The Brazilian press reacted this Tuesday with a combination of criticism and wonder for Brazil’s position with respect to the war in Ukraine and essentially for the strong interest in intervening in that conflict with the risk of losing neutrality.
The comment from the British magazine is repeated in the local media The Economist to which he alludes certain naivety of President Lula da Silva to try to influence global issues where the country has little or no influence.
The axis of criticism is what is considered as a alignment of Brazil with the positions of Russia and China, a perception that increased with the visit this Monday to the Planalto by Vladimir Putin’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, who underlined the “similar approaches” of the two countries in international affairs, i.e. war.
Lula argued that both Ukraine and Russia are equally responsible for the war. or globe In a text titled “naive or megalomaniac” he states that “after having taken a inappropriate position in favor of Russia in the war with Ukraine, Brazil has completely lost the possibility of participating in a group of countries in favor of peace”, Lula’s proposal for the ceasefire”.
“It makes no sense to say that the war is the fault of the invaded country, Ukraine,” he adds on his website. The reasoning seems to be based on that wisdom of a bar table, where Lula intends to settle the matter over a beer. When one doesn’t want to, two don’t quarrel, Lula reasons”.
He then adds, as illustrative background, a synthesis of other international experiences of previous Lula governments, including the failure to negotiate a nuclear deal between Iran and the United States or the failed attempt to bring Colombia and Venezuela closer together.
Folha de São Pauloin turn, warns of a “risky diplomacy” with Lula taking on “a unnecessary political cost siding with Beijing and Moscow”.
risky rhetoric
“The anti-American rhetoric adopted by Lula in Beijing, a natural journey given China’s status as Brazil’s largest trading partner, carries risks. The president spoke about the independence of the dollar and criticized the US warmongering in Ukraine and suggested territorial losses (Crimea) in exchange for peace. more seriously, declared that the victims are as guilty as the aggressors.” He argued in his editorial.
Also state frame a critical view. “Lula’s irresponsible talkativeness in China puts Brazil’s image is in danger as neutral in major conflicts, without the country gaining anything except Western distrust”.
He reproaches that he “turned Brazil into a tracker of Chinese interests solely and exclusively to distance himself from the United States, the old bad guy of the Brazilian left”.
“It is not known exactly what Brazil gained with these crazy gestures of Lula -he adds-, but we know what it is losing: its traditional image of a balanced country, neutral with respect to the main conflicts, but an intransigent defender of human rights”.
In its editorial, the newspaper then describes the idea expressed by the PT leader on the matter as embarrassing Ukraine’s responsibility in the war.
“Lula’s statements did not produce more than indignation and indifference and they have not improved Brazil’s position in intending to join the team of conflict mediators. Today, by the way, Brazil, thanks to Lula’s irresponsible talkativeness, is increasingly seen as unreliable, due to his apparent sympathy for Russians and Chinese,” he concludes.
Brasilia. Special delivery
Source: Clarin
Mary Ortiz is a seasoned journalist with a passion for world events. As a writer for News Rebeat, she brings a fresh perspective to the latest global happenings and provides in-depth coverage that offers a deeper understanding of the world around us.