The importance of presidential leadership for Brazilian foreign policy (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Possibilities and Perils of Presidential Diplomacy: Lessons from the Lula Years in Brazil
The Lula years emerge as notable because they mark one of larger shifts in the Brazilian foreign policy-making process since the Baron of Rio Branco established a technocratic foreign ministry in 1902. On a more conceptual level the Lula brand of presidential diplomacy is interesting because its changing nature over the last eight years highlights the possibilities and perils of this diplomatic device, with the last year of Lula’s international presence perhaps proving the most challenging for Itamaraty. To flesh these ideas out this chapter will begin with a brief review of the concept of presidential diplomacy. Attention will then be turned to the policy-making changes that Lula’s government brought to Brazil’s international engagement and the manner in which presidential diplomacy drove these changes and was deployed as a tactic to advance the Worker’s Party foreign policy. The possibilities and perils of presidential diplomacy will then be outlined through reference to Lula’s activities. Finally, the chapter concludes by arguing that the Lulista version of presidential diplomacy has opened unproven, but potentially fruitful future possibilities for Brazil in the global South. Central to this is the proposition that the Lula presidency has precipitated a democratization of Brazilian foreign policy that has eroded the hegemony of Itamaraty and created the space for wider intra-governmental and societal debate about Brazil’s international relations.
The Politics of Brazilian Foreign Policy and Its Analytical Challenges
Foreign Policy Analysis, 2016
Starting from the perspective that foreign policy is a public policy, this article discusses the conceptual and political implications of the new configuration of Brazilian foreign policy. Therefore, we abandon its automatic association with the cruder versions of realism and bring it to the field of politics, thus recognizing that its formulation and implementation fall into the dynamics of governmental choices which, in turn, stem from negotiations within coalitions, bargaining, disputes, and agreements between representatives of diverse interests. As a result, we remove foreign policy from a condition linked to inertial and supposedly self-evident and/or permanent national interests (which would be protected from injunctions of cyclical nature related to partisan politics) and undress it of features generally attributed to so-called state policies. Finally, we suggest ways for an innovative research agenda on the role of diplomatic agency, political institutions, and nonstate actors in Brazil's foreign policy. It used to be common among foreign policy analysts both from academia and from the media to ascribe the sources of Brazilian foreign policy mainly to a single agency. The main responsibility for Brazilian foreign policy making was generally attributed to either an individual (generally, the President or the Foreign Minister) or an institution (the Foreign Ministry, best known as Itamaraty). The reasons for this are well known: On the one hand, Brazilian presidentialism concentrates too much agency in the president's hands (Abranches 1988), giving him/her, when particularly attentive to foreign policy issues, a great latitude for action. On the other hand, the long-standing professionalism of Brazilian
The democratic regime and the changes in Brazilian foreign policy towards South America
Brazilian Political Science Review
In recent times the interaction between democracy and foreign policy has begun to be studied and theorized in Brazil. The link between politics and foreign policy is not new, however, the focus of this article is on the shifts that have taken place since t he beginning of the democratic regime. Its aim is to identify changes in Brazilian foreign policy based on ideas and political preferences due to alternation of governments; and deconstruct the idea that Brazilian foreign policy is a state policy, limited to superficial changes. Following a discussion of the recent literature about changes in foreign policy, the article maps the changes that occurred between 1990 and 2003 and analyses Brazilian foreign policy behavior towards South America during the Worker's Party administrations. Based on a comparative perspective, it examines the changes in Brazilian behavior toward the region during the Temer administration. This was the area where foreign policy experienced strongest transformations. Finally, the article briefly points out the changes that occurred in foreign policy towards South America at the beginning of Bolsonaro's administration. The methodology, especially in relation to the Temer and Bolsonaro administrations, uses press material and interviews with foreign policymakers.
Brazilian Political Science Review, 2013
In this article, I intended to develop an analytical schema to analyze moments of redirection in Brazilian Foreign Policy. The schema encompasses the following logic: sources from national and international contexts may influence the domestic political arena, leading to the opening of a policy window and the rupture of stabilizers, which together may form a scenario prone to reform in terms of foreign guidelines. In this context, the decision makers may opt to promote a foreign policy change (FPC). To apply this model, we chose two administrations that are substantially different as to their international system and their political scope, even though both are considered by the Brazilian foreign policy literature as restructuration periods. By studying these administration's foreign policies, we tested the utility of this model and accomplished a comparative analysis seeking similarities amongst these chancing processes.
Latin American Politics and Society, 2011
Brazilian diplomats and academics alike have long regarded regional leadership as a springboard to global recognition. Yet Brazil’s foreign policy has not translated the country’s structural and instrumental resources into effective regional leadership. Brazil’s potential followers have not aligned with its main goals, such as a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and Directorship-General of the World Trade Organization; some have even challenged its regional influence. Nevertheless, Brazil has been recognized as an emergent global power. This article analyzes the growing mismatch between the regional and global performance of Brazilian foreign policy and shows how both theoretical expectations and policy planning were “luckily foiled” by unforeseen developments. It argues that because of regional power rivalries and a relative paucity of resources, Brazil is likely to consolidate itself as a middle global power before gaining acceptance as a leader in its region.
The Long March Towards the Democratization of Brazilian Foreign Policy
2014
Brazilian foreign policy is undergoing a progressive, yet still modest, process of transformation. The country’s social and economic transformations and intense social pressure in order to open-up the black box of policy making have made the democratization of foreign policy not just inevitable, but also essential for Brazil’s aspirations for prominence on the world stage.
Can Brazil Lead? The Breakdown of Brazilian Foreign Policy and What it Means for the Region
For the last 20 years Brazil pursued an activist foreign policy both in relation to its own region and the wider world. Yet, in recent years, many Brazil's initiatives have stalled or collapsed. The argument put forward is that this inertia is largely due to the almost total absence of Brazilian political leadership, especially in South America. Yet, such leadership is urgently needed in the face of multiple regional and international challenges, with the political and economic crisis serving here as an illustrative case study. Particular attention here will also be paid to the role of UNASUR in this crisis. Using the conceptual framework of Complexity and Human System Dynamics (HSD), it will be argued that Brazil cannot assume the leadership role that is needed because its foreign policy is marked by a lack of overarching objective, muddled foreign policy execution and a lack of clear channels through which to formulate such a coherent policy which has the chance to achieve its strategic objectives. The article will propose ways for Brazil to redefine its foreign policy approach and objectives to become the dynamic leader the region needs.
The Politics of Brazilian Foreign Policy
Oxford Bibliographies - International Relations, 2020
From November 1902 through February 1912, four presidents governed Brazil. Throughout all this period, though, only one person headed the foreign ministry: José Maria da Silva Paranhos Jr., alias Baron of Rio Branco (20 April 1845–10 February 1912). This political wonder and diplomatic giant was to shape Brazil’s international doctrine and diplomatic traditions for the following century. His major achievement was to peacefully solve all of Brazil’s border disputes with its South American neighbors. Founded in 1945, Brazil’s prestigious diplomatic school carries his name, Instituto Rio Branco, and, since the early 2000s, Brazilian foreign policy has become the largest subfield of international relations in university departments across the country. Indeed, Brazilian foreign policy is to Brazilian academia what American politics is to US academia, namely, a singular phenomenon that has taken over a general field. In contrast with the United States, most in-depth research from about 1998 to 2010 came from foreign-based scholars; however, since then a large cadre of mostly young academics in Brazil have seized the agenda. Unlike the pre-2000 period, the orientation has been toward public policy rather than diplomatic history. That the top Brazilian journals of international relations are now published in English rather than Portuguese attests to the increasing internationalization of the field.
Book Review “Brazilian Foreign Policy after the Cold War” University Press of Florida. Sean Burges
Ante Portas - Studia nad bezpieczeństwem, 2019
In this work, the author Sean Burges analyzes the main achievements of Brazilian foreign policy between 1992 and 2002. The choice of such a decade to be analyzed, according to the author, refers to the ten years (hitherto) of greatest achievements in Brazil. This decade in question is also called "The Decade of Fernando Henrique Cardoso". He was a foreign minister from 1992-1993, finance minister from 1993-1994, and president of Brazil from 1995-2002. The Canadian scholar tries to understand "how" and "why" Brazil carving its space into the international scenario as a consensual hegemony. Burges does that examining official documents and from several interviews with Brazilian diplomats. And this method can be understood as his first mistake, since diplomats and official documents only disclosure what the Brazilian government wants to show. Meaning: not necessarily the "reality". After the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union Burges, the international scenario was going through a complicated phase of fast pace changings and growing in internationalization. Facing new challenges Burges claims the Brazilian government embarked on a Foreign Policy in a "quiet style of leadership on South America". Still, Brazilian diplomacy was seeking to keep the country's autonomy in the international sphere without foreign interference. According to this author, during Fernando Henrique Cardoso's "decade" Brazilian foreign policy was seeking this so-called "quiet leadership" in South America because being explicit would incur costs. Here is one more problem in his analysis, Brazil is very important to regional stability. However, during the two mandates of Cardoso, the main goal of the country's foreign policy wasn't to have leadership in the region. It's important, but it was clear that at that moment Brazilian foreign policy was directed towards carving a niche among the great powers, not among other countries of the Global South. At the beginning of the 1990s, Brazil was suffering from a huge economic crisis. Said that the country couldn't afford any kind of leadership in the