Blouin World: Hitting “reset”: Brazil’s Rousseff to visit Washington in June

"Hitting 'reset:' Brazil's Rousseff to visit Washington in June"

W. Alejandro Sanchez

Blouin Beat: World

May 6, 2015

Originally published: http://blogs.blouinnews.com/blouinbeatworld/2015/05/06/hitting-reset-brazils-rousseff-to-visit-washington-in-june/

On June 30, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff will visit Washington D.C. to meet with President Barack Obama, a highly anticipated meeting given the tensions between the two governments, and leaders themselves, over the past two years.

Historically speaking, relations between the U.S. and Brazil have never been strong. While an in-depth discussion on the history of Washington-Brasilia relations is outside the scope of this analysis, it suffices to say that both nations have strived to be regional leaders, with the U.S. obviously enjoying the upper hand. For example, during the 1964 coup in Brazil (which installed a military regime that ruled until 1985), the U.S. sent a carrier group, headed by the USS Forrestal, to monitor the situation and intervene in favor of the coup-plotters if necessary.

Relations took a turn for the worst in 2013, when NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the intelligence agency he worked for had spied on foreign leaders and entities. U.S. espionage operations on Iran or North Korea would hardly be shocking news, but Snowden revealed that the NSA had spied on U.S.-friendly leaders, including Rousseff. According to reports, the Brazilian head of state’s phone calls were monitored, “as well as Brazilian embassiesand … the state oil corporation, Petrobras.” This prompted severe tensions between Brasilia and Washington, resulting in Rousseff canceling a trip to Washington in October 2013. She also heavily critiqued U.S. intelligence operations during a speech at the United Nations in September of the same year.

However, bilateral relations may finally be set to improve. Rousseff was elected this past October 2014 for a second presidential term, coinciding with Obama’s remaining year and a half in office. Already, there have been several positive diplomatic initiatives such as Vice President Joe Biden’s presence at Rouseff’s inauguration in January. Moreover, the two heads of state met at the Summit of the Americas, which was held in Panama this April. The Summit is generally regarded as a major victory for Obama, as he was received well by his fellow hemispheric leaders and even met with Cuban President Raúl Castro in a historic face-to-face. The U.S. president also met with Rousseff, which has been interpreted as a strong step toward improving relations. Obama praised Brazil by declaring that “[it] is obviously not only one of the most important countries in the hemisphere, but is a global leader on a whole range of issues.”

Hence, Rousseff’s upcoming visit to Washington is important, as it will help maintain this diplomatic momentum. Nevertheless, the Brazilian leader probably does not expect to go back to Brasilia empty handed. She has declared her interest in bilateral cooperation in areas like “alternative energies, science, technology, and education.” Moreover, Brazil’s objective is to continue making headway in the U.S. weapons market following the purchase by the U.S. Air Force of some 20 Super Tucano military aircraft, produced by the Brazilian company EMBRAER.

Finally, there is the question of whether the trip will commence negotiations toward a visa-waiver regime. This option has been on the table for some time, but an agreement has not been reached. According to data from the Office of Travel and Tourism Industries, over 2.2 million Brazilian citizens entered the U.S. in 2014. This makes Brazil the country with the fifth most travelers coming to the U.S. in that year, behind only Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and Japan.

In other words, Brazilians want to continue coming to the U.S. — though how well the Brazilian middle class will be able to maintain its purchasing power in view of the country’s economic problems is another story.

The Brazilian head of state’s trip comes after a series of major (generally peaceful) protests throughout Brazil. Some of the most outspoken protesters demanded the president’s impeachment. Given these domestic woes — not to mention the recent Petrobras scandal and Rousseff’s alarmingly low popularity — she could benefit greatly from not only a diplomatically successful trip to Washington, but also a trade or tourism-related agreement that will broadly benefit her citizenry. It’s in Rousseff’s best interests to deliver something positive when she returns from Washington.

VOXXI: President Obama’s foreign policy vision does not include Latin America

"President Obama's Foreign Policy Vision does not include Latin America"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
VOXXI
May 29, 2014
Originally published:  http://voxxi.com/2014/05/29/foreign-policy-latin-america-obama/

President Barack Obama vision on foreign policy  –unsurprisingly–  does not looks like it will be focusing much of its attention on Latin America.

The May 28 foreign policy speech at West Point Academy by the head of state highlighted the perception of Latin Americanists, including myself, that the Obama administration will maintain cordial but unexceptional relations towards the rest of the Americas in the immediate future.

In the address, Obama explained his vision for U.S. foreign and defense policy for the last two years of his presidency.

Unfortunately, references to Latin America were few and far between.

POTUS (Briefly) mentions Latin America

One important section of President Obama’s address discussed how the United States has reduced military operations in Afghanistan, since “Al-Qaida’s leadership [in] Pakistan and Afghanistan has been decimated.” Moreover, Obama took a jab at Russia and China; arguing that their recent actions, in Ukraine and the South China Sea respectively, worry their neighbors.

In contrast, the only Latin American nation President Obama addressed by name was Brazil, when he mentioned the rising middle classes in Brazil and India and how their governments seek a greater presence in global forums. He also addressed Brazil and other U.S. allies in a discussion on cybersecurity. President Obama declared, “we are putting in place new restrictions on how America collects and uses intelligence — because we will have fewer partners […] if a perception takes hold that we’re conducting surveillance against ordinary citizens”

While this statement does not mention Brazil directly, it does reference Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, who has been one of the most outspoken critics of the 2013 revelations that the NSA spied on Washington’s allies. The Brazilian leader went so far as to cancel a trip to the U.S. in October to protest Washington’s conduct.

President Obama’s praise of Brazil’s middle class and his promise to place greater restrictions on intelligence operations can be interpreted as a message that Washington still wishes to strengthen bilateral relations with Brazil.

Finally, the U.S. leader renewed his pledge to close the controversial detention center in Guantanamo Bay, “because American values and legal traditions do not permit the indefinite detention of people beyond our borders.” Whether the U.S. leader can accomplish this within the next two years is debatable. For years he has promised to shut down the detention center but, so far, little progress has been made.

Hypothetically speaking, if the Democrats were to gain a significant majority in November’s mid-term elections President Obama could have enough support to (finally) stay true to his promise.  Nevertheless, a realist would argue that the U.S. President’s intention to shut down the Guantanamo Bay prison is an objective, alas not a priority

From 2014 to 2016

On a personal note, I must confess that I did not expect the U.S. leader to only vaguely refer to Latin America. Over the past months, I have discussed the various visits of senior officials to Latin American nations: President Obama’s trip to Mexico, Vice President Biden’s visit to Chile, and Secretary of Defense Hagel’s visit to Mexico and Guatemala, to name a few. However, as previously noted, Brazil was the only regional country referred to by name in the president’s speech.

The U.S. head of state did stress the importance of partnerships and coalitions. The U.S. continues to profit from having allies in Latin America but, rather than creating military coalitions to invade Iraq, these nations have focused on operations like combating drug trafficking. Washington provides financial and military assistance to regional allies – case in point Guatemala – and we should expect this trend to continue.

Interestingly, President Obama failed to mention drug trafficking and other security challenges facing the Western Hemisphere. The absence of such a discussion suggests that U.S. military aid to the region under the umbrella of Southern Command (the component of the U.S. military that oversees most of Latin America and the Caribbean) will remain scarce for the foreseeable future.

As a final point, on the issue of the possibility of military interventions, the President stated that “international opinion matters, but America should never ask permission to protect our people.”

While it would be natural for any country’s commander-in-chief to issue such a statement, the remark raises the question of future U.S. military initiatives in Latin America. The U.S. armed forces have recently carried out humanitarian missions in Central America; nevertheless, farther south the situation is grimmer.

Namely, when Secretary of State Kerry recently commented on the situation in Venezuela, VenezuelanForeign Affairs Minister Elias Jaua stated that Kerry should “mind his own business.” Over the past months (and years) the Venezuelan government has regularly accused Washington of trying to destabilize the country.

It will be interesting to see how President Obama’s speech is interpreted across Latin America, particularly by governments at odds with Washington.

Predictably, President Obama hardly mentioned Latin America in his speech on the future of U.S. foreign and defense policy. One could argue that this demonstrates that Washington does not see the region as a priority. If no other new initiatives a la JFK’s Alliance for Progress occur in the next two years, hopefully President Obama can at least be successful in shutting down the Guantanamo Bay prison. But even this seems unlikely.

Blouin Beat: World: Rousseff’s U.S. visit postponement savvy move

Rousseff's U.S.visit postponement savvy move
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Blouin Beat: World
September 18, 2013
Originally published: http://blogs.blouinnews.com/blouinbeatworld/2013/09/18/rousseffs-u-s-visit-postponement-savvy-move/

The NSA revelations continue to roil global affairs. News that the agency had carried out espionage operations against Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff (as well as her aides and Brazil’s biggest company, energy giant Petrobras) has prompted the South American head of state to announce that she will postpone her visit to Washington, originally scheduled for October 23.

As much the event may resemble an act of petulance or retribution, it is not — and it does not mean that the U.S. and Brazil are now on the outs for good. Postponing the trip to Washington was the best option in a bad scenario. Had the Brazilian leader travelled to the U.S. capital, met with President Obama and attended the planned state dinner, the NSA program would have been a massive elephant in the room. She would have faced lacerating public scrutiny when she returned if she had met with the U.S. leader and not raised (and protested) the NSA issue, as she would not have been able to do with any effectiveness unless she had gone to D.C. and thrown the oil deals and arms sales the visit was expected to center on back in Obama’s face — an impossibility.

Rousseff cannot, at now of all times, afford to look weak or to be perceived as not having defended Brazilian sovereignty sufficiently. She faces challenges on several fronts. In June, protests broke out across major cities in Brazil, fueled by popular rage over a spike in public transportation prices as well as massive expenditures for the upcoming 2014 FIFA World Cup and the 2016 Rio Summer Olympics — all of which helped ignite a simmering and widespread discontent about Brazil’s limping economy. Meanwhile, Rousseff’s cabinet was hit by the resignation in late August of Foreign Affairs Minister Antonio Patriota, after a bizarre incident involving a Bolivian senator who escaped to Brazil to avoid prosecution in La Paz with the aid of Brazilian diplomatic personnel.

All grim news for Rousseff as Brazil is facing general elections scheduled for October 2014, elections in which she will be running for a new presidential term. Now, it’s true that her approval ratings have started to recover from the dive they took after the protests started. A recent pollreported that 38% of Brazilians consider her tenure either “excellent” or “good,” up from 31% in July, when the protests were still ongoing. A September 12 analysis from Brazil’s Estadao showcases the hardening consensus among the nation’s political observers that this climb-back in popularity gives Rousseff a solid(ish) footing with which to face the elections — but also that it’s unlikely for her ever to recapture her previous levels of support. Hence every opportunity to look strong on behalf of her aggrieved constituents counts, and her now-kiboshed trip looks to have been an ideal opportunity there.

But, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Brazil and the U.S. countries had bilateral trade flows of $103 billion in 2011; as of 2012, the export of U.S. goods to Brazil totaled $43.7 billion and the import of goods from Brazil totaled $32.1 billion. Unsurprisingly, products of particular interest that were imported from Brazil to the U.S. were mineral fuels and crude oil. Data from Brazil’s Ministry of Development, Industry and External Commerce for the January-August 2013 period also shows a year-on-year increase in trade. Neither Rousseff, whose country needs all the trade revenue it can muster, nor Obama, stinging from the international rejection of his proposed Syria strike and doubtless looking for some good global-harmony news, will make a serious move to jeopardize that trade. Which likely makes the recent speculation on whether, as a way to “punish” the U.S. for the espionage operation, Brazil might chose not to purchase  36 type F-18 fighter jets from Boeing — reportedly worth $4 billion — just that: speculation. (Although it is important to stress here that other companies are competing for the coveted contract, like France’s Dassault Aviation and Sweden’s Saab.) Rousseff’s statement that she wants Brazilian internet access to be less dependent on U.S. servers — bold but murky in its technical specifics and expensive if implemented — is another gesture on her part aimed at helping her approval numbers in their incremental climb. As Mauricio Cantoro, a Brazilian professor of international affairs, tweeted on September 17, “Interesting decision by Dilma to postpone (but not cancel). It gives time for the crisis to calm down and leaves a door open for dialogue.” That “dialogue” will, it seems hard to deny, focus on energy deals and F-18s. So look for the realities of the marketplace to prevail here.

Quote: Univision: Why Ecuador Is a Good Asylum Destination for Edward Snowden

Why is Ecuador a Good Asylum Destination for Edward Snowden
By: Manuel Rueda
ABC Univision
June 24, 2013
Originally published: http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/ecuador-good-asylum-destination-edward-snowden/story?id=19476802#.UcjAj85Yu0z

He was recently called a traitor by Secretary of State John Kerry, and is now officially wanted in the U.S. for espionage. But Edward Snowden, the NSA leaker who flew from Hong Kong to Russia over the weekend, probably made a good move for himself on Sunday, by asking for asylum in Ecuador.

Snowden's asylum request was read out on Monday morning by Ecuador's foreign minister Ricardo Patino. In the letter, Snowden asks the Ecuadorean government to consider granting him political asylum because he is being persecuted in the U.S. for using his right to free speech to reveal information on government abuses. He also says that chances of a fair trial are slim in the U.S., where he may be charged with treason and is likely to face life in prison or the death penalty.

Patiño explained that the asylum request was currently "under review." But the foreign minister also made some "reflections" on this case, which will sound like music to Snowden's ears.

"The government of Ecuador puts principles above [political and commercial] interests," Patiño said. "In this case human rights principles."

"We would have to ask ourselves who has betrayed who, [in the Snowden case]" Patiño continued. "Did [Snowden] betray the interests of humanity, or did he betray the interests of certain political elites, in a certain country."

These statements suggest that Snowden will probably get asylum in Ecuador. An interesting twist of fate if you consider that this whistleblower had initially said that he would seek refuge in Iceland, because of its strong internet freedom laws.

But why did Snowden go for Ecuador, and not some other country that would happily host a CIA nemesis? Consider this:

1. Ecuador is already protecting Julian Assange

The Wikileaks founder has been holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for a year, avoiding British officials who want to extradite him to Sweden. Assange has not been allowed to head to Ecuador, which granted him asylum last year on humanitarian grounds because British officials will not allow him to leave the embassy without arresting him.

Since Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy last summer however, the South American nation has not buckled to pressure from British officials who say that they are obliged to arrest Assange and send him to Sweden where he faces sexual assault charges. In fact, Ecuador's foreign minister recently visited London to present the British government with a series of legal arguments that would force the British to allow Assange to board a plane to Ecuador. The UK did not budge, but Ecuador proved that it is quite a plucky nation when it comes to defending high-profile refugees.

2. Ecuador has weak extradition treaties with the U.S.

Like many countries in the western hemisphere, Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the U.S. But as BBC Mundo notes, the treaty between Ecuador and the U.S. excludes crimes that are committed with "political motifs." As long as Snowden can prove that he broke his oath of secrecy for political reasons instead of, say, for personal profit, he will not be eligible for extradition to the U.S.

3. The Government of Ecuador profits politically from having Snowden around

Unlike Iceland, the Ecuadorean government has a proven record of saying no to U.S interests, so it is much more likely to tell the U.S. government to take a hike when it asks for Snowden's extradition.

President Rafael Correa has backed environmental lawsuits, against Chevron for example, that accuse the U.S. company of polluting large swathes of the Amazon rainforest. In 2009, Correa also refused to renew the U.S. military's lease on an airforce base in the Pacific port of Manta despite requests by U.S. diplomats to renew the lease, as the base was being used for anti-narcotics flights.

Alex Sanchez, an international security analyst at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs says that providing asylum to Snowden wins political points for Ecuador's leftist president.

"Correa wants international recognition, [as a defender of human rights]," Sanchez said. "This also allows him to show [domestically] that he is not a lackey of the U.S. like previous presidents of Ecuador."

The decision to grant asylum to Snowden would, of course, generate diplomatic tensions between Ecuador and the U.S. But Sanchez said that such tensions might not be too risky for Ecuador.

Sanchez noted that Venezuela is still allowed to sell oil to U.S. refineries, for example, even while its government blasts out anti-U.S. rhetoric in international forums and accuses U.S. embassy personnel of being part of plots to "destabilize" that country. If the U.S. government fails to take any reprisals for such matters, Ecuador is probably figuring that there will be few reprisals from the U.S. over Snowden's asylum claim, Sanchez said.

4. President Correa will be around for a while

From Snowdens perspective, the political situation in Ecuador provides another important bonus. President Correa was just re-elected this year and has four years left in his current term. If Correa pushes for a law that allows for an unlimited number of re-elections like Chavez did in Venezuela, he could also be around for more than that.

Snowden will probably be safe in Ecuador while Correa is at the helm. Though as Foreign Policy magazine notes, he will have to come up with a long-term strategy to ward off legal challenges, and even with a way to make a living for himself, after the Ecuadorean government tires of paying for his bills.
.