Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Brazil and United States: parallel
lives?
Paulo Roberto de
Almeida
Joseph Smith:
Brazil and United
States: Convergences and Divergences
Athens, GA: Georgia University Press, 2010; pp. xii, 244; $
24.95, paper; ISBN: 978-0-8203-2770-9
Joseph Smith is
an “old fellow” of Brazilian studies in the English speaking world. He has
already authored an impressive array of papers, essays and some books on the
relationship between the United States and Latin-American countries, as well as
many journal articles and at least one specific study on the diplomatic
relations between the two biggest countries of the Western hemisphere, Unequal Giants (1991), dealing with
bilateral affairs during the “old” Republic in Brazil (1889-1930). His many
other research works in this domain gave him synthetic capabilities to present,
now, a comprehensive, albeit linear, analysis about how the two republics have
‘converged’ and ‘diverged’ along almost two centuries of continuous
relationship since the early 19th century.
In fact, those
relations were already under travails before Brazilian independence and shortly
after American separation from Britain, as American founding fathers sent an envoy
to Lisbon, and the Portuguese Crown a diplomatic representative to Philadelphia
and Washington before Portugal’s invasion by the French troops of Napoleon. As
soon as the Court established itself in Rio de Janeiro, an American minister
was designed, in 1810, to improve the commercial relations between the two
nations. British interests dominated Brazil’s economic interface with the world
for most of the 19th century, but U.S. arose as a major importer of
Brazilian coffee as soon as this commodity became a major staple in Brazil’s
exports, which would be the case for a century approximately.
Convergences
were evident during high times of European imperialism, but divergences arose as
different paths towards industrialization – more market oriented in the U.S.,
more State led, in the case of Brazil – pushed this country to “require”
official help from the U.S. to expedite its development. Since the early
Fifties, disagreements have been almost economic in nature, with trade
conflicts reinforcing political differences in the U.N. and other organizations.
Military regime in Brazil undermined political cooperation and strengthened
economic nationalism in Brazil, and Smith’s book stresses very well Brazilian
aspirations to become, not only a mere regional leader, but a recognized world
power (with many other divergences existing in nuclear policy and trade
negotiations). The book relies on diplomatic documents and testimonies by key
actors to support the main episodes of this bilateral relationship made of ups
and downs.
Indeed, Brazilian
leaders of all times showed an ambivalent attitude towards U.S. leadership in
the hemisphere and the world: an envy of the formidable power of the Northern
giant and, at the same time, a contempt towards the ‘benign neglect’ that Washington
always demonstrated in connection with Brazilian requests for a “special
relationship”. The attraction for the American way of life and the agenda for
political cooperation, as Smith remarks, were emphasized during Cold War times,
when Brazil competed with Argentina for regional leadership; afterwards, the
two biggest South American countries started economic integration and promoted
the Mercosur scheme.
In more recent
times, Lula’s government and the leftist advisors of the Worker’s Party (PT)
acted to counterbalance and diminish American influence in South America, a
subtle undertaking made of alliances with “progressive” – or Bolivarian –
governments in the region and the creation of new organizations – like Unasur,
or South American Nations Union – deliberately excluding the U.S. from the dealings.
Smith somewhat fails to recognize and reveal this anti-American component of
PT’s foreign policy, preferring instead to rely on the rhetorical proclamations
by political leaders about the overall good relationship between the tow
countries; that is true, also, but one can not ignore that, in many aspects, an
especially activist Brazilian diplomacy, ideologically motivated, engaged in
initiatives to counteract American interests in the region or elsewhere.
As it happens with
many other developing countries around the world, Brazilian leaders and
citizens in general love American capital and U.S. technology and all the
gadgetry that comes together, but mistrust American capitalists and “imperial” politicians
too patronizing. Those aspects of national character, or of “political
psychology” influencing bilateral relations, are not well covered in a book whose
main arguments are almost exclusively supported by written sources and official
documents; but otherwise, the political scenario and its economic determinants
are treated in an adequate manner.
For all the
rest, Smith’s book delivers what its subtitle promises: a well balanced history
of approximations and disagreements between an established superpower and a
regional leader with an aspiration to become a global power, without all the
means to do so (up to now). A final Bibliographical Essay confirms Smith’s
mastery over the most important works on Brazil’s history published in English
and also the relevant literature, including some important books published in
Brazil, about the bilateral diplomatic relationship and the Brazilian foreign
policy. This book closes very well a complete series on the U.S. and the
Americas, directed by Lester D. Langley.
Paulo Roberto de
Almeida
Brasília, 29 setembro 2011
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário