O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida.

quarta-feira, 27 de março de 2013

To Bric or not Too Brics? - Le Monde, Estadao, NYT

Um piquenique de chefes de Estado, ou como já disse alguém dos summits iberoamericanos: um envelope em busca de algum conteúdo...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

Le Monde, blog Amérique Latine (Paulo Paranaguá)

Que fait le Brésil dans le bric-à-brac des BRICS ?



Le Brésil, la Russie, l’Inde, la Chine et l’Afrique du Sud se retrouvent au 5e Sommet des BRICS, à Durban, en Afrique du Sud, mercredi 27 mars. L’acronyme, inventé en 2001 par un analyste de Goldman Sachs, s’est taillé une réputation, à défaut d’une identité.
Les Brésiliens veulent y voir une « entité politico-diplomatique » destinée à mieux faire entendre la voix des émergents sur la scène internationale, tout en mettant l’accent sur les performances économiques. Ainsi, la croissance de 6,9 % prévue en 2013 pour les BRICS serait presque le double des pronostics pour l’économie mondiale dans son ensemble. Sauf qu’à cette aune, le Brésil fait figure de canard boiteux, avec une hausse du produit intérieur brut d’à peine 0,9 % en 2012, ce que les Brésiliens appellent un Pibinho (un PIB minuscule).
Les échanges entre les BRICS s’élèvent à 282 milliards de dollars (219 milliards d'euros), soit dix fois le volume d’il y a dix ans. Cependant, ils restent négligeables en comparaison avec le volume du commerce entre ces cinq pays et le reste du monde : 6 000 milliards de dollars.
Un examen plus attentif des chiffres confirme ce qu’on sait déjà : les BRICS comptent un géant, la Chine, la seule justifiant le terme de puissance émergente. La Russie est une puissance en déclin, maintenue à flot par les exportations de gaz et des ventes d’armes. L’Inde n’est pas sortie du bourbier de ses contradictions et conflits, tandis que l’Afrique du Sud, puissance régionale à l’échelle de l’Afrique australe, gère tant bien que mal (plutôt mal) le lourd héritage de l’apartheid.
Lula et Dilma Rousseff à Sao Paulo en 2012.
Photo Ricardo Stuckert
Le bric-à-brac des BRICS est une auberge espagnole. Le Brésil est en concurrence avec la Chine en Amérique latine et en Afrique, mais aussi sur son propre marché intérieur. Tandis que les Brésiliens leur vendent du fer et du soja, les Chinois font du dumping face aux produits industriels « made in Brazil ». Si prompt à dénoncer la « guerre des monnaies », en pointant du doigt le dollar, Brasilia se tait sur le taux du  yuan.
Il y a une sorte de schizophrénie brésilienne, partagée entre l’empressement à conforter les BRICS et une diplomatie économique pour le moins poussive, pour ne pas dire erratique. Sous les présidences de Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva et de Dilma Rousseff, le Brésil a beaucoup misé sur les relations Sud-Sud, comme si l’Union européenne (UE) et les Etats-Unis n’étaient pas ses principaux partenaires.
Le Mercosur et l'UE, un mariage de raison ?
Pourtant, le Mercosur (l’union douanière sud-américaine) et l’Amérique latine ne semblent plus vraiment prioritaires pour les Brésiliens, si ce n’est dans la rhétorique. Le Mercosur est en panne, sans que Brasilia ne réagisse autrement que par la fuite en avant, l’élargissement au Venezuela compliquant la donne. L’Union des nations sud-américaines (Unasur) et la Communauté des Etats latino-américains et caribéens (Celac) restent des forums politiques, tandis que d’autres pays de la région avancent vers une intégration et une ouverture accrues, grâce à l’Alliance du Pacifique.
Ce contexte éclaire la place accordée aux BRICS. Le Brésil se rêve en puissance émergente et n’hésite pas à faire cavalier seul par rapport à ses turbulents voisins. Bien sûr, les diplomates brésiliens font ce qu’ils peuvent pour éviter des problèmes de voisinage, mais ne vont pas jusqu’à se salir les mains dans les litiges qui les entourent. Seule exception, la participation à la Mission des Nations unies pour la stabilisation en Haïti (Minustah), gage de la candidature brésilienne à un poste permanent au Conseil de sécurité, insaisissable faute de réforme de l’ONU.
Cette gestion diplomatique à la petite semaine est en crise. Brasilia se voit menacé par le projet de Trans-Pacific Partnership (Accord de partenariat trans-pacifique, TPP) et la future négociation d’un Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (Accord de commerce et d’investissement transatlantique, TTIP) entre les Etats-Unis et l’UE.
Pris de court, le Brésil tente de relancer les échanges et le partenariat avec le Canada et avec les Etats-Unis, et mise aussi sur un accord entre le Mercosur et l’UE, après dix ans de négociations infructueuses. Le moment est difficile pour la reprise des tractations entre le Mercosur et l’UE, car l’Argentine est réticente, le Venezuela s’oppose à tout accord de libre-échange et la crise rend problématiques des concessions de l'UE sur le marché agricole. Les Brésiliens pourraient essayer de négocier seuls, à l’instar des négociations entre l’UE et les pays andins.
Pour le Brésil, la présence dans le club exclusif des BRICS ne règle rien, c’est une sorte d’ersatz, une façon de jouer dans la cour des grands, par le verbe et la posture.
==========
Um fundo político
27 de março de 2013 | 2h 08
Celso Ming - O Estado de S.Paulo

Na reunião de cúpula iniciada ontem e que continua hoje, na África do Sul, os chefes de governo dos Brics (Brasil, Rússia, Índia, China e África do Sul) criaram um fundo de resgate cuja utilidade não é clara. Parece mais uma iniciativa destinada a passar para o mundo a ideia de que a sigla Brics não é artificial e que pode vir a construir boa unidade política.

Pela sua condição de contingência, esse fundo estaria disponível sempre que um dos países-membros enfrentasse crise de liquidez, ou seja, tivesse de lidar com repentina incapacidade de honrar compromissos no exterior. Assim, desempenharia função parecida com a do Fundo Monetário Internacional e, nesse sentido, se apresentaria como alternativa ao Fundo.

A tabela que está logo aí mostra que as cinco economias têm impressionante volume de reservas internacionais. E reserva é o que o nome diz: uma carteira de recursos imediatamente disponíveis cuja função é proteger a economia contra eventuais crises de caixa.

Em outras palavras, fica difícil entender como um fundo extra de somente US$ 100 bilhões poderia propiciar mais defesa contra sufocos dessa natureza do que esse montão de recursos formado pelas próprias reservas internacionais. As da China, por exemplo, são 35 vezes maiores do que será o patrimônio desse fundo; as da Rússia, 5 vezes; as do Brasil, 3,7; e as da Índia, 2,9.

Neste momento, o único país que poderia ser atingido por um esvaziamento relativamente rápido de suas reservas seria a África do Sul, que, no entanto, tem sozinha mais da metade dos recursos disponíveis nesse fundo.

Do ponto de vista do Brasil, a disponibilidade dessa nova fonte de recursos de contingência poderia servir para que o Banco Central reduzisse sua demanda de dólares que depois fossem estocados nas reservas, como são hoje, a um custo muito alto. (Porque cada compra de dólares que depois serão aplicados a juros baixos exige emissão de títulos da dívida pública, que pagam juros de ao menos 7,25% ao ano.)

Mas a decisão de aumentar ou diminuir as reservas internacionais do Brasil não é determinada pela necessidade de construir um colchão de proteção contra crises, mas pela de executar a política cambial. Se o governo federal entende que é preciso desvalorizar o real (elevar a cotação do dólar) ou impedir valorização maior, o Banco Central compra moeda estrangeira no câmbio interno; se o objetivo é o contrário, vende.

Do ponto de vista técnico, esse fundo não faz lá muito sentido. Nenhum grupo de países se disporia a criar um patrimônio desses somente para uma ajuda eventual à África do Sul.

O que se pode dizer é que se trata de uma iniciativa destinada a passar o recado de que as cinco economias que fazem parte do Brics querem demonstrar que são mais do que uma sigla inventada em 2001 por um economista (Jim O'Neill, então do Grupo Goldman Sachs). E que, agora, se propõem a dar certo conteúdo político a uma aglomeração que, no momento, está longe de compor uma unidade.
 ===========

Group of Emerging Nations Plans to Form Development Bank

Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Tuesday in Durban, South Africa,  just ahead of Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, South Africa’s defense minister.
JOHANNESBURG — A group of five emerging world economic powers met in Africa for the first time Tuesday, gathering in South Africa for a summit meeting at which they plan to announce the creation of a new development bank, a direct challenge to the dominance of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
The leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, all members of the so-called BRICS Group of developing nations, have agreed to create the bank to focus on infrastructure and development in emerging markets. The countries are also planning to discuss pooling their foreign reserves as a bulwark against currency crises, part of a growing effort by emerging economic powers to build institutions and forums that are alternatives to Western-dominated ones.
“Up until now, it has been a loose arrangement of five countries meeting once a year,” said Abdullah Verachia, director of the Frontier Advisory Group, which focuses on emerging markets. “It is going to be the first real institution we have seen.”
But the alliance faces serious questions about whether the member countries have enough in common and enough shared goals to function effectively as a counterweight to the West.
“Despite the political rhetoric around partnerships, there is a huge amount of competition between the countries,” Mr. Verachia said.
For all the talk of solidarity among emerging giants, the group’s concrete achievements have been few since its first full meeting, in Russia in 2009. This is partly because its members are deeply divided on some basic issues and are in many ways rivals, not allies, in the global economy.
They have widely divergent economies, disparate foreign policy aims and different forms of government. India, Brazil and South Africa have strong democratic traditions, while Russia and China are autocratic.
The bloc even struggles to agree on overhauling international institutions. India, Brazil and South Africa want permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council, for example, but China, which already has one, has shown little interest in shaking up the status quo.
The developing countries in the bloc hardly invest in one another, preferring their neighbors and the developed world’s major economies, according to a report released Monday by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
Just 2.5 percent of foreign investment by BRICS countries goes to other countries in the group, the report said, while more than 40 percent of their foreign investment goes to the developed world’s largest economies, the European Union, the United States and Japan.
Africa, home to several of the world’s fastest-growing economies, drew less than 5 percent of total investment from BRICS nations, the report said. France and the United States still have the highest rate of foreign investment in Africa. Despite China’s reputation for heavy investment in Africa, Malaysia has actually invested $2 billion more in Africa than China has.
Still, 15 African heads of state were invited to the summit meeting in South Africa as observers, a sign of the continent’s increasing importance as an investment destination for all of the BRICS countries.
China is in many ways a major competitor of its fellow BRICS member, South Africa. South African manufacturers, retail chains, cellphone service providers, mining operations and tourism companies have bet heavily on African economic growth and in some ways go head-to-head against Chinese companies on the continent.
South Africa is playing host for the first time since becoming the newest member of what had been known previously as BRIC. Many analysts have questioned South Africa’s inclusion in the group because its economy is tiny compared with the other members, ranking 28th in the world, and its growth rates in recent years have been anemic.
In an interview last year with a South African newspaper, Jim O’Neill, the Goldman Sachs executive who coined the term BRIC, said South Africa did not belong in the group.
“South Africa has too small an economy,” Mr. O’Neill told the newspaper, The Mail & Guardian. “There are not many similarities with the other four countries in terms of the numbers. In fact, South Africa’s inclusion has somewhat weakened the group’s power.”
But South Africa’s sluggish growth has become the rule, not the exception, among the onetime powerhouse nations. India’s hopes of reaching double-digit growth have ebbed. Brazil’s surging economy, credited with pulling millions out of poverty, has cooled drastically. Even China’s growth has slowed.
And once welcome, Chinese investment in Africa is viewed with increasing suspicion.
On a visit to Beijing last year, President Jacob Zuma of South Africa warned that Chinese trade ties in Africa were following a troubling pattern.
“Africa’s commitment to China’s development has been demonstrated by supply of raw materials, other products and technology transfer,” Mr. Zuma said. “This trade pattern is unsustainable in the long term. Africa’s past economic experience with Europe dictates a need to be cautious when entering into partnerships with other economies.”
Mr. Zuma appeared to have a change of heart before the summit meeting, saying Monday that China does not approach Africa with a colonial attitude.
But other African leaders are not so sure. Lamido Sanusi, governor of Nigeria’s central bank, wrote in an opinion article published in The Financial Times this month that China’s approach to Africa is in many ways as exploitative as the West’s has been.
“China is no longer a fellow underdeveloped economy — it is the world’s second-biggest, capable of the same forms of exploitation as the West,” he wrote. “It is a significant contributor to Africa’s deindustrialization and underdevelopment.”

Um comentário:

Anônimo disse...

Se o Brasil é o "patinho feio"("canard boiteux'!) dos BRICS...com exceção da China ( um esplendoroso "pavão"!), todos os demais são "chesters"(ou "chesteres"!), ou seja, "galinhas" com "mania de grandeza" que pensam ser um "peru"!


Vale!