Exaltation to Maduro annuls Lula’s agreement to resume relations between Brazil and Venezuela

The return of the union between Brazil It is Venezuela after four years of suspension came to prominence this week after the dictator Nicolas Maduro go to Brasilia and meet with the president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (PT). The resumption of relations drew even more attention after a speech by the PT member who classified the dictatorship in Venezuela as a “narrative issue”. The statement generated an uproar, and the Brazilian head of state was criticized by the president of Uruguay, Luis Alberto Lacalle Pou, and the president of Chile, Gabriel Boric, during the meeting of South American leaders held in the federal capital. Both said that it is not possible to close your eyes to what is happening in Venezuela. Since before the 2022 elections, which enshrined Lula, there has been concern about relations between the two countries, with the most pessimistic fearing that Brazil is heading towards “Venezuelization”. This exaltation of the PT to Maduro, received with pomp by the PT government, even puts Brazilian democracy in check. For the experts consulted by the Young pan, the resumption of relations is necessary. However, it is necessary to know how to differentiate between Venezuela and Maduro.

“From the moment we border with Venezuela, it is crucial that we resume relations because we have a series of issues to deal with and face: migration, health issues, environment, indigenous peoples, drug trafficking, trade, in addition, of course , of the debt that Brazil must recover from Venezuela”, said Regiane Nitsch Bressan, professor of international relations at Unifesp. “Brazil wants to resume relations to deal with all these issues, but it can also try to influence, in some way, the country so that democracy is recovered”, analyzes the specialist, adding that “isolation does not help at all”. “Venezuela is not just Maduro, there is a society. When we act like the United States, which directly affects the economy, the population suffers.” She also points out that, by isolating a country, we give room for someone to occupy that space, something that has already been happening: China is increasingly present in the region. Political scientist Leandro Consentino also welcomes the return of the union, but highlights the importance of knowing how to differentiate the country from its leader. “The president, in my opinion, is doing the right thing, in the sense of getting closer to Venezuela. We don’t have to break off diplomatic relations because the Venezuelan people deserve our respect and there is a history of cooperation. It’s another thing to align yourself ideologically with what Maduro, chavismo and an authoritarian regime represents”, ponders the expert.

Political scientist Rui Barbosa follows the same path: it is perfect that Brazil has diplomatic relations with Venezuela or any country in the world. “Eventually, we can give a ‘talk’ to this country with which we maintain relations. We can put some pressure on them when they violate some basic principles. However, acting as Lula did goes against his own discourse in defense of democracy. “Brazilian democracy itself can be weakened by the conduct of the president in the international context”. Carlo Cauti, professor of international relations at Ibmec-SP, points out that the problem is not rapprochement, but exaltation. “Lula’s speech was much more than a political error, it was a communication disaster that demonstrates the true nature of this government from an ideological point of view and creates disgust, not only in the population, but also in neighboring countries that look to the Brazil as a State that not only supports, but exalts a bloodthirsty dictatorship as if it were a democracy.” In other words, it is not uncommon to maintain a diplomatic relationship with a dictatorship, especially if it is on your border. Countries in Europe do business with China, for example, but none of the European leaders praise the Chinese government. On the contrary, they take advantage of the visit to highlight the human rights problems in that country. “It is exactly the opposite of what was done here in Brazil, when Lula said that Venezuela has a democracy. So, it becomes more than a political problem, it generates distrust of other partners, of other possible partner countries and creates a fear that Brazil may be moving towards Venezuela, in economics and politics”.

Regiane, despite knowing that Lula’s speech was very sensitive, expected something like this to happen. “If we are inviting Venezuela to negotiate in our country and resume dialogue, this beginning of conversation was necessary and positive. Obviously, Lula is aware of the conditions in the country, but we will not be able to exert any influence in Venezuela if there is no opportunity for dialogue”, opines the specialist, remembering that Maduro arrived in the country a day in advance, was received by the president and, unlike the other leaders who were here, there was a bilateral meeting. “Sand we have an enemy on our side, the ideal is to know what he is thinking, what he is going to do, predict the situation a little. Venezuela is not an enemy, but it has been breaking with democracy for a long time, with the rules of the democratic game.” However, these mistaken statements by the president could harm the country and bring distrust to international powers that no longer know “what whistle Brazil is playing”, as political scientist Leandro Consentino points out. Luila’s gestures, in his view, signal a “lack of commitment to democracies”, something that the government has always made a point of differentiating from the previous one. “In practice, he associates himself with authoritarian issues, as long as they are ideological signals close to his own.”

Venezuela in Brics and single currency?

One of the points between Lula and Maduro’s meeting was the desire to make Venezuela join the Brics, a totally impossible scenario in the eyes of specialists. According to them, there is no reason for this to happen, since the group brings together nations that are among the largest economies in the world or are very large in geographic terms. According to Cauti, Venezuela does not fit into any of the cases. Therefore, thinking about her ticket is something absurd. “It has no capacity for international projection, it would make no sense for the Brics to admit Venezuela. It is exactly something that China and other countries are signaling: there is no reason for this entry to happen.” Regiane Nitsch Bressan recalls that, when Venezuela entered Mercosur, it did not insist on complying with all the bloc’s rules, which led to its suspension. “What happens now is that, at this very effusive moment, people are talking about Venezuela joining the Brics, especially thinking about the parallel currency. But we know that these are difficult issues to be achieved in the short term”.

Experts also point out that this single currency advocated by President Lula is very difficult to implement because it requires harmonization of macroeconomic policies, that is, interest rate and exchange rate negotiations, explains Professor Regiane. In theory, it is a very positive project if done well, but it involves commitment from all the countries involved. In addition, in recent years, the countries of South America have remained far apart, which means that the single currency should not materialize in the next decade. Professor Cauti criticizes this will of the Brazilian government, going so far as to say that it shows that “whoever is occupying the Planalto at this moment does not have the slightest notion of basic economic issues, as a single currency is created when there are macroeconomic conditions that are convergent”. An example is the euro, taken off the ground after years of economic, monetary and commercial union. “A long process that led European countries to act on the same macroeconomic policies, with inflation at the same level, public spending at the same level, unemployment at the same level, etc.” In South America, this would be impossible because each country operates with different macroeconomic policies. “It doesn’t make any sense to propose something like that to the majority of the community because the basic conditions for it are lacking, so it is something that demonstrates that, in fact, we are in the hands of a person who has no idea what he is talking about. Implementing some kind of policy in this regard could be a catastrophe for the Brazilian economy.”