SUBJECT:
NORTHEAST BRAZIL: LANDLESS MOVEMENT TRIES TO RE-INVENT ITSELF SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED, NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION
¶1. (SBU) Summary: Just as in southern Brazil (reftel), the Landless Rural Workers Movement (MST), and their fellow travelers in the always-disadvantaged northeast region, seem to be changing tactics; with confrontation less appealing, they appear to be re-positioning themselves and trying to get on the government "gravy train." Membership has been affected by President Lula's "Bolsa Familia" program of cash transfers to the poor. Unable to seize any more "unproductive" farms, as agro-industry increases production, the land reform activists opt for reinventing themselves as advocates for small-scale rural development and alternative energy, according to sources in the Catholic Church. End Summary
¶2. (SBU) Father Herminio Canova, who heads the northeast region's Pastoral Land Commission (CPT) for the Catholic Church's National Conference of Brazilian Bishops (CNBB), met with the principal officer in Recife May 21. He and one of the CPT lawyers gave an overview of how the land reform movement was changing. Father Herminio had recently been on a march to Brasilia, then visited the conflict area along the Brazil-Venezuela border in Roraima, where clashes took place between indigenous people and rice farmers. The priest said the CPT was launching a national campaign to limit the size of large land-holdings "to defend agrarian reform, territorial and food sovereignty." He explained that the long-standing campaign to seize and divide up "unproductive" farms had reached a dead end; in the current economy, agro-industry was using most land that could increase production. So, according to Father Herminio, the landless movement is now going to focus on consolidation of the lands already seized, demanding faster loans for the members and encouraging them to get involved with alternative forms of energy, mainly bio-fuels.
¶3. (U) The ethanol boom has caught the attention of the settlers in the agrarian reform farms. They are now looking for crops that can be turned into fuel or other ways to produce energy with small-scale technologies. For the CPT, which opposes large scale hydro-electric dams, as well as the "near servitude" conditions of migrant workers on the sugar plantations, only renewable energy from small-scale projects should be pursued in order to preserve the environment and the Amazon region. Father Herminio said settlers in the land along the Sao Francisco River were interested in working with Petrobras to experiment on bio-fuel production. This irrigated area of agro-industry near Petrolina also has large concentrations of the landless movement settlements.
¶4. (SBU) The CPT leader explained that in the northeast region, there are five main land reform groups - the MST, a splinter group known as the MLST, two federations of rural workers - FETRAPE and FETRAF-plus the "Central Syndicate" and nine smaller groups involved in pressuring the government to redistribute land. During this year's "Red April" land invasions, groups from this coalition invaded 14 farms across Pernambuco state. But according to the CPT, the number of invasions and the number of families taking part is declining, partly as a result of President Lula's "Bolsa Familia - which provides cash payments to mothers who vaccinate their children and keep them in school. Father Herminio said the key was giving the money to women, instead of men, thus ensuring it was spent on food. He said, "One woman told me, `I struggle at odd jobs, anything to earn the money that feeds my three children for 15 days, but it's President Lula who pays for the next 15.' That's how people see Bolsa Familia."
¶5. (SBU) The priest said that women in the landless movement are receiving the Bolsa Familia payments even as they are squatting on land, waiting for the legal ownership that may take years to obtain. But families already receiving "Bolsa Familia" have little incentive to take the risks involved in joining a new occupation of land with no immediate hope for better living conditions.
¶6. (SBU) Critics of the landless movement, including one school administrator who met with the consular staff and state law enforcement officers, say the occupations are a shake-down scheme. They say that the occupations in Red April get publicity, then the squatters negotiate certain sums or program concessions to go elsewhere. These critics point to the fact that those occupying contested land rarely plant any crops --not even subsistence beans or manioc which grows everywhere-around their hovels.
RECIFE
¶7. (SBU) Father Herminio's view of the political situation reflects frustration with the slow pace of legalizing land claims and obtaining credit for farmers. He says the Lula government and Pernambuco Governor Eduardo Campos, a Lula ally, may talk about supporting the rural poor, but they don't "have control." He believes that, despite the lack of resources and credit, the settlers must become more productive. Violence in response to the land invaders may have lessened, the priest said, but the CPT reported murders resulting from land conflicts in 14 states last year, instead of just eight the previous year.
¶8. (SBU) "Slave labor" --or entrapment into conditions of near servitude on remote ranches-- is still a major concern for the CPT. Father Herminio was particularly adamant about conditions for sugar cane workers on ethanol plantations in the south and west. He has heard complaints from Pernambuco cane cutters, rounded up when the harvest season ends here and taken south, that they work in inhumane conditions. This is the dark side of ethanol for the priest, who would still like to see the small farmers and squatters producing their own bio-fuel in a program sponsored by the government.
¶9. (SBU) Comment: Brazil's agro-industry continues to expand, and the disparities between the rich and poor remain. While the MST and its offspring operate on the edges of the economy, denouncing large landowners in the name of oppressed, they have lost steam. They expected more support from President Lula, but they can't criticize him because he's too popular with their constituency thanks to his Bolsa Familia program. So the game is played behind the scenes; there are invasions to gain bargaining chips, then some credits or grants to partners of the movement that ensure the peace. Having reached this stalemate, the movement seems to be consolidating their holdings and looking for more popular causes to champion -such as defending the environment. This cable was coordinated with Embassy Brasilia.
PAGE
Labels: BRAZIL, LAND REFORM, LULA DA SILVA
Read more...
What do these people really believe in?
By The Post
Mon 12 July 2010, 04:00 CAT
THE very essence of leadership is that you have to have vision. You can’t blow an uncertain trumpet. And accordingly, leaders must invoke an alchemy of great vision. The best vision is inside. To think is easy. To act is hard. But the hardest thing in the world is to act in accordance with your thinking.
We say all this in light of what Rupiah Banda said last Thursday about a person without education who is focused being able to lead a country. Rupiah went to great length explaining this point in praise of visiting Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
And he said: “The problem with some of us, especially those of us who were colonised and educated by the British, is that we think education is everything. This man President Lula never went to university and yet he learnt a lot of things through life. What this is teaching us is that you can grow big if you are focused. This President Lula is the only president without a university degree and yet he has built more universities than any other president. This man here is even building a university that will have 40 per cent of students coming from Africa.”
This was what Rupiah said. It is difficult to believe that these words actually came from Rupiah’s mouth. We say this because not very long ago, Rupiah’s political party and government vigorously pushed through the National Constitution Commission a clause requiring a presidential candidate to have a university degree.
Many people told them that this was not necessary and gave many reasons to justify their position. But they were not ready to listen to any reason from anyone no matter how sound it might have been. Their focus was only on one thing: to find a way of stopping Michael Sata, whom they believed did not possess a university degree, from contesting next year’s presidential elections. This is all that preoccupied their minds, and nothing else.
Opportunists from some opposition parties that thought this would increase their chances in next year’s elections also joined Rupiah’s party and government in this criminal connivance to stop Sata from contesting next year’s elections. Here, there was no issue of principle. It was all about political expedience. And this is how reckless we can be with our lives and our future – constructing a constitution on the basis of political expedience and not principles. Coming up with a constitutional clause aimed at only one person.
We say this because if Rupiah truly believed that a person without a university degree is not fit to lead a country as president, he wouldn’t have said all those things he said about Lula. Sometimes it’s difficult to really know what our politicians believe in because in one breath they say one thing, and in another they do the opposite.
It is really difficult to know what our politicians stand for because they change so quickly, probably quicker than a chameleon changes its colours. It is true that those who stand for nothing fall for anything – they can be made to support anything and to denounce anything with ease. And how can such politicians be of real influence to our people? We ask this question because example is not the main thing in influencing others; it is the only thing. You can’t lead anyone else further than you have gone yourself. Leadership is practiced not so much in words as in attitude and in actions.
José Marti, an outstanding hero and forerunner of Cuba’s liberation, said that “Doing is the best way of saying.” Truly, living is the best way of believing. Our way of life is the result of what we believe.
To remind Rupiah about all this is insulting him, is expressing hatred towards him and his government. But leaders, and indeed all of us, should accept to live with the consequences of everything we say. Truth, wisdom and good sense – these are worth paying for, but too valuable for anyone to sell.
What we are seeing today in our country is what happens in a nation when principles, values and standards are lost; when leaders become little demigods who are not answerable to anyone but only to their inner demons.
As we have stated before, the individual does best in a strong and decent community of people with principles, standards, common aims and values. We need politics that are rooted in a straightforward view of society.
We sometimes wonder how future generations will judge the decisions that are being made in our country today.
There’s need for our politicians to know that this country will not be a good place for any of us to live in unless it is a good place for all of us to live in.
There’s need for Rupiah, in the interest of accountability and honesty, to explain to the Zambian people why he is finding it acceptable and suitable for Brazil, such a big, complex and advanced country to have a president without a degree and find the same to be unacceptable for a relatively small and simple country like Zambia. Probably the only honest explanation Rupiah can give is that Lula is not challenging him for the Zambian presidency in next year’s election. This is not the way to lead the country; this is not the way to make laws for a country. This is abuse of power. This is corruption. This is selfishness that shouldn’t be allowed in our country.
It’s clear that this whole clause about a university degree for a presidential candidate is premised on greed, selfishness and total lack of respect for others. But we know that the selfish and dishonest man has in himself his own punishment. Selfishness and dishonesty kills more than the sword. The selfish and dishonest man realises that he is a mean and trivial person who doesn’t deserve public trust for a long time. He will never have high and noble aspirations.
The consequences of this type of leadership are blindness of mind, inconstancy and heedlessness. It’s always important to remember that there’s no vice that can become a virtue no matter how much propaganda we cover it with – vice is not virtue as light is not darkness.
Labels: CONSTITUTION, LULA DA SILVA, NCC, PRESIDENCY, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
Mpombo questions Philips’ 25m euro deal with govt
By Patson Chilemba
Mon 12 July 2010, 04:00 CAT
GEORGE Mpombo yesterday questioned the government’s decision to award Philips a 25 million euro contract to cover the upgrade and maintenance of equipment in 71 government hospitals nationwide.
And Mpombo described President Rupiah Banda’s statement to Brazilian President Inacio Luiz Lula da Silva that even someone who was not educated but focused could become President as hypocrisy of the worst kind.
Commenting on the signing of the five-year contract between Philips and the Ministry of Health, Mpombo, who is Kafulafuta MMD member of parliament and former defence minister, challenged the government to explain the procurement procedures used in awarding Philips the contract.
“It has got strong connection to State House. So we would want to know the procurement system, was it followed? Was it single-sourcing?” Mpombo asked. “We want to challenge them; tell us whether the procedures were followed, or was it single-sourcing?”
Mpombo said the deal was suspect.
Mpombo said such happenings usually led to the loss of public confidence in those who governed the country.
The renewed collaboration between Philips and the Ministry of Health was announced at the kick-off of the Lusaka leg of Philips’ Cairo-to-Cape Town tour, which ends on July 20.
During a Philips media roundtable at Pamodzi Hotel on June 15, 2010, Philips healthcare senior director JJ van Dongen said the agreement would include the training and education of healthcare workers on advanced medical treatments using modern technologies to improve the quality of care.
JJ van Dongen said the 25 million Euro project included the installation and maintenance of diagnostic imaging equipment including mobile X-ray, fluoroscopy, ultrasound scanners, operating theatres and dental treatment systems.
And on President Banda’s statement to President Lula that even someone who was not educated but focused could lead the country, Mpombo said that was hypocrisy of the worst kind.
Mpombo said the attempts to introduce the degree clause in the Constitution were meant to bar some aspirants from vying for the Republican presidency.
“Why did he sponsor that particular arrangement and lobbied so heavily? The government lobbied so heavily to have that provision adopted. So in my view it has exposed the real intentions,” Mpombo said. “He just said that to please Lula. He just wanted to gain some mileage out of it. In Brazil, the visit to Zambia was billed as a private visit. Here in Zambia, he said it’s a state visit. The man was just passing, just stopping by. His major trip was to go to South Africa and just stop over here. But you could see the excitement in Mr Banda.”
On Thursday, President Banda said even without education, a person who is focused could succeed in leading a country.
During the Zambia-Brazil Business Forum at Pamodzi Hotel in Lusaka, President Banda praised President Lula for ascending to the Presidency despite his humble education.
“The problem with some of us, especially those of us who were colonised and educated by the British, is that we think education is everything,” President Banda said. “This man President Lula never went to university and yet he learnt a lot of things through life. What this is teaching us is that you can grow big if you are focused. This Lula is the only President without a university degree and yet he has built more universities than any other President.”
On tourism minister Catherine Namugala’s statement that Zambian politics were too dirty, especially for women, Mpombo said politics were not a game for the feeble-minded but an assessment of people’s capacities.
“It is not true that women shun politics because of what Catherine is talking about. It is not true. You can see the women in UPND, PF members in Lusaka and also elsewhere. So it is a negative statement which must be treated with the contempt it deserves,” he said.
Mpombo said some women should blame themselves over the attacks they received.
He cited education minister Dora Siliya’s conduct on the privatisation of Zamtel.
Mpombo said people who were attacking President Banda were not after his blood, but that they were doing so because he was a servant of the people, who was expected to do right.
“Catherine must use her closeness to Rupiah Banda even to advise him on his frequent foreign trips because you see the President is becoming adventurous as Marco Pollo was,” Mpombo said. “Rupiah Banda has got it all wrong. The work of the President is not to personally go and woo investors, you have ministers of commerce, and you have ambassadors.”
Mpombo bemoaned President Banda’s “mis-governance.”
“Recently, he went with businessmen to Mfuwe to talk about tourism, and he was accompanied by Catherine Namugala, no civil servant was there; and we don’t know who was paying accommodation for those foreigners who came. If there is a problem, which side do you think Rupiah Banda will take?” Mpombo asked. “That is a conflict of interest. There is no way the President is going to Mfuwe with business colleagues. That is the work of the permanent secretaries, the minister. But when the President is getting physically involved, then you have a problem.”
On Saturday, Namugala said Zambian politics were dirty, especially for women.
“Yes, that also character assassination you know, when you talk about political debate, I expect that a country like Zambia will be talking about ‘how do we educate more of our people? How do we ensure poverty levels go down? How do we ensure that the natural resources are not depleted, the wealth of the country remains in the hands of the local people?’” Namugala said.
“Those are the issues one expects political leadership to be addressing. Not to be talking about an individual, ‘how many wives they have for instance. Who said they are stupid? Who said that they don’t have a degree?’ You know, those things that are irrelevant, that don’t add value to the lives of a person in Muyombe.”
Labels: GEORGE MPOMBO, LULA DA SILVA
Read more...
Sata tells Rupiah to emulate Lula’s serious mindedness
By Patson Chilemba
Sat 10 July 2010, 04:00 CAT
PATRIOTIC Front (PF) president Michael Sata yesterday asked President Rupiah Banda to emulate the serious mindedness of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
Commenting on President Lula’s visit to Zambia which lasted less than a 24 hours, Sata said President Lula was not a tourist like President Banda, but a serious minded leader who came to talk about issues and immediately left.
He said President Lula was not like President Banda who spent more than a week on an official state visit to China.
“He came for a day and left. He is a serious minded President. He knows what he came here for. He did not come to enjoy overstaying. He is not a tourist and I hope our President is learning something. Come, talk and get back here. The work is here in Zambia,” Sata said.
He said Zambia would only move forward if the leaders in government knew what they wanted to achieve for the country.
Sata said President Banda had the fortune of some serious minded leaders visiting the country.
“Even the President of Chad, when he came, he came to talk business…so everybody who has been here, they come to talk business and they leave,” he said.
Sata charged that the desperation shown by those in government over the secret visit of Chadian President Idriss Deby was evidence that they were trying to hide something.
“It can’t be anything less than a deal. There must be a number of deals and that’s why you see the sequence of events. This man comes, cuts a deal, and Vice-President George Kunda says ‘we remove abuse of office from corruption’. This is the sequence. They sale Zamtel, they say ‘we are not going to have any more operators in Zambia’,” said Sata.
President Lula recently visited Zambia before he proceeded to South Africa.
He arrived in the country on Wednesday in the late afternoon and left early Thursday afternoon.
Labels: LULA DA SILVA, RUPIAH BANDA, SATA
Read more...
Lula – one of the world’s most intelligent politicians
By The Post
Fri 09 July 2010, 04:50 CAT
It is not surprising that Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva is the first Brazilian President to visit our country. It takes an intelligent leader with a clear and correct view of the world like Lula to do that. There is no doubt Lula is one of the world’s most intelligent politicians today with a messianic view of the world.
And it is a great honour for our country to host such a leader even if it was just for one night. We would have loved to have him in our country for a much longer period so that he can meet many Zambians from various walks of life and have a proper feel of the challenges and problems facing our people and the prospects for the future.
And looking at where Brazil is coming from, its subservient past, bound to the United States national security strategy as any in Latin America in the decades before, the reforms that have taken place in that country are a source of great pride and hope for all the peoples of the Third World.
A reformed Brazil has shed its subservient past. Instead of becoming a victim of globalization, like many in the underdeveloped South, Brazil emerged a victor to claim a leading role in world affairs.
Just how much Brazil’s standing under the presidency of Lula has changed was recently evidenced during United States Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s trip to Latin America in March this year. While in Brasilia, Clinton requested Brazil’s support for a new round of sanctions against Iran for its alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons. Her plea was a perfect chance for Brazil to fall in line with the United States after Lula’s recent overtures towards Iran, including a warm reception granted to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in November last year.
Instead, Brazil bluntly dismissed Clinton’s petition, saying: “We will not simply bow down to an evolving consensus if we do not agree.” Brazil’s curt refusal to tow Washington’s line spoke volumes more about this country’s new found self-assurance.
The source of this new frame of mind is the country’s transformation from macroeconomic basket case to a stable economy during the past 16 years.
Under the leadership of two exceptionally good leaders, Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Lula, the country improved its economic performance and, above all, cured a chronic case of high inflation. It accomplished all this while putting in place successful social programmes and preserving crucial state functions, notably in the realm of research and development.
The result has been a reduction of poverty – from 48 per cent of the population in 1990 to less than 26 per cent in 2009 – and rapid expansion of the middle class, always good news for democratic consolidation.
To put it simply, the convergence of political stability, honest and intelligent political leadership and sound economic policies allowed Brazil to unleash its natural potential just as globalization was gathering pace.
Exports of Brazil have grown five-fold in two decades, pushing trade from 11 per cent of GDP in 1990 to 18 per cent in 2009.
Crucially, this trend has been coupled with more diversified trading relations, in which countries like Iran and, above all, China play more visible roles. Indeed, in 2009 China surpassed the US as both Brazil’s largest trading partner and export market.
Massive recent oil discoveries give Brazil the second largest oil reserves in South America (12.6 billion barrels). Combined with large scale ethanol production (37 per cent of the world’s total), and huge soybean exports (32 per cent of the world’s total), among many other assets, Brazil has become an energy and commodity powerhouse.
This is not the only transformation Lula has brought that bolsters Brazil’s growing economic might. Once the largest debtor in the developing world, today Brazil is a lender even to the International Monetary Fund.
Even more remarkably, while the country continues to attract large quantities of foreign direct investment (US $45 billion in 2008 alone), it has become a major investor in its own right. In 2006, Brazil became a significant net foreign investor, a feat not seen in any other Latin American country.
Moreover, any account of why the country emerged virtually unscathed from the global economic crisis must take into account the conspicuous role of the state-owned Brazilian Development Bank, which today boasts of a larger lending portfolio than the World Bank.
The combination of heavy presence in the crucial commodity markets, more diverse commercial links and greater financial autonomy have compounded Brazil’s sheer size to give it unprecedented diplomatic clout.
Lula has intervened in most of the Latin American political or diplomatic crises. While Lula’s personal appeal is part of the reason, structural factors are at play, too, including the sudden proliferation of regional organizations – notably the recently launched Latin American and Caribbean Community of States – that threatens to hollow out the mandate and relevance of the US dominated Organization of American States.
The new outfits, which pointedly exclude the US and Canada, are tangible signs of Brazil’s intervention to redraw the western hemisphere’s diplomatic architecture, suiting the leadership role that the country envisions play in South America.
Nothing perhaps demonstrates Brazil’s new confidence as its relations with Iran, a trade partner to the tune of US $1.3 billion a year – nearly all in Brazilian exports. Iran’s nuclear dispute with the US and Europe offers Brazil the opportunity to assert its autonomy.
Brazil has not forgotten being at the receiving end of the US hectoring during the 1970s regarding the development of its own nuclear programme.
To those who don’t understand what is going on, giving Iran the benefit of the doubt on the nuclear issue may appear either as naïve or cynical on Brazil’s part.
Yet, for many Brazilians, the stance is simply a rejection of their past subservience to the US. Lula’s position on Iran may be irksome and even prove unsustainable, but it is not devoid of rationality.
Above all, it’s a message of independence vis-a-vis the United States that Brazil can afford as never before.
These are the benefits of having an honest, intelligent and well meaning political leadership. Those old jokes we used to hear about Brazil and its inflation are history.
A cruel and oft-repeated joke says that Brazil is the country of the future…and will always be. As Clinton found out, easy going Brazilians are not willing to be the butt of jokes anymore. They act as though the future has finally arrived. With a leader like Lula at the helm of Brazil, they may well be right.
Let’s learn from Brazil, let’s learn from Lula about how a country can transform itself in such a short time and how good leadership can make this possible.
Labels: LULA DA SILVA
Read more...
President Lula shares Brazil’s success story
By Chibaula Silwamba and Patson Chilemba
Thu 08 July 2010, 16:50 CAT
VISTING Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva yesterday queried the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank for remaining silent on the economic crisis in Europe and US when in fact they had been lecturing developing countries on similar problems.
And President Lula said it is unimaginable that developing countries can still continue to be excluded from global decision making processes.
Meanwhile, Brazil and Zambia has signed eight bilateral agreements and two memoranda of understanding (MoUs) in different sectors that include agriculture, diplomatic relations, biofuels production, fighting hunger, health and others.
Speaking at State House in Lusaka, President Lula said the IMF and the World Bank did not know how to solve the economic crisis.
“We are facing a crisis in Europe, what is the size of this crisis? We do not yet know the amount of rotten money that exists in those banks in European countries. And we do not have a surveillance and oversight system that could inform us about the size of the hole in the Germany bank or in French banks for that matter,” President Lula said.
“Now, when the crisis, was in a country like Zambia or we have a crisis in a country like Brazil, then the IMF representative and the World Bank representative will teach us what we should do, what we should do on our economy. Now that the crisis happens in the rich countries, the IMF is in a deep silence and the World Bank is now mute, it’s not even saying anything. They don’t know how to address the problem.”
He said developing countries had the recipe of how to tackle their crisis instead of depending on developed countries to solve them.
President Lula said the global economic crisis was a blessing in disguise for the developing world.
“I believe that there is nothing that happens by coincidence. I believe that this global economic crisis possibly is good so that the countries from the south should act in a different way as compared to how they acted in the 20th Century,” President Lula said.
“During the 20th Century we were under the expectation that the rich countries will solve our problems and now this crisis applies to us to discover our own solutions, that we have to solve our own problems. We have to diversify our trade relations, our political ties, our social ties, our cultural relations. I am personally convinced that Brazil can do something for Zambians and Africans, we can do much more than we have done up to now.”
He highlighted the achievements that Brazil had achieved over the years, which he said Zambia and other developing countries could learn from.
“Thanks to God and I believe that God sometimes writes in proper way but through different lines. In emerging economies and in developing countries are much more sound than the economies of the so-called rich countries,” President Lula said.
“For example, we had a debt of US $30 billion to the IMF but when I took office, we repaid the IMF and we don’t owe anymore to the IMF. On the contrary, the IMF owes us US $14 billion. We have US $250 billion in our currency reserves.”
He said Brazil’s economy was growing at an impressive rate.
“The economy will grow above five per cent per year, some even say that it will go to seven per cent or even above seven per cent but I will be happy with five per cent growth rate. We have helped the crisis in Greece; actually we were the very first country to put money in the IMF to help the poor countries because the rich countries were promising to put the money in the IMF but they haven’t given money to the IMF yet,” he said.
President Lula said the ten agreements that Zambia and Brazil signed would be beneficial to both countries.
“It will also allow us that we could work with much better perspective in terms of investment from Brazilian companies, mining industries for example in Zambia, to produce biofuels,” he said.
“We will sign the agreement in the health area and agriculture area, which is also very important; we will continue to work together at the G20. We can try to reorganize the Doha Round and we will continue to work together to democratise the UN Security Council.”
He advised President Banda that welfare programmes must benefit the poor and not the rich, who are not the intended beneficiaries.
“In Brazil, the money has been reaching the hands of the poor. I also want to say Mr President that what we should share with Zambia is that in your trip to Brazil, if you can bring together in your delegation all the Cabinet ministers that have something to do with the social policy or with income transfer policy or programmes, we have very successful story in terms of social policies in the world,” President Lula said.
“Twenty one million Brazilians were lifted from poverty lives. So, today we have more than 62 per cent of the Brazilian population in what is now considered as middle class.”
He said the poor people in Brazil had risen through the social ladder and now had the purchasing power.
“They are the ones going shopping, buying refrigerators, buying clothes, buying more tools, buying hygiene materials, they the new consumers. Let me give you a figure Mr President that I think tells our success story that the programme that we have developed, we call it electricity for all. We have 10 million people that live in remote areas that had no access to electricity, and we decided to take electricity to all of them. We went on the ground and we discovered that it was not two million families but three million families. So now we have taken electricity to 2.4 million households,” President Lula said.are
“Electricity reaches those households. So people can buy TV sets, sound systems. But what I believe is truly important is to allow Brazilians to have electricity so that they can get some cold beer too.”
He said most of the programmes that Brazil was developing were not extraordinary.
“In Brazil we have a special programme serving food at school canteens, we have about 34 million children that everyday have lunch in their schools. That is why I want you to come to Brazil; to get to see on the ground, not just to believe in what the President says, you have to look for yourself, or you don’t have to believe what one of my Cabinet ministers but you have to see yourself with your own eyes and speak to people on the ground, to see the extraordinary results of our policies that we are developing in Brazil,” President Lula said.
“I believed that Zambia and Brazil are still far away to develop their cultural and trade policy that actually matches the greatness of the two countries. I believe that this collaboration process is just the beginning and I believe that we do have the ability to do much more.”
And President Banda said Zambia was happy that Brazil as a member of the G20 had continued to provide a voice of reason at international gathering in championing the cause of the developing world.
Later President Banda conferred the first division of the Order of the Eagle of Zambia on President Lula for championing the cause of the developing world.
The award is reserved for Zambian and foreign heads of state and former heads of state.
And the eight bilateral agreements signed between Brazil and Zambia include the performance of remunerated activities by dependants of diplomatic, consular, administrative, military and technical staff, cooperations in the field of education, Brazil-Zambia vocational training centre, training and capacity building for health professionals of the University Teaching Hospital, strengthening the national strategic plan for HIV/AIDS, cultural cooperation, visa exemptions for holders of diplomatic, official and service passports, and production of biofuels.
The MoUs signed are in the field of food and nutritional security and humanitarian assistance, and technical cooperation in the field of sports.
The agreements and MoUs were signed by Brazilian international relations minister Celso Amorin and Zambia’s foreign affairs minister Kabinga Pande at State House.
Labels: IMF, LULA DA SILVA, World Bank
Read more...
Lula is an outstanding statesman – Fidel
By Larry Moonze in Havana, Cuba
Wed 03 Mar. 2010, 18:40 CAT
FIDEL Castro has said Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is an outstanding, prestigious and selfless statesman whose voice is respectfully heard in every international meeting.
Meanwhile, the former Cuban president said earthquake-devastated Haiti is a symbol of the poverty suffered by billions of people worldwide, including a significant portion in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Fidel also said Chile recovering from an 8.8 magnitude earthquake could count on Cuba but added that considering the type of cooperation required following material loss amounting to some US $30 billion, there was not much that Cuba could do.
Reflecting on last week's meeting with President Lula, Fidel said he was aware of Lula's fervent wishes to help the noble and long-suffering people.
“I want to place on record the significance and symbolism I attach to Lula's recent (last week on Wednesday) visit and my meeting with him both personally and as a revolutionary,” Fidel said.
“He had said that as he was nearing the end of his term as President, he wanted to visit his friend Fidel; he honoured me with that description. I think I know him well. We often had fraternal conversations both in Cuba and abroad.
I once had the honour of visiting him in his house located in a modest neighbourhood in Sao Paulo where he lived with his family. It was very moving for me to meet with him, his wife and children. I will never forget the fraternal and healthy family atmosphere in that home and the sincere affection showed by the neighbours who approached Lula when he was already a prestigious worker and political leader.
No one knew then whether or not he would become the President of Brazil since major interests and forces opposed him but I enjoyed talking with him. On the other hand, Lula did not care much about that position. He took pleasure in fighting and he did so with irreproachable modesty.
This, he showed extensively when, after being defeated twice by his adversaries, he only accepted to run for the Workers Party on a third occasion due to the strong pressure of his most sincere friends… I shall keep an unforgettable memory of my last meeting with the President of Brazil and I do not hesitate to declare it.”
Fidel said he did not always agree with President Lula's policies. He said he opposed by principle the production of biofuels using crops that could serve as food since “ I am aware that hunger already is and can increasingly become a major tragedy for humanity”.
But Fidel said biofuels were not a creation of Brazil and its leader Lula.
“It is an essential part of the world economy imposed by imperialism and its rich allies that subsidises their farm productions to protect their domestic markets and compete in the world market with the food exports of the third world nations which are forced to import the industrial items produced with the raw materials and energy resources of these same countries that inherited poverty from centuries of colonialism,” he said. “I perfectly understand that given the unfair competition and subsidies of Europe and the United States, Brazil had no choice but to produce ethanol.”
Fidel said President Lula informed him of high-level education programmes that Brazil intended to carry forward and that he also expressed great appreciation for the role of China in the world.
He said President Lula said Brazil’s trade with China amounted to US $40 billion.
Fidel said President Lula was proud to have been honoured with the choice of Brazil to host the 2016 Olympic Games and the 2014 World Football Cup.
“All of this has been the result of the projects submitted by Brazil which left those of their competitors behind,” he said. “One thing is clear. The metal industry worker Lula has become an outstanding and prestigious statesman whose voice is respectfully heard in every international meeting. A great proof of his selflessness was his refusal to go for re-election and his confidence that the Workers Party will continue in government in Brazil.”
Fidel said over the years , Brazil and Cuba lived their own history due to US impositions.
“Our homeland endured exceptional pressures during the incredible stages since 1959 confronting the aggressions of the mightiest power known to history,” he said. “Hence the enormous significance we attach to the recent meeting in Cancun Mexico and to its decision to establish a Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. No other institutional event of the past century in our hemisphere is so transcendental.”
Fidel said that agreement had been reached at a time when the most serious economic crisis of the globalised world developed concurring with the greatest danger of an ecological catastrophy for the human species and the earthquake that destroyed Port-au-Prince in Haiti.
He said the earthquake in Haiti was the most painful human disaster in the history of the hemisphere as it hit the poorest country of the continent and the first one to eradicate slavery.
Fidel said only six weeks after the death of over 200,000 people in Haiti, there was another dramatic news of the damages caused by another earthquake but this time in Chile causing the death of close to 1,000 people and huge material damages.
“It was particularly moving to watch the suffering of millions of Chileans materially and emotionally affected by such a harsh blow of nature,” he said.
Fidel said fortunately, Chile had more experience in coping with earthquakes and was a country with more resources and a higher economic development.
He said if it were not for the sounder buildings and infrastructure, a countless number of people, perhaps tens or hundreds of thousands of Chileans would have perished.
“There are reports of two million victims and the potential loss of between 15 and 30 billion dollars,” Fidel said. “Faced with this tragedy, Chile counts on the solidarity and the sympathy of the peoples, ours included, although given the type of cooperation required , there is not much that Cuba can do.
Nevertheless, the Cuban government was one of the first to communicate to Chile our feelings of solidarity at a time when the communication system was not yet operational.”
He insisted that the country, which today put to the test the world capacity to tackle climate change and ensure the survival of the humanity was Haiti.
“The recent earthquake in Chile, with the amazing intensity of 8.8 on the Richter scale, although fortunately at greater depth than the one which devastated Port-au-Prince, leads me to emphasise the importance and the duty to encourage the steps toward unity taken in Cancun even though I do not entertain illusions knowing how difficult and complex our struggle of ideas will be vis-a-vis the efforts of the empire and its allies inside and outside our countries to thwart our people’s efforts toward unity and independence,” said Fidel.
Labels: FIDEL CASTRO, LULA DA SILVA
Read more...
Free market policy has failed, observes Brazil’s Lula
Written by Larry Moonze
Saturday, September 26, 2009 6:07:55 PM
BRAZILIAN President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has said the world is in a transition to multilateralism that will not conflict with the United Nations. And President Lula said the on-going economic recession was more than a crisis of big banks but the crisis of big dogmas.
He said the senseless way of thinking and acting which dominated the world for decades had proved itself bankrupt. Addressing the 64th UN General Assembly in New York, USA last Wednesday, President Lula said the world was in a period of transition in international relations.
He said that multipolar world would be based on experience of regional integration. President Lula said leaders pushing for such a multipolar world were not wishful thinkers. He said it took political will to confront and overcome situations that conspired against peace, development and democracy.
"Unless the political will is present throwbacks like the embargo against Cuba will persist," President Lula said.
"Unless there is political will we will see more coups like the one that toppled the constitutional president of Honduras, Jose Manuel Zelaya, who has been granted refuge in Brazil's embassy in Tegucigalpa since Monday. The international community demands that Mr Zelaya immediately return to the Presidency of his country and must be alert to ensure the inviolability of Brazil's diplomatic mission in the capital of Honduras. Unless political will prevails, threats to the world like climate change will continue to grow.
"All countries must take action to turn back global warming. We are dismayed by the reluctance of developed countries to shoulder their share of the burden when it comes to fighting climate change. They cannot burden developing countries with tasks which are theirs alone. Brazil is doing its part. We will arrive in Copenhagen with precise alternatives and commitments."
President Lula said the new world was a political and moral imperative.
"We cannot just shovel away the rubble of failure; we must be midwives to the future," he said. "This is the only way to make repairs for so much injustice and to prevent new collective tragedies."
President Lula said it was a need to build a new international order that was sustainable, multilateral and less asymmetric, free of hegemonies and ruled by democratic institutions.
"This multipolar world will not conflict with the United Nations," President Lula said.
"On the contrary, it could be an invigorating factor for the United Nations. For a UN with the political and moral authority to solve the conflicts in the Middle East, assuring the co-existence of a Palestinian State with the State of Israel. For a UN that confronts terrorism without stigmatising ethnic groups and religions, but rather dealing with underlying causes and promoting dialogue between civilisations.
"For a UN that can really help countries like Haiti trying to rebuild its economy and social fabric after achieving their political stability. For a UN committed to the African Renaissance we are now seeing. For a UN able to implement effective policies that preserve and expand Human Rights. For a UN that can make real progress towards disarmament in true balance with non-proliferation. For a UN that can truly lead in initiatives to protect the planet's environment."
On the economic and financial crisis, President Lula said the free market policy had failed.
"I refer to the absurd doctrine that markets could regulate themselves, with no need for so-called "intrusive" state intervention, and to the thesis of absolute freedom for financial capital, with no rules or transparency, beyond the control of peoples and institutions," he said. "It was an iniquitous defence of a minimal, crippled, weakened state, unable to promote development or fight poverty and inequities. It included the demonisation of social policies, an obsession with precarious labour relations and an irresponsible co-modification of public services. The real cause of the crisis was the confiscation of most of the sovereignty of peoples and nations through the state and democratic governments - by autonomous networks of wealth and power."
He said controlling the crisis and changing the course of the world economy could not be left to the usual few.
"Developed countries - and the multilateral agencies they run - had been unable to foresee the approaching catastrophe, much less prevent it," President Lula said. "It is not fair that the price of runaway speculation be paid by workers and by poor or developing countries, who had nothing to do with it."
President Lula said rich countries were putting off reform at multilateral agencies like the IMF and the World Bank. He said no one could understand the paralysis of the Doha Round whose conclusion will above all benefit poor countries.
President Lula said there were also worrisome signs of return to protectionist practices while little had been done to fight tax havens.
He said since the global economy was interdependent, it was an obligation for states to intervene across national borders and was a must to re-found the world economic order.
Labels: LULA DA SILVA, NEOLIBERALISM
Read more...
Time for 'new world order': Brazilian President
Jun 17 12:45 PM US/Eastern
The global financial crisis has reduced the differences between nations and created the opportunity to form a new world order, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday.
Speaking after a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev in the Kazakh capital Astana, Lula called on the global community to seize on the crisis to create a fairer world for developing nations.
"I want to say that before the crisis, there were many countries which had greater significance than others, and some countries which had no significance at all," he said through a translator.
"After the crisis, everyone has become similar. We have the possibility to create a new world order and together we should improve our relations."
Lula arrived in Kazakhstan Wednesday following the first-ever summit between fellow developing economic powerhouses Russia, India and China -- together with Brazil dubbed the BRIC nations -- in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg.
Nazarbayev, head of Central Asia's largest economy, is keen to secure a larger role for his government in world affairs.
Following up on Lula's call, the pair said in a statement following their meeting that the United Nations should open up the UN Security Council to developing nations in an effort to bolster global security.
They said that opening the organisation, which only has five permanent members, to wider membership was the only way to make the often-criticised body "more legitimate and effective."
Labels: LULA DA SILVA, NEOLIBERALISM
Read more...
Latin America Banks on Independence
The new Bank of the South shatters neoliberal economics
By Mark Engler
Latin American leaders launched the Bank of the South at a ceremony in Buenos Aires on Dec. 9, 2007. The back will support regional development in order to wean the region of institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
In the closing weeks of 2007, a region in revolt against the economics of corporate globalization issued its most unified declaration of independence to date.
On Dec. 9, standing before the flags of their countries, the presidents of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay and Venezuela, along with a representative from Uruguay, gathered in Buenos Aires and signed the founding charter of the Banco del Sur, or the Bank of the South.
The Bank of the South will allow participating governments to use a percentage of their collective currency reserves to strengthen Latin America’s economy and promote cooperative development. It plans to begin lending as early as 2008 with around $7 billion in capital.
By itself, the bank represents a serious challenge to U.S.-dominated institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). As part of a larger trend, it signals a major break from the policies of “free trade” neoliberalism that dominated in the region throughout the ’80s and ’90s.
The Bank of the South’s creators are keenly aware of the significance of this break. In the words of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, the bank is “aimed at freeing us from the chains of dependence and underdevelopment.” Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa concurred, arguing that with the bank, “South American nations will be able to put an end to their political and financial dependence that they have had with the neoliberal model.”
Officially, the international financial institutions are keeping their tone upbeat. On Dec. 11, IMF Director General Dominique Strauss-Kahn told Agence France-Presse that the new bank is “not a problem; it’s maybe an opportunity.” Similarly, Augusto de la Torre, World Bank chief economist for Latin America, said, “As far as the World Bank is concerned, this new initiative is not perceived as a competitor.”
But in March 2007, as Latin American leaders were first discussing the creation of a new body, one anonymous insider at the neoliberal IDB told the Financial Times that the Bank of the South represented the largest threat to his institution in decades. “With the money of Venezuela and political will of Argentina and Brazil, this is a bank that could have lots of money and a different political approach,” he explained. “No one will say this publicly, but we don’t like it.”
Breaking Washington’s hold
There is good reason for those invested in the Washington Consensus to dislike the Bank of the South. In recent decades, the IMF, the World Bank and the multilateral regional banks have largely controlled poorer countries’ access to credit and development financing. These institutions allowed developing countries to avoid defaulting on their debt, provided funds in some difficult times and gave a nod of approval to private creditors. But the price the countries paid in return was steep.
In order to stay in their good graces, developing nations have had to privatize industries, open markets to foreign businesses, liberalize capital flows, keep monetary policy tight and implement fiscal austerity (that is, cut needed social services for their people). In the end, such policies proved disastrous in Latin America.
Per capita GDP, which had been growing at a steady rate throughout the ’60s and ’70s, grew hardly at all in the subsequent two decades of neoliberalism. During the latter period, the region also developed some of the highest levels of inequality in the world.
The Bank of the South would work to remedy this situation. Unlike the preexisting financial institutions, the new bank will be run by Latin American countries themselves, will not be dominated by any single nation and will be free to support development approaches that are much more sensitive to the needs of the poor.
A May 2007 statement of South American finance ministers affirmed that the new bank and other mechanisms of regional integration “must be based on democratic, transparent and participatory schemes that are responsible to their constituencies.”
With the exception of Paraguay’s Nicanor Duarte Fruto, each of the Latin American leaders involved in the Bank of the South was elected in recent years on a mandate to split from Washington. Well aware of the failures of economic neoliberalism in the region, and under pressure from an enlivened citizenry, the bank’s members have outraged the international business press by working to do just that.
Several governments have moved to free themselves of direct oversight from the IMF by repaying loans early. In December 2005, Argentina and Brazil announced that they would pay off $9.8 billion and $15.5 billion, respectively. The IMF, which benefits from interest payments on long-term loans, was nonplussed.
Argentina, which was a model of the IMF during the ’90s and suffered severe economic collapse in 2001, vocally declared good riddance. Then-President Néstor Kirchner triumphantly proclaimed that throwing off the chains of IMF debt constituted a move toward “political sovereignty and economic independence.”
Since then, Latin American governments have been one-upping each other in their acts of defiance.
In Bolivia, upon taking office in 2006, President Evo Morales announced he would let the country’s standing loan agreement with the IMF expire. In May 2007, he declared Bolivia would withdraw from a World Bank arbitration center that handles investment disputes, usually favoring corporate interests. Nicaragua has similarly rejected the authority of the center.
Correa topped them by ejecting the World Bank’s representative to Ecuador in April 2007. He declared the officer a persona non grata in the country, insisting, “We will not stand for extortion by this international bureaucracy.”
That same month, Chávez announced that Venezuela would withdraw from membership in the IMF and World Bank altogether. While the country is still working out the details of this move, the prospect is unprecedented in the era of corporate globalization.
The ability of oil-rich Venezuela to provide its neighbors with financing they previously might have needed to beg for from Washington is a significant factor in their willingness to break with the IMF and World Bank. Venezuela has offered billions in support to countries—including Argentina, Bolivia and Ecuador—and those backup funds make many countries less susceptible to threats of capital flight than in the past. Along with investments from China and India, it dramatically reduces Washington’s ability to starve dissident leaders of financial resources when governments grow, in its view, disobedient. The Bank of the South will help to formalize a source of alternative finance and place it under regional control.
Rude awakenings
The establishment of the Bank of the South comes at a particularly bad time for the IMF. The institution’s troubles were brought into relief at its annual fall meetings in mid-October, after which the Washington Post contended, “the International Monetary Fund needs restructuring, and maybe a bailout.”
IMF lending has plummeted in recent years, as its supposed beneficiaries have launched a rebellion. Cutting ties with the fund is not just a Latin American phenomenon. Russia, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines have also pursued strategies of early debt repayment. Many Asian countries that were burned by the region’s neoliberal financial crisis in 1997 are building large cash reserves to prevent a return to the IMF in times of economic downturn, and they have recently worked on creating a regional currency exchange that will further increase their distance from Washington.
These developments are sapping both the IMF’s influence and its cash flow. Its loan portfolio has dwindled from nearly $100 billion in 2004 to around $20 billion today. A single country, Turkey, now accounts for the bulk of its lending. The IMF has lost almost all influence in Latin America, with lending there plummeting to a paltry $50 million, less than 1 percent of its global loan portfolio. As recently as 2005, the region had accounted for 80 percent of its outstanding loans.
Deprived of lucrative interest payments from poorer countries, the IMF is now desperately trying to meet its $1 billion administrative budget without dipping into its gold reserves. In stark contrast to the triumphalist pronouncements made in past fall meetings, in 2007 the IMF’s newly installed Dominique Strauss-Kahn confessed that “downsizing is on the table” for the institution.
Ignoring the wider picture, pro-free trade pundits have generally responded to the Bank of the South by minimizing its significance and predicting failure. The Wall Street Journal characterized the bank as but one of Hugo Chávez’s many madcap schemes, insisting that it is “unlikely to live up to his grandiose vision.” Meanwhile the Economist asserted, “The IMF can sleep easy.” It pointed out that the Bank of the South’s founding agreement lacked many details about its governance and lending policies, and that disagreements persist among the region’s key players.
It is true that Latin America has a history of internal disputes thwarting dreams of regional unity—and that quarrels persist today. While Venezuela and Ecuador have pushed for the bank to have a far-reaching mandate, Brazil prefers a more modest institution. To the disappointment of many of his progressive supporters, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has adhered to conservative economic policies designed to keep Brazil in good standing with foreign creditors. The country also runs a large internal development bank, which loaned $38 billion in 2007 to fund national projects. Therefore, Brazil has less to gain directly from making the Bank of the South into a robust regional lender.
Activists, while generally positive, have expressed some concerns. Environmentalists worry the Bank of the South, while more democratically managed than its counterparts in Washington, may nevertheless develop a similarly destructive record of funding large-scale, ecologically harmful construction projects.
Other progressives, ranging from the members of the Jubilee South coalition to Cuban commentator Eduardo Dimas, have argued that the institution must go beyond traditional development lending to support such measures as land reform, a common regional currency and projects explicitly designed to promote political solidarity in the region. These would more closely link the bank with the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), an initiative through which the Venezuelan government has paid for Cuban doctors to provide services in the region and has promoted other forms of mutual assistance.
Reservations about the Bank of the South’s mandate, however, should not obscure the swiftness and severity of Latin America’s assault on the international financial institutions.
Chávez first floated the idea of the bank in 2006, and the speed at which it has come into existence has been shocking. The widespread support within Latin America for independent bodies such as the new bank suggests that the days when the United States could act as an economic overseer dictating policy for countries across the globe are coming to an end.
Upon the inauguration of the Bank of the South, even Lula da Silva delivered a message of defiance to the North. “Developing nations must create their own mechanisms of finance,” he said, “instead of suffering under those of the IMF and the World Bank, which are institutions of rich nations.” He added bluntly: “It is time to wake up.”
Labels: BANK OF THE SOUTH, HUGO CHAVEZ, LULA DA SILVA, NEOLIBERALISM, SOUTH AMERICA
Read more...
