, Biden seems willing to allow Brazil’s generals to shower themselves with the privileges of a cast and its billionaires to raise their bounty by massively indebting the population, thereby stripping it from access to public services even as basic as education.

THE STRUGGLE FOR COMMUNISM

The centenary of the Chinese Communist Party in Beijing on July 1st had President Xi Jinping follow in the footsteps of Mao Zedong as he had earlier managed to do with Karl Marx himself. What the post-BRICS era can offer with growing Chinese influence in South America arises from massive poverty reduction and strict measures against deforestation.

As much as a radical reform of tax policy and a universal basic income might make progressives dream, 85 percent of Brazilians are unaffected by changes to taxation, whether it be income, corporate, property or inheritance taxes. Much of the remaining 15 percent are prepared to go to any length and use any means to maintain the country’s regressive policies.

Without reining in the billionaires, in ways similar to what China itself is doing, continental prospects for reforming the fiscal structure can lead only to deepening South America’s backyard status. Hopes for reverting this scenario through elections or peaceful means equates to self-denial. However, a bona fide escape from the backyard lies through the Belt and Road. For that to happen, the continents’ left-of-center intelligentsia has to stop hating China, indeed hating a China that creeps mainly in their darkest fantasies.

Five years after the 2016 Coup, anywhere from a quarter to a third of Brazilians awake without knowing where to find food. The country is seeing the most violent upward transfer of wealth in its history. Some estimates suggest the average Brazilian family carries a debt load accounting for some 76 percent of monthly income.

As China ponders whether Belt and Road can be ushered into the continent without military escort, Brazil, Colombia, Uruguay and even Venezuela’s pro-Guiado business clan, have leapt toward privatizing anything in reach. Their bet is that by ridding the State of public property they can prevent predictable popular uprisings from morphing into a springboard for Chinese expansion into the continent.

Poverty-reduction may well turn out to be Xi Jinping’s strongest asset abroad. Even for G7 populations, freedom and democracy now sound hollow. The psychological and emotional depression limitless behavioral data extraction provokes has mainly favored the rise of far-right authoritarian figures. Even the myth of the uberized entrepreneur is bottoming out in Brazil as out-of-control gasoline pricing forces drivers off the roads. The place to turn for Brazilians might well become China – provided it is not already.

Norman Madarasz is professor of critical political philosophy and non-canonical literature, and teaches in Brazil. He is the author of Obstruções à justiça: dívida, sexo, estética pós-punk e outros small data da filosofia contemporânea. Porto Alegre: Editora Fi, 2017.

Tags:

You May Also Like

Brazilian Grupo Corpo's Umbanda-Inspired "Gira" presentation. Photo by José Luiz Pederneiras

Brazilian Grupo Corpo Brings Its Mesmerizing Dance to the US

In the heart of Brazil, where the rich tapestry of Afro-Brazilian culture weaves together ...

AMAZONLOG17 brought together nearly 2,000 military personnel from 23 different countries. (Photo: AMAZONLOG17)

US Joins Brazilian Army in Exercises of Rescue Operations in the Amazon

The city of Tabatinga, located nearly 1,000 kilometers from Manaus, set the stage for ...

Rendering of an oil derrick in the rainforest. AI-generated.

Brazilian Hypocrisy: Green Talk and Brown Actions

Brazil’s massive 13 December 2023 auction of oil and gas drilling rights betrays a ...

Former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro and US's Donald Trump when both men led their countries.

Barring Bolsonaro from Re-election, Brazil Offers a Lesson to the US and the World

Earlier this summer, Brazil’s top electoral court banned former president Jair Bolsonaro from running ...

A Brazilian Virus Called Odebrecht

Over the last 73 years, Odebrecht has become the leading construction company in Latin ...

Brazil’s Finance Minister Sees ‘Vigorous Growth” and 1.5 Million New Jobs in 2006

Brazil’s Minister of Finance, Antonio Palocci, told reporters on Friday, December 23, that Brazil ...

Hydra of Lerna: Brazil’s New Anti-Corruption Action Goes After Ministers and Governor

Brazil’s Federal Police officers executed warrants for Operation Hydra of Lerna at the Workers’ ...

It seems the future never arrives in Brazil What Lies Ahead in Brazil? Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country? Europeans, US, developed country, developing country. Bolsonaro, future B. Michael Rubin For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of a country is one simple way to measure its economic development. Another way to measure a country's progress is the extent of public education, e.g. how many citizens complete high school. A country's health may be measured by the effectiveness of its healthcare system, for example, life expectancy and infant mortality. With these measurement tools, it's easier to gauge the difference between a country like Brazil and one like the U.S. What's not easy to gauge is how these two countries developed so differently when they were both "discovered" at the same time. In 1492 and 1500 respectively, the U.S. and Brazil fell under the spell of white Europeans for the first time. While the British and Portuguese had the same modus operandi, namely, to exploit their discoveries for whatever they had to offer, not to mention extinguishing the native Americans already living there if they got in the way, the end result turned out significantly different in the U.S. than in Brazil. There are several theories on how/why the U.S. developed at a faster pace than Brazil. The theories originate via contrasting perspectives – from psychology to economics to geography. One of the most popular theories suggests the divergence between the two countries is linked to politics, i.e. the U.S. established a democratic government in 1776, while Brazil's democracy it could be said began only in earnest in the 1980s. This theory states that the Portuguese monarchy, as well as the 19th and 20th century oligarchies that followed it, had no motivation to invest in industrial development or education of the masses. Rather, Brazil was prized for its cheap and plentiful labor to mine the rich soil of its vast land. There is another theory based on collective psychology that says the first U.S. colonizers from England were workaholic Puritans, who avoided dancing and music in place of work and religious devotion. They labored six days a week then spent all of Sunday in church. Meanwhile, the white settlers in Brazil were unambitious criminals who had been freed from prison in Portugal in exchange for settling in Brazil. The Marxist interpretation of why Brazil lags behind the U.S. was best summarized by Eduardo Galeano, the Uruguayan writer, in 1970. Galeano said five hundred years ago the U.S. had the good fortune of bad fortune. What he meant was the natural riches of Brazil – gold, silver, and diamonds – made it ripe for exploitation by western Europe. Whereas in the U.S., lacking such riches, the thirteen colonies were economically insignificant to the British. Instead, U.S. industrialization had official encouragement from England, resulting in early diversification of its exports and rapid development of manufacturing. II Leaving this debate to the historians, let us turn our focus to the future. According to global projections by several economic strategists, what lies ahead for Brazil, the U.S., and the rest of the world is startling. Projections forecast that based on GDP growth, in 2050 the world's largest economy will be China, not the U.S. In third place will be India, and in fourth – Brazil. With the ascendency of three-fourths of the BRIC countries over the next decades, it will be important to reevaluate the terms developed and developing. In thirty years, it may no longer be necessary to accept the label characterized by Nelson Rodrigues's famous phrase "complexo de vira-lata," for Brazil's national inferiority complex. For Brazilians, this future scenario presents glistening hope. A country with stronger economic power would mean the government has greater wealth to expend on infrastructure, crime control, education, healthcare, etc. What many Brazilians are not cognizant of are the pitfalls of economic prosperity. While Brazilians today may be envious of their wealthier northern neighbors, there are some aspects of a developed country's profile that are not worth envying. For example, the U.S. today far exceeds Brazil in the number of suicides, prescription drug overdoses, and mass shootings. GDP growth and economic projections depend on multiple variables, chief among them the global economic situation and worldwide political stability. A war in the Middle East, for example, can affect oil production and have global ramifications. Political stability within a country is also essential to its economic health. Elected presidents play a crucial role in a country's progress, especially as presidents may differ radically in their worldview. The political paths of the U.S. and Brazil are parallel today. In both countries, we've seen a left-wing regime (Obama/PT) followed by a far-right populist one (Trump/Bolsonaro), surprising many outside observers, and in the U.S. contradicting every political pollster, all of whom predicted a Trump loss to Hillary Clinton in 2016. In Brazil, although Bolsonaro was elected by a clear majority, his triumph has created a powerful emotional polarization in the country similar to what is happening in the U.S. Families, friends, and colleagues have split in a love/hate relationship toward the current presidents in the U.S. and Brazil, leaving broken friendships and family ties. Both presidents face enormous challenges to keep their campaign promises. In Brazil, a sluggish economy just recovering from a recession shows no signs of robust GDP growth for at least the next two years. High unemployment continues to devastate the consumer confidence index in Brazil, and Bolsonaro is suffering under his campaign boasts that his Economy Minister, Paulo Guedes, has all the answers to fix Brazil's slump. Additionally, there is no end to the destruction caused by corruption in Brazil. Some experts believe corruption to be the main reason why Brazil has one of the world's largest wealth inequality gaps. Political corruption robs government coffers of desperately needed funds for education and infrastructure, in addition to creating an atmosphere that encourages everyday citizens to underreport income and engage in the shadow economy, thereby sidestepping tax collectors and regulators. "Why should I be honest about reporting my income when nobody else is? The politicians are only going to steal the tax money anyway," one Brazilian doctor told me. While Bolsonaro has promised a housecleaning of corrupt officials, this is a cry Brazilians have heard from every previous administration. In only the first half-year of his presidency, he has made several missteps, such as nominating one of his sons to be the new ambassador to the U.S., despite the congressman's lack of diplomatic credentials. A June poll found that 51 percent of Brazilians now lack confidence in Bolsonaro's leadership. Just this week, Brazil issued regulations that open a fast-track to deport foreigners who are dangerous or have violated the constitution. The rules published on July 26 by Justice Minister Sérgio Moro define a dangerous person as anyone associated with terrorism or organized crime, in addition to football fans with a violent history. Journalists noted that this new regulation had coincidental timing for an American journalist who has come under fire from Moro for publishing private communications of Moro's. Nevertheless, despite overselling his leadership skills, Bolsonaro has made some economic progress. With the help of congressional leader Rodrigo Maia, a bill is moving forward in congress for the restructuring of Brazil's generous pension system. Most Brazilians recognize the long-term value of such a change, which can save the government billions of dollars over the next decade. At merely the possibility of pension reform, outside investors have responded positively, and the São Paulo stock exchange has performed brilliantly, reaching an all-time high earlier this month. In efforts to boost the economy, Bolsonaro and Paulo Guedes have taken the short-term approach advocated by the Chicago school of economics championed by Milton Friedman, who claimed the key to boosting a slugging economy was to cut government spending. Unfortunately many economists, such as Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, disagree with this approach. They believe the most effective way to revive a slow economy is exactly the opposite, to spend more money not less. They say the government should be investing money in education and infrastructure projects, which can help put people back to work. Bolsonaro/Guedes have also talked about reducing business bureaucracy and revising the absurdly complex Brazilian tax system, which inhibits foreign and domestic business investment. It remains to be seen whether Bolsonaro has the political acumen to tackle this Godzilla-sized issue. Should Bolsonaro find a way to reform the tax system, the pension system, and curb the most egregious villains of political bribery and kickbacks – a tall order – his efforts could indeed show strong economic results in time for the next election in 2022. Meanwhile, some prominent leaders have already lost faith in Bolsonaro's efforts. The veteran of political/economic affairs, Joaquim Levy, has parted company with the president after being appointed head of the government's powerful development bank, BNDES. Levy and Bolsonaro butted heads over an appointment Levy made of a former employee of Lula's. When neither man refused to back down, Levy resigned his position at BNDES. Many observers believe Bolsonaro's biggest misstep has been his short-term approach to fixing the economy by loosening the laws protecting the Amazon rainforest. He and Guedes believe that by opening up more of the Amazon to logging, mining, and farming, we will see immediate economic stimulation. On July 28, the lead article of The New York Times detailed the vastly increased deforestation in the Amazon taking place under Bolsonaro's leadership. Environmental experts argue that the economic benefits of increased logging and mining in the Amazon are microscopic compared to the long-term damage to the environment. After pressure from European leaders at the recent G-20 meeting to do more to protect the world's largest rainforest, Bolsonaro echoed a patriotic response demanding that no one has the right to an opinion about the Amazon except Brazilians. In retaliation to worldwide criticism, Bolsonaro threatened to follow Trump's example and pull out of the Paris climate accord; however, Bolsonaro was persuaded by cooler heads to retract his threat. To prove who was in control of Brazil's Amazon region, he appointed a federal police officer with strong ties to agribusiness as head of FUNAI, the country's indigenous agency. In a further insult to the world's environmental leaders, not to mention common sense, Paulo Guedes held a news conference on July 25 in Manaus, the largest city in the rainforest, where he declared that since the Amazon forest is known for being the "lungs" of the world, Brazil should charge other countries for all the oxygen the forest produces. Bolsonaro/Guedes also have promised to finish paving BR-319, a controversial highway that cuts through the Amazon forest, linking Manaus to the state of Rondônia and the rest of the country. Inaugurated in 1976, BR-319 was abandoned by federal governments in the 1980s and again in the 1990s as far too costly and risky. Environmentalists believe the highway's completion will seal a death knoll on many indigenous populations by vastly facilitating the growth of the logging and mining industries. Several dozen heavily armed miners dressed in military fatigues invaded a Wajãpi village recently in the state of Amapá near the border of French Guiana and fatally stabbed one of the community's leaders. While Brazil's environmental protection policies are desperately lacking these days, not all the news here was bad. On the opening day of the 2019 Pan America Games in Lima, Peru, Brazilian Luisa Baptista, swam, biked, and ran her way to the gold medal in the women's triathlon. The silver medal went to Vittoria Lopes, another Brazilian. B. Michael Rubin is an American writer living in Brazil.

Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country?

For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. ...

President Wants to Welcome Again Foreigners to Own Land and Airlines in Brazil

Brazilian President Michel Temer will propose legislation to lift restrictions on foreign ownership of ...

WordPress database error: [Table './brazzil3_live/wp_wfHits' is marked as crashed and last (automatic?) repair failed]
SHOW FULL COLUMNS FROM `wp_wfHits`