Our closest new friends in the block (of nuclear would-be countries)...

The Birth of a Bomb
A History of Iran's Nuclear Ambitions
By Erich Follath and Holger Stark
Der Spiegel, 06/17/2010

In the dispute over Tehran's nuclear program, the UN Security Council has imposed new sanctions. Is Iran truly building a nuclear bomb as Western countries claim? Or are countries playing up the dangers to bring Iran to its knees? SPIEGEL traces the history of Tehran's nuclear program -- with stops in Washington, Vienna and Isfahan.

It is yet another of those secret meetings at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The deputy director general of the agency, who works on behalf of the United Nations to prevent nuclear bombs from getting into the wrong hands, has invited 35 diplomats to a meeting on the fifth floor of the UN building in Vienna. Some take pictures with their mobile phones of the ice floes on the Danube River drifting by below. Everyone is prepared for a routine meeting. But everything will be different this time. With the help of high-tech espionage, history is written on this February day in 2008. And perhaps it will later be said that it was the day Iran finally lost its innocence, and the day the Israelis were provided with arguments for a war.

Olli Heinonen confronts the diplomats with new information about Tehran's nuclear program. The Finnish nuclear scientist, the IAEA's deputy director general and head of the Department of Safeguards, has been to Natanz and Isfahan several times himself, and his inspectors, or "watchdogs," report back to him regularly. In addition, cameras monitor nuclear activities in many of the Iranian facilities. As useful as all of this is, it doesn't replace supplementary, secret information.

Heinonen knows that there are many things happening in Iran that he doesn't know about. Nevertheless, he has received critical information through indirect sources, including recordings made by a leading Iranian nuclear scientist.

A Treasure Trove of Facts
Always wary of attempts to manipulate him, Heinonen has spent a lot of time comparing the exclusive information with his own records and checking it against other reports. His research has led him to conclude that he has been given a treasure trove of facts, images and names -- all of it "with a 90-percent likelihood of being authentic."

The room is dark as the projector hums in the background. For the next two hours, Heinonen projects images, diagrams and copies of manuscripts onto the wall. The story they tell is diametrically opposed to the official Tehran version, which holds that Iran is using fissile material for peaceful purposes only and that there is no military nuclear program. "Project 5" describes Iran's uranium mining program and how it processes the material into uranium hexafluoride, an intermediate product in the process of producing nuclear fuel. "Project 110" depicts the testing of highly explosive nuclear materials. "Project 111" illustrates attempts to build a warhead for Iran's Shahab-3 missile. The IAEA experts have translated a literary motif on the first page of the document that reads: "Fate does not change people as long as people do not change fate."

Heinonen says that all of this information raises urgent questions, particularly about a man named Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the secret head of the program, whose name is mentioned repeatedly in the documents. Although Heinonen doesn't say that his information constitutes evidence of a nuclear bomb program, no one has ever come this close to offering a "smoking gun" for an Iranian military nuclear program. The presentation, by a Scandinavian known for his levelheadedness, offers a convincing body of evidence -- and makes a very strong impression on the assembled experts.

The Iranian ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, jumps up excitedly and promptly claims the information Heinonen has just presented is nothing but "fabrications," a claim he will later be forced to partially retract. The Americans, the French and others are busy taking notes and trying to take pictures of the slides with their mobile phones, as one of the attendees recalls.

'Chariots of Fire'
Heinonen has kept the best for the end: a three-minute film from Tehran that was probably intended for the country's senior political leaders and is as professionally produced as a trailer for a Hollywood movie. It shows the computer-supported simulation of an explosion of a missile warhead. As the IAEA deputy director general soberly points out, the simulated explosion, at an altitude of 600 meters (1,970 feet), would make no sense for the use of conventional, chemical or biological weapons.

The clip uses the powerful theme music from the film "Chariots of Fire," by Vangelis, which won an Oscar in 1982, together with the film of the same name. But there is also another context to the phrase "chariots of fire," and it can be assumed that the highly educated Iranian scientists knew what it was. The 19th-century British writer William Blake popularized the unusual phrase, with its biblical origins, in a short poem from the preface to his epic "Milton: A Poem," best known today as the hymn "Jerusalem." The lyrics read: "Bring me my bow of burning gold / Bring me my arrows of desire / Bring me my spear: O clouds unfold! / Bring me my chariot of fire!" Were the Iranians using the phrase "chariots of fire" as a poetic euphemism for the atom bomb?

Follow the article in seven parts:

* Part 1: A History of Iran's Nuclear Ambitions
* Part 2: Pinpricks with Little Impact on Berlin
* Part 3: How the World's Nuclear Dealer Got His Start
* Part 4: 'Arming to Threaten the Peace of the World'
* Part 5: 'A Very Dangerous Man'
* Part 6: Growing Suspicions of a Weapon Program
* Part 7: Israel Secretly Prepares for a Military Strike

Pausa para... a Kabala do diplomata

Não sei é para levar a sério, mas recebi de alguém entendido em Kabala.
Acho que não sirvo para diplomata: não nasci num dia 2...

Material Retirado da Kabala Judaica
O DIA EM QUE VOCÊ NASCEU E A SUA FORMA DE AGIR !!??
(...)
DIAS 2: DIA DA DIPLOMACIA

É um ser diplomata por excelência. É aquele que harmoniza o grupo e a família; o que possui o dom da reconciliação.
É cooperativo, aparentemente tímido e vulnerável, de certa maneira passivo, mas sempre atento aos detalhes de seu ambiente.
Enquanto solteiro é comum envolver-se romanticamente e quase sempre tais romances são complicados.. Precisa se casar, pois a vida de casado lhe trará muito mais tranqüilidade, e onde encontrará um parceiro compatível e compreensível, sendo excelente marido ou esposa.
No trabalho sente-se melhor desenvolvendo atividades ligadas a grupos ou recebendo ordens, pois com sua personalidade um tanto passiva, é amado por todos e é sempre excelente profissional. Não suporta ficar parado procurando sempre algo para fazer. É compreensivo com os sentimentos alheios e incapaz de ferir quem quer que seja.
Um dos seus grandes defeitos é a inclinação para subestimar seus dotes e capacidades, tanto intelectuais como profissionais, sendo, muitas vezes, subordinado de pessoas com capacidades inferiores às suas.
Poderá se dar bem em qualquer serviço público, diplomata, pesquisador, bibliotecário, contabilidade, serviços sociais, professor, principalmente na música ou de literatura.
Caso não seja culturalmente desenvolvido, pode-se tornar cruel, inescrupuloso e até violento, no propósito de atingir seus objetivos.

Este blog pede encarecidamente a quem possuir a última edição da Kabala, que confira para saber se o dia 2 é mesmo o dia do diplomata. Ainda tenho uma leve esperança de que eu sirva para essa coisa...

Quem disse que os romances de espionagem estão fora de moda?

Boa notícia: eles nunca sairam de moda.
Má notícia: os personagens deste "romance" estão completamente fora de moda...

The World from Berlin: 'Espionage Is Still Obligatory for Most States'
SPIEGEL ONLINE 2010
06/30/2010 01:53 PM

The arrest of 10 alleged Russian spies in the US may have caused tensions between the two former Cold War enemies. But German commentators on Wednesday argue that the case is unlikely to do much lasting damage. In today's world, they say, spying is a necessary evil.

Their exploits sound like something from a bad spy novel. Invisible ink, coded radio transmissions and even the swapping of identical bags -- the 10 alleged Russian sleeper agents arrested on Sunday seemed to have a penchant for the clichés of the espionage business. However, the very public unveiling of the spy ring could have serious repercussions, coming just as relations between Washington and Moscow were finally improving.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was in the US only last week on a state visit, a sign of warming relations between the two old Cold War enemies following the election of President Barack Obama. And a new nuclear arms control deal, known as New START is on the cards, although it still needs to be ratified by the US Senate and the Russian parliament.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, himself a former spy, said on Tuesday that he hoped the series of arrests would not harm US-Russian relations. Russian officials initially denounced the arrests as "Cold War-era spy stories" and suggested elements in the US government were attempting to undermine the move toward better relations between the two countries. The Russian Foreign Ministry has since admitted that some of those arrested are Russian citizens but says they did nothing to hurt US interests.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted that the US authorities had announced the arrests just days after Medvedev's visit, saying: "The only thing I can say is that the moment for doing that has been chosen with special elegance."

Operating Without Diplomatic Cover
The 10 people arrested across the US on Sunday have been charged with failing to register as foreign agents. Some may also face money laundering charges. Another suspect was arrested in Cyprus on Tuesday. The suspects have not been charged with the more serious crime of espionage. And it is not yet clear if the agents passed on any important information to their handlers.

The accused were allegedly part of an operation to infiltrate US society in a bid to gather information relating to US policymaking. In espionage parlance, they were "illegals," spies operating without diplomatic cover. Court papers say the operation goes back as far as the 1990s and that some of those arrested had been tracked for years by the FBI.

A few of the suspects lived as married couples, and some of them used fake identities, claiming to be US or Canadian citizens, while others used their real names. The decision to make the arrests came after it seemed the investigation had been uncovered and one of the suspects was preparing to leave the country.

Most German commentators on Wednesday think the spy scandal is a storm in a teacup and predict that it will have little long-lasting impact on US-Russian relations.

The Financial Times Deutschland writes:
"Political espionage is still obligatory for most states. That goes for the US as much as for Russia and China. The fuss that the US government has made about the unveiled spies is hypocritical. After all, it is far from a surprise that Russia sends agents to the US. And it would be a great surprise if there were no US spies in Moscow."

"Particularly in these times when the clear front lines are crumbling and where minor states could become nuclear powers within a few years, governments have to be kept informed about what is going on around them. That is true particularly for the last superpower, the US, which would be a target for potential aggressors. Giving up a widespread network of spies would be negligent."

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:
"At least the US intelligence service had enough respect to wait until the honored guest from Russia had flown home before they released the news of the Russian spy ring."
"For Moscow, this delay was not long enough. The bitterly angry irony of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was the most charming expression of rage. Others felt reminded of the Cold War. The old reflexes still functioned -- on both sides. However, in all likelihood the affair will be nothing more than a short celebration for the conservatives in both countries, a cold rain shower in the political summer."
"Neither the Kremlin nor Prime Minister Vladimir Putin have any increased interest in seeing a dozen unveiled agents ruin with one blow the past few months' careful policy of easing tensions. Moscow is set on appeasement and on the urgent modernization of a Russia that is still backwards economically. And for that they need the help of the US and American investors ... In all likelihood, therefore, the excitement of a few hot days is likely to cool down very quickly."

The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:
"The timing couldn't be worse for the blowing of the spies' cover. The Senate in Washington still has to ratify the New START treaty for the reduction of strategic nuclear weapons, something that was already far from a sure thing. The spy affair could grow into a bigger burden.
Presumably Russia will now have to expel a few American diplomats. However, the likelihood that there are quite a few people in Russia spying for the Americans, could calm down the crisis."

The conservative Die Welt writes:
"The ridicule that has greeted the agents, who seemed to be having such a great time in the US that they didn't want to spoil the fun with espionage, will probably not be viewed with amusement in Washington and Moscow. Espionage is no trivial matter, not even between partners."
"It is curious to realize that the deployment of spies in the comfortable West still leads to idleness. In Moscow, and particularly in Pyongyang, Tehran, Baghdad or Kabul, the lack of distractions and the fact that discovery could mean death, makes agents a lot more diligent. And there is no possibility of disappearing into middle-class anonymity like that achieved by the Russian agents in the US."

Siobhán Dowling

Brasilianistas: Congresso da Brasa em Brasilia, 22 a 24 de julho de 2010

Brazilian Studies Association
Congresso em Brasília - Brasa X - 22 a 24 de julho de 2010

A) BRASA (www.brasa.org)
A Brazilian Studies Association (BRASA) constitui um grupo internacional e interdisciplinar de estudiosos que apóiam e promovem estudos brasileiros em todos os campos, em especial nas humanidades e nas ciências sociais. A BRASA se dedica à pesquisa de temas brasileiros em todo o mundo, particularmente nos Estados Unidos. A BRASA tem aproximadamente 600 membros nos Estados Unidos, no Brasil, na Europa, no Canadá e em outros países latino-americanos.

A direção atual é assegurada pela professora Peggy Sharpe, da Universidade Estadual da Flórida, como presidente, pelo vice-presidente Randal Johnson, da Universidade da Califórnia em Los Angeles e pelo diretor executivo da BRASA, professor Marshall C. Eakin, da Universidade do Tennessee. Dez outros acadêmicos brasileiros e americanos, inclusive um diplomata brasileiro, integram o seu Comitê Executivo.

A BRASA organiza uma conferência internacional de estudos brasileiros a cada dois anos. A mais recente, BRASA IX, ocorreu na Universidade de Tulane, em Nova Orleans, Louisiana, de 27 a 29 de março de 2008. Ademais dos painéis institucionais e das mesas acadêmicas, a BRASA homenageia uma personalidade da área atribuindo uma distinção, Lifetime Contribution Award. Na BRASA IX, o homenageado foi o professor Gregory Rabassa, e na BRASA VIII o professor Thomas Skidmore.

B) Congresso BRASA X - 22 a 24 de Julho de 2010, Brasília, DF
O congresso da BRASA X terá lugar de 22 a 24 de Julho de 2010, em Brasília no Centro de Convenções Brasil 21.
São esperados entre 300 e 400 associados estrangeiros e entre 500 e 600 brasileiros.
A conferência terá 10 sessões com 15 painéis por sessão, durante dois dias e meio, num total de 150 painéis.

O Professor Werner Baer, conhecido economista da Universidade do Illinois em Urbana, será homenageado com o Lifetime Contribution Award na BRASA X.

Questao do concurso do Itamaraty...

97 O MERCOSUL, orientado pela lógica da globalização, segue o modelo adotado pela União Européia, que prioriza o intercâmbio comercial.

-------

O gabarito aponta como certo o item acima.
Eu só consegui pensar naquele samba do Stanislaw Ponte Preta, cujo nome já é um atentado ao politicamente correto que vigora em nossos dias...

Addendum importante:
OK, OK, não vamos ser injustos com o CESPE e com o Itamaraty. O meu indutor em erro se desculpou pelo erro, como abaixo ele me escreve:

Prezado Professor:
Mas devo consignar meu engano (que percebi ao ler o comentário acima). Na realidade, como apontado por João Marcos, o gabarito aponta o item como ERRADO e não como certo. Fiz alguma confusão na leitura do gabarito, daí meu inconformisto com a resposta (que é ERRADA, portanto, o gabarito está ok).
O Gabarito definitivo encontra-se aqui:
http://www.cespe.unb.br/concursos/_antigos/2004/IRBRTPS2004/Arquivos/GAB_DEF_IRB.PDF
Prof. Paulo, obrigado, mais uma vez, pela atenção.
Abçs,

Bem, a única coisa que eu acrescentaria, seria esta: o autor da questão quis mesmo fazer um "samba do crioulo doido", sendo explicitamente politicamente incorreto (por muito menos um professor da UnB foi processado, por se referir a negros americanos como crioulos...).

Agora, cá entre nós: muitos candidatos, animados com aquele fervor militante de que só alguns ideólogos neófitos são capazes, devem ter pensado que, realmente, esse Mercosul neoliberal foi feito mesmo para cumprir objetivos exclusivamente comerciais, e que ele merece toda a sua reorientação social e política que vem atravessando nos últimos oito anos. Nunca se deve desconfiar da capacidade de alguns reagirem de um jeito estranho quando ouvem a palavra globalização; eles vão logo sacando seus revólveres...

Manual de Economia Al Reves: ainda uma aula do Professor Chavez

Sempre vou me surpreender com a ENORME capacidade de certas pessoas de reescreverem, completamente, toda a parte de microeconomia (e se der a macroeconomia também) dos manuais de economia com base na vontade pessoal, e não nas realidades econômicas mais comezinhas. Vale o prêmio Ignóbil de Economia do ano.

Venezuela: prohíben venta informal de alimentos si no cumple con el control de precios
Infolatam
Caracas, 29 de junio de 2010

Chávez aplica esta medida en momentos en los que ha arreciado el intermitente desabastecimiento.

El Gobierno venezolano ordenó que los comerciantes informales del país solo podrán vender alimentos básicos si respetan el control de precios vigente para los mismos y garantizan las condiciones de "higiene y salubridad" necesarias.

Una resolución publicada en la gaceta oficial oficializó la "prohibición absoluta de venta" de los alimentos básicos "a través del comercio informal, ambulante o eventual donde no se garantice el cumplimiento de los precios establecidos por el Ejecutivo Nacional".

La prohibición se aplica además cuando los vendedores informales no puedan garantizar las "condiciones de higiene y salubridad de los alimentos para el consumo humano declarados de primera necesidad", informaron medios locales que citaron la gaceta oficial.

En Venezuela se da el fenómeno de que alimentos controlados como el café, el azúcar y la harina de maíz desaparecen cíclicamente de los anaqueles de los comercios formales, pero se los puede hallar en las ventas ambulantes o informales con precios muy por encima de los establecidos por el Gobierno.

El Ejecutivo del presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, aplica la medida sobre la venta informal de alimentos básicos en momentos en que ha arreciado el intermitente desabastecimiento de algunos de ellos, y el sector acumula una inflación de 20,5 por ciento en lo que va de año, según datos de Banco Central de Venezuela (BCV).

El Gobierno socialista de Chávez mantiene desde 2003 un régimen de control de precios sobre un centenar de productos alimenticios y médicos, entre otros, considerados de primera necesidad, con el fin de garantizar el acceso a los mismos a la mayoría de la población.

Las Claves:
* Una resolución oficializó la "prohibición absoluta de venta" de los alimentos básicos "a través del comercio informal, ambulante o eventual donde no se garantice el cumplimiento de los precios establecidos".
* Se estableció "30 días continuos" para que los comerciantes informales se adecúen a la medida oficial,

Duas visoes do Brasil: a mitica e a real

Cada um escolhe a sua...

A nation’s destiny
By Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
Financial Times, 29/06/2010

When I look back on my seven years as president of Brazil, I have great reason to be proud of the achievements of my government.
In that time, we have returned to growth an economy that had long been stagnant, taken tens of millions of people out of absolute poverty, created more than 14m formal jobs and increased workers’ incomes. Today, most Brazilians are members of the middle class. Our internal market has also grown exceptionally, which was crucial in protecting Brazil from the worst effects of the global financial crisis.
We did this while keeping inflation under control, reducing the ratio of debt to gross domestic product and rebuilding the regulatory functions of the Brazilian state.
We set in motion a powerful process to improve our infrastructure – in energy, housing and social assets – through the accelerated growth programme. As part of this, we are eliminating the bottlenecks that have affected our competitiveness in the past – what is often called the “Brazil cost”.
I am the first president of Brazil without a university degree, yet my government has built the most universities, and ensured they open their doors to hundreds of thousands of young poor people.
Brazil has also been able to substantially reduce its vulnerability to external shocks. We are no longer debtors, but have become international creditors. There is no little irony in the fact that the union leader who once shouted “IMF out!” in the streets has become the president who paid off Brazil’s debts to the same institution – and ended up lending it $14bn.
It is particularly satisfying to have led these changes while strengthening democracy. The tough criticism I have faced from the opposition and from sections of the media are testament to the health of Brazil’s democracy.
As I near the end of my second term as president, what makes me particularly proud is the place Brazil has come to occupy in the world over the past few years, along with other emerging nations. With them, we are creating the basis of a new international economic and political geography. With them, we have sought to build a world that is more just in social and economic terms – free of hunger and misery, respectful of human rights and able to confront the threat of global warming.
But the successes my government has achieved cannot obscure the enormous challenges that still lie ahead. Most importantly, we still have significant amounts of poverty in our country. The creation of opportunities for our young people, in particular, should remain a key objective, as it is central to the future we are building for Brazil. To do this, we must address issues such as how to improve our education system, how to find effective ways of dealing with drugs and violence, and how to offer our young people real choices in terms of work, leisure and culture.
Some of these initiatives will be decisive in the construction of an economy that is based increasingly on knowledge. The great advances we have made in the field of science – which have placed us among the best in the world in this area – must continue and be translated into technological progress.
But there are also political deficits we will have to face. The reform of the Brazilian state, which we have begun, must continue and deepen, along with tax reform. The reform of our political and electoral systems cannot wait any longer – that would compromise the continuity of the advances we have enjoyed in recent years.
For myself, after leaving the presidency I want to continue to contribute to improving people’s quality of life. At the international level, I intend to concentrate my attention on initiatives to benefit the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, and the continent of Africa. Brazil has much experience it can share. We cannot be an island of prosperity surrounded by a sea of poverty and social injustice.
I want to continue the efforts my government has made towards creating a multilateral and multipolar world that is free from hunger and poverty. A world in which peace is no longer a utopia, but a concrete possibility.

==============

A Noruega tropical de Lula
Editorial - O Estado de São Paulo, 30/06/2010

Convidado pelo Financial Times (FT) de Londres a fazer uma avaliação do seu governo e a antecipar o que pretende fazer depois de deixar o Planalto, no primeiro dia de 2011, o presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva respondeu com um artigo de 700 palavras, publicado ontem em um suplemento especial sobre o Brasil.

Trata-se de uma versão comparativamente austera, como convém aos textos do mais influente diário econômico do mundo, da exuberante teoria do “nunca antes na história deste País”, complementada pela promessa de “continuar a contribuir para a melhora da qualidade de vida das pessoas” - desta vez no mundo inteiro.

Mas a megalomania se livra dos arreios quando, para justificar o seu intento de fazer pelos latino-americanos, caribenhos e africanos o que se vangloria de ter feito pelos brasileiros, Lula não deixa por menos: “Não podemos ser uma ilha de prosperidade cercada por um mar de pobreza e injustiça social.”

Sejam quais forem as evidências que ele queira enfileirar sobre os progressos dos últimos anos da economia brasileira e das condições de vida da população - e seria pueril, ou desonesto, negá-los -, Lula fala do Brasil, 75.º colocado no Índice de Desenvolvimento Humano (IDH), como se fosse uma Noruega.

O país nórdico lidera o ranking criado pelas Nações Unidas e gasta proporcionalmente mais do que qualquer outro país em ajuda externa. Na realidade, já descontados os Estados Unidos e o Canadá, 16 países do Hemisfério têm um IDH melhor que o brasileiro.

Como era de esperar, Lula credita exclusivamente ao seu governo o fato de o Brasil sangrar em saúde. O que veio antes foi como se não tivesse existido, ou, quando existiu, foi contraproducente. “Devolvemos o crescimento a uma economia de há muito estagnada”, alardeia, “e o fizemos mantendo a inflação sob controle, reduzindo a relação entre a dívida e o PIB e reconstruindo as funções reguladoras do Estado brasileiro.”

O papel, como se diz, aceita tudo. Nem a conjuntura internacional excepcionalmente favorável a exportadores de produtos primários e insumos, como é o Brasil, nem, muito menos, a decisão de Lula de se apropriar da “herança maldita” do governo Fernando Henrique, na esfera macroeconômica, precisam ser reconhecidas - o que não há de ter escapado àquela parcela dos leitores do Financial Times que sabe que a história do País não começou quando o atual presidente chegou ao Planalto.

Além de se atribuir a paternidade pelo “novo Brasil”, título do caderno especial do FT, Lula fez pelo menos 2 gols em impedimento, na esperança de que os árbitros estivessem olhando para o outro lado. A afirmação sobre a reconstrução das funções reguladoras do Estado nacional é mais do que falsa. O que o lulismo tem feito com as agências reguladoras é privá-las de sua autonomia e manipular a sua composição para atender aos interesses do governo e seus aliados políticos e politiqueiros. A isso se chama destruir e não reconstruir.

O leitor distraído pode tomar pelo valor de face o que Lula escolheu dizer sobre a transformação material do País, mas os investidores sabem perfeitamente quanto há de embromação nas seguintes palavras: “Pusemos em marcha um processo poderoso de melhorar nossa infraestrutura (?). Como parte disso, estamos eliminando os gargalos que afetavam nossa competitividade no passado - o que costuma ser chamado “custo Brasil”.”

Lula reconhece “os enormes desafios pela frente”, a começar da pobreza ainda significativa, a insuficiência do sistema de educação, além da droga e da violência. E menciona em seguida a necessidade das reformas tributária e político-eleitoral. Estas últimas “não podem esperar mais”, sob pena de “comprometer a continuidade dos avanços de que desfrutamos nos anos recentes”.

O presidente fala como se tivesse dado o melhor de si, ao longo desses 7 anos, para mudar as regras do jogo político. Não apenas não o fez - e ao não fazê-lo permitiu que prevalecessem no Congresso os interesses dos que querem que tudo permaneça como está -, como ainda tirou proveito da fragmentada e reduzida representatividade do sistema de partidos para formar a sua enxundiosa base parlamentar, vitaminada pelo mensalão.