Brazil: history, geography, and culture

Brazil, the largest country in South America, occupying almost half of the continent, is one of the world's largest and most populous countries. Despite a checkered history of colonization, slavery, dictatorship, economic, and political problems, the country has emerged as an important regional power in Latin America and has the potential of becoming a global economic and political powerhouse. This paper presents an analysis of the current political and economic situation in Brazil by focusing on its current President's background and ideology and his administration's policies on economic alliances, globalization, relations with the United States, and the environment.

President Lula's Background and Political Ideology

Luis Inacio Lula da Silva (popularly known as just "Lula") was born on 27 October 1945, in a poor working class family. He started working in factories at a young age as a mechanic and lathe operator and became involved in trade union activities in the late 1960s. He was elected the Head of the Metallurgists' Trade Union in 1975 and became a strike leader and a symbol of opposition to the military dictatorship in the 1970s and early 1980s. Lula founded the Workers Party (PT) in 1980 and contested as his party's candidate in three unsuccesful bids for the Presidency in 1989, 1994 and 1998, on a largely anti-capitalist platform ("Biography").

By the late 1990s, Lula had softened his radical politics, moving to the center of the political spectrum and mending his fences with the Brazilian business community that had reacted negatively to his previous candidacy due to his radical anti-capitalist rhetoric. His choice of industrialist Jose Alencar of the centre-right Liberal Party as his runing mate further established his credentials as a moderate and he was elected as President of the Federative Republic of Brazil in his fourth attempt at the Presidency in October 2002 by a clear margin ("Leftist Lula wins Brazil election").

Election Campaign Platform & Ideology of Lula's Administration

Lula's election campaign in the 2002 elections was based on a platform of opposition to 8 years of neo-liberal policies of the Cordoso government. For over a decade, the United States had encouraged economic policy reforms in Latin America and promoted privatization and the liberalization of trade, finance, capital market liberalization, foreign direct investment, deregulation, and fiscal discipline. By the late 1990s, however, these reforms had started to unravel. Severe economic crisis and political instability had hit a number of countries, including Argentina. The contagion had also been felt in Brazil where the problems of inequality, poverty and unemployment remained unsolved or even worsened (Ribando, 3-4).

The Workers Party promised to reverse the neo-liberal policies and increase state investment in education, health care, and agriculture, besides carrying out land reforms. At the same time, Lula diluted his Socialist agenda by promising to maintain the fiscal and monetary policies associated with Brazil's standing International Monetary Fund (IMF) agreements. After coming to power in January 2003, President Lula surprised many people by maintaining a conservative fiscal policy, surpassed the IMF's fiscal and monetary targets, and even paid off its entire IMF debt of $15.5 billion by end of 2005 -- two years ahead of schedule ("Brazil to Pay off..."). He also enacted social security and tax reforms, and passed a law in 2004 to allow more private investment in public infrastructure projects. After stabilizing the economy and shoring up investor confidence in his first year in power, Lula turned to his agenda of 'social reforms,' by introducing a Fome Zero (Zero Hunger) program aimed at ending hunger by introducing a number of measures including creating cisterns in Brazil's semi-arid regions, strengthening family agriculture, and implementing the Bolsa Familia (Family Grant) program, which provided monthly stipends to 11.1 million poor Brazilian families in exchange for compulsory school attendance for all school-age children. The program has been credited with poverty reduction although its success was limited by bureaucratic red-tape and charges of corruption (Ribando, 4). On the whole, therefore, Lula's government has followed a centrist policy of social welfare and fiscal restraint.

Policies on Globalization and the "Washington Consensus"

Although the Brazilian government under Lula has followed a policy of pragmatism in foreign relations and international free market trade, it has been equally assertive in opposing those aspects of globalization that adversely affects Brazil's and the developing world's interests. For example, Brazil was instrumental in the collapse of the World Trade Organization (WTO) talks in September 2003 at Cancun, Mexico when Lula led a walkout by the developing countries over the issue of agricultural subsidies by the G8 nations. Under Brazil's lead, the developing nations, refused to negotiate new foreign-investment rules until powers like the U.S. And the European Union promised to cut the lavish agriculture subsidies that effectively keep developing-world farmers out of lucrative markets (Padgett). Lula has similarly been opposed to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) trade pact for the North and South America that the United States wants to promote. Instead, Brazil has supported regional trade pacts such as Mercosul and the South American Community of Nations, which envisage not only a free-trade area within the South American region but a common market like the European Union. It has also promoted increased trade with the Asian and African countries and has refused to follow the "Washington Consensus" and the policy of neo-liberalism.

Relations with the United States

The initial apprehensions of the United States about Lula as a leftist radical who would form a Latin American 'axis of evil' with the Communist leaders of Cuba and Venezuela have not come to pass. Lula has continued to pursue a pragmatic foreign policy and maintained friendly relations with the United States by co-operating with it on specific issues without seeking an all-encompassing privileged relationship (Ribando, 11).

Although the two countries have their differences over trade issues as explained above, they agree on the importance of maintaining regional stability and security, fighting terrorism, and combating narcotics, arms, and human trafficking. The two countries are also seeking to promote an 'energy partnership' that seeks to promote the production and use of ethanol as an alternative to fossil fuels.