Former Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s victory over incumbent Jair Bolsonaro sends a powerful message to the rest of the world. Although he won only narrowly, Lula, as he is known, succeeded by building a broad democratic coalition spanning from the far left to the center right.
Facing a deeply divided country, the president-elect is now setting the tone for a four-year term that begins in January. In his victory speech, he promised to establish a civil, inclusive, conciliatory and green government.
By calling for healing and solidarity, he offered a sharp contrast to his predecessor’s divisive rhetoric.
Illustration: Yusha
Make no mistake: Lula is facing tremendous headwinds in governing the world’s fourth-largest democracy. Although his convictions were annulled, many Brazilians are outraged that a man formerly implicated in corruption scandals is returning to the presidency. Lula also must deal with a sizable far-right bloc of legislators, daunting economic challenges and a simmering culture war unleashed by Bolsonaro and his militant supporters.
Still, Lula has an opportunity to be a transformational president, and in ways that would exceed what he achieved during his hugely popular first presidency from 2003 to 2010. He will need to offer a blueprint that emphasizes four main priorities.
For starters, Lula must position Brazil as a green superpower and a global leader in the transition to a carbon-neutral economy. Home to more than 60 percent of the world’s tropical forests, 20 percent of its fresh water and at least 10 percent of the planet’s biodiversity, Brazil is particularly well suited to assume an environmental leadership role.
However, the public and private sectors will need to abandon business as usual and seize the opportunities offered by the global green and orange (creative) economies. That means supporting policies to align agricultural, livestock, pharmaceutical and commodity markets with conservation goals and investing in the technologies and skills needed to support the bioeconomy, biotechnology, environmental services and regeneration.
With the right incentives in place, Brazil is capable of building a 100-percent renewable-energy grid and a sustainable food-production system.
Equally important, deforestation must end, especially in the Amazon, where 94 percent of such activities are occurring illegally. Lula’s government must disrupt the complex illicit economies and supply chains that have been fueling this destruction.
Enforcing forest protections, empowering environmental authorities and indigenous groups, strengthening the rule of law, and ensuring that companies deliver full traceability and transparency in their supply chains are all essential.
Brazil can and should also ramp up multilateral entrepreneurship in the global south, including by promoting arcs of restoration and alliances to protect tropical forests across the Amazon, Great Lakes of Africa and Southeast Asia.
Second, Lula must promote reconciliation and coexistence at home. As he noted in his victory speech, political polarization has heightened the risk of violence. The new government must foster closer partnerships with civil society and major digital platforms to rein in disinformation and safeguard civic and digital rights.
Brazil’s divisions are constantly amplified on social media and messaging services, but solutions are within reach. Brazil’s Superior Electoral Tribunal played a critical role during this year’s election by working with eight leading social-media platforms, fact-checking agencies and civil-society organizations to detect and disrupt disinformation.
However, de-platforming anti-democratic actors and moderating digital harms is not enough. Brazil should absorb lessons from other countries that have reduced online and offline polarization.
For example, encouraging “intergroup contact,” such as through citizen assemblies, has been shown to reduce prejudices between constituencies, as have projects built around “superordinate goals,” such as the effort to make Brazil a green superpower.
Beyond that, Brazilian leaders need to foster a political culture in which citizens focus more on policies than on personalities — for example, by allowing for more open consultations and participatory decisionmaking.
Third, Lula should strive to reinvigorate global initiatives to address poverty, inequality and food insecurity. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war on Ukraine, many lower and middle-income countries’ sustainable-development efforts have suffered massive setbacks. As global financial and monetary conditions have tightened, many countries have been barreling toward punishing debt crises that could hit the most vulnerable communities the hardest.
Under Lula, Brazil should advocate a global agenda to promote not just UN sustainable development goals, but also closer “south-south cooperation” to deliver material benefits for the world’s poorest.
Brazil has a venerable diplomatic tradition of supporting global cooperation through multilateral institutions and other forums designed to serve developing countries’ interests. In a fragmented and divided world, its ability to build consensus and foster partnerships is more important than ever.
Lastly, Lula should leverage Brazil’s international credibility to spur multilateral action against new global risks. Political and diplomatic leadership is needed to reinforce fragile norms barring weapons of mass destruction, to reduce the harms associated with new technologies and to mobilize investments in climate-related mitigation and adaptation efforts — especially in countries that stand to incur the greatest costs from global warming despite being the least responsible for it.
Even though Brazil’s new government must attend to its domestic challenges, it can and should lead the charge against these systemic, interconnected global risks. The world needs Brazil’s voice, which means that Brazil now needs to emerge from the shadow of the past four years.
Ilona Szabo, co-founder and president of the Igarape Institute, is a member of the UN secretary-general’s High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS