The month of October had the particularity of focusing regional and international political attention on the presidential elections in Brazil in its double instance.
Over and over again the question was who wins: Lula da Silva or Jair Bolsonaro. Expectations have multiplied and the comparison has sharpened. The doubts were probably due to the different attitudes of both candidates, one more aggressive and the other more compassionate.
The leader of the Workers’ Party made a big bet to win in the first round. With a pragmatic turn left to center to right. There they met the PSDB of Fernando Henrique Cardoso and his teammates. Declare as a mantra that on October 2nd “President Bolsonaro should go home”.
Many polls expressed the PT’s victory in the first round. Social networks have shown surprising militant activism. The difference was less than estimated, the 10 points were far from what was expected.
Having won the first round by a narrow margin, Lula has spread concern in the Petista Front about the ballot.
The support of Simone Tebet and Ciro Gomes was immediately agreed. The latter did so out of partisan discipline. He has not made any public statements in favor of the former president.
The parliament
The next question is how a country like Brazil is governed without parliamentary control. Despite losing in the first round, Bolsonarism will have majority control of the Houses. Vulgar politics has created a term, “physiologism”, a practice of smaller parties when the big ones rule. What can I get from the Executive in exchange for my parliamentary support.
It can be a ministry, a secretariat, a bank, a state company, etc. All kinds of chords are worked out there, and not all of them end well, as experience indicates, for example the Mensalao (kickbacks), it was the first corruption crisis of the Lula government that caused the fall of José Dirceu, its head of the Civil House.
Brazil’s future challenges are manifoldincluding maintaining growth after a decade of stagnation, reducing unemployment, reducing domestic spending, protecting the environment, reducing poverty, supporting and increasing agribusiness, promoting the competitiveness of industry , the fight against corruption and organized crime.
There is also a political challenge that is pacification in democracy after almost two years of radicalized rivalry following the electoral race in Brazil.
In the global picture, the election can be compared to what happens in other latitudes, both in the hemisphere and in the rest of the world.
autocracy vs. democracy
The debate between autocracy and democracy is also on the agenda in Brazil. Just observing the subjugation of the Capitol by Trumpism or the expulsion of Hu Jintao in full ceremony of the Chinese CP by order of Xi Jinping is a reflection of what is happening in the West and in the East, each with its own specificities.
The hiring of Giorgia Meloni in far-right Italy seeks to convey a moderate image with European harmony. The new left-wing presidents of Chile and Colombia try to do the same thing in our region, prematurely creating credibility problems.
Foreign policy
Speaking of international politics, both Lula and Bolsonaro act in the BRICS. The environmental issue is a profound challenge especially with the European community. Faced with the invasion of Ukraine, the statements were not entirely clear at first. They then corrected the route despite the fertilizer being supplied by Moscow.
Lula, as a campaign, expressed that the polarization between the two PT and PL parties is better than one-party systems like Cuba and China.
Brazil is not part of CELAC (the Community of States of Latin America and the Caribbean). In general, Brazilian diplomacy believes that Mexico is part of a North American association. Unasur was conceived by the Cardoso government and executed by the PT as a South American association.
Mercosur was a joint creation of the four partners and neighbors, which preceded the bilateral agreements between Argentina and Brazil. The agreement with the European Community is still pending: promoting it again would be a positive attitude.
Argentina’s relationship with Brazil must return to the path of growth and mutual trust, both politically and economically. This is the common challenge that both countries deserve for the benefit of their inhabitants. It is a time of opportunity and worth taking advantage of.
* Juan Pablo Lohlé was ambassador to Brazil, OAS and Director of CEPEI in Spain
Source: Clarin
