As relações internacionais do Brasil numa era de fragmentação geopolítica - Paulo Roberto de Almeida

 As relações internacionais do Brasil numa era de fragmentação geopolítica

Paulo Roberto de Almeida

A divisão bipolar do planeta durante a Guerra Fria iniciada em 1947 parecia ter sido superada em 1992, quando os presidentes dos Estados Unidos, George Bush, e da Rússia, Boris Ieltsin, proclamaram a emergência de uma “nova ordem mundial”. O otimismo quanto à convergência de interesses entre os grandes atores geopolíticos se manteve durante alguns anos, chamados de “pós-Guerra Fria”, mas depreciativamente caracterizados como sendo o de um“momento unipolar”, isto é, o da hegemonia dos Estados Unidos. A Rússia de Putin ainda se encontrava empenhada numa difícil reconstrução econômica (e militar) e a China, recém-admitida na OMC em 2001, ainda ensaiava sua extraordinária expansão comercial e tecnológica das décadas seguintes, que a levou a se afirmar, em poucos anos, como a segunda maior potência econômica do planeta e a primeira no domínio do comércio mundial. Em 2009 ela já tinha substituído os Estados Unidos como primeiro parceiro comercial do Brasil, depois de um domínio americano de mais de 150 anos nos nossos intercâmbios externos.

Analogias históricas são sempre enganosas, mas observa-se uma tendência, entre os analistas internacionais, no sentido de caracterizar o atual cenário geopolítico internacional como sendo o de uma “segunda Guerra Fria”, ao início com características mais econômicas e tecnológicas, no período recente mais marcadamente geopolíticos. Ela coloca, em dois campos opostos, o império americano, de um lado, ainda hegemônico no plano militar, e, de outro, dois novos contendores, Rússia e China, unidos por uma “aliança sem limites” a partir de fevereiro de 2022, pouco antes da invasão da Ucrânia pela Rússia. 

A similaridade de situações pode não se dar exatamente nos moldes da “primeira” Guerra Fria, quando o que predominou foi o chamado “equilíbrio do terror nuclear”; mas eventuais desenvolvimentos, nesta nova fase, podem desembocar num cenário ainda mais preocupante, que foi oque prevaleceu no “Norte Global” dos anos 1930, colocando em confronto aberto as democracias de mercado do Atlântico Norte– então com vários pacifistas no comando das principais potências – e as potências fascistas, expansionistas e belicistas, que se opunham a esse poderio geopolítico e que pretendiam contestar pela força das armas essa hegemonia. O confronto desembocou na maior conflagração militar da história, com dezenas de milhões de mortos e a conformação de uma nova ordem global a partir de 1945, um cenário mundial construído principalmente pelos Estados Unidos e que seguiu sendo caracteristicamente ocidental, em virtude da mediocridade econômica do universo comunista e das tribulações internas da China durante maior parte do período.

No pós-guerra, em face da grande divisão do mundo, a da Guerra Fria geopolítica e das contendas interimperiais do período 1946-1989, o Brasil construiu, com hesitações ao início, uma postura diplomática de neutralidade e de real autonomia na política externa. Isto foi positivo para os objetivos prioritários da nação, o do crescimento econômico e o do seu desenvolvimento social. Não parece mais ser o caso no período recente, desde quando o candidato Lula, ainda em 2022, e o agora presidente, a partir de 2023, já proclamou várias vezes sua preferência pessoal – ou seja, ainda não uma escolha da diplomacia brasileira – pela construção de uma “nova ordem global multipolar”, nos mesmos termos vagos que vem sendo anunciados pelo presidente russo Vladimir Putin, secundado pelo líder chinês Xi Jinping. Esse objetivo pode ser encampado pelo foro Brics, em fase de ampliação para o Brics+, com a incorporação de mais de uma dezena de países associados a partir de 2023.

De maneira já evidente, o que se assiste em 2025 – quando o Brasil responde pela presidência interina do Brics+,acolhendo a sua reunião de cúpula – é a uma nova fratura entre as grandes potências, como não se via desde o entre guerras. A preeminência de fato de uma ordem ocidental,construída nos estertores da Segunda Guerra Mundial, vem sendo ativamente contestada pelo novo poderio econômico e militar das duas grandes potências declaradamente adversárias dessa ordem. A Rússia de Putin, em especial, parece repetir os descaminhos diplomáticos dos impérios centrais na fase preliminar à Grande Guerra, assim como as aventuras bélicas das potências fascistas agressivas dos anos 1930. Naquela conjuntura, o Brasil tentou manter, tanto quanto conseguiu, sua neutralidade em face dessas disputas imperiais, mas soube escolher o seu campo no momento decisivo, graças ao tirocínio esclarecido de um estadista, Oswaldo Aranha, nutrido nos ensinamentos do barão do Rio Branco e na doutrina jurídica construída pelo jurista Rui Barbosa. 

A fragmentação geopolítica da atual conjuntura internacional, que vem sendo chamada – sem muita originalidade histórica – de “segunda Guerra Fria”, ameaça, assim, se converter em guerra quente, talvez em conflagração direta, pela agressividade bélica de uma das duas potências autocráticas, declaradamente opostas à ordem ocidental “hegemônica”. É nesse contexto que o presidente Lula, em clara ruptura com os padrões tradicionais da diplomacia brasileira, de afirmada autonomia em relação às contendas políticas das grandes potências e de neutralidade em face dos conflitos interimperiais, parece ter escolhido o seu “campo”, que é o dos promotores de uma largamente indefinida “nova ordem global multipolar”, sem que isso constitua, ainda, uma nova doutrina para a diplomacia brasileira.

Se tal orientação se confirmar, enquanto política de Estado, ela pode ser prejudicial ao Brasil, não apenas no contexto dos seus objetivos e interesses nacionais permanentes, de crescimento econômico e desenvolvimento social, mas também no campo dos valores e princípios democráticos e humanistas expressos nas cláusulas de relações internacionais do artigo 4º da Constituição de 1988. No primeiro semestre de 2025, um eventual desvio em relação a esses fundamentos conceituais da política externa e da diplomacia brasileira permanecia ainda no terreno das hipóteses. Uma evolução mais conforme à tradicional postura do Brasil nas suas relações internacionais indicaria um desejável retorno à autonomia e à independência de sua política externa e de neutralidade no posicionamento diplomático em face das contendas interimperiais.

 

Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Brasília, 24 de janeiro de 2025

Frases de Winston Churchill - Gabriela Bruschi (First Online)

Winston Churchill, 150 anos desde seu nascimento. As frases icônicas do primeiro-ministro britânico, um grande motivador

Gabriela Bruschi

First Online, 1 de dezembro de 2024, 10:22

https://www.firstonline.info/pt/Winston-Churchill-150-anos-de-seu-nascimento-as-frases-ic%C3%B4nicas-do-grande-motivador-do-primeiro-ministro-brit%C3%A2nico/

As suas palavras, afiadas e cheias de perspicácia, resistiram ao passar dos anos e o seu papel como estrategista e visionário permaneceu intacto através das gerações

Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, nasceu em 30 de novembro de 1874, há 150 anos, no Palácio de Blenheim, em Woodstock, em Oxfordshire. Foi um líder durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial e uma figura icónica do século XX, deixando um legado significativo. A foto dele com os dedos desenhando o V é um ícone da vitória sobre o nazismo.

Também foi um escritor e um palestrante refinado e prolífico, lembrado por seu eloquência e os agudos reflexões que refletem sua profunda compreensão da humanidade e da política. Isso é senhas, perspicaz e cheio de perspicácia, resistiu ao passar dos anos e o seu papel como estrategista e visionário permaneceu intacto ao longo das gerações. Hoje seria chamado grande motivador.

Há frases que ficam na história

As citações de Churchill destacam a acuidade, a determinação e a sabedoria que transmitiu ao longo da sua vida e que alimentaram a sua perspectiva sobre liderança, resiliência e coragem em tempos difíceis. Aqui estão os mais famosos:

• “Mudar nem sempre significa melhorar, mas para melhorar é preciso mudar.”
• “O sucesso é a capacidade de passar de um fracasso a outro sem perder o entusiasmo.”
• “Não tenho nada a oferecer além de sangue, trabalho, lágrimas e suor.”
• “A política é quase tão excitante como a guerra e quase tão perigosa. Na guerra só se pode morrer uma vez, na política muitas vezes.”
• “Ter medo é uma reação. A coragem, por outro lado, é o resultado de uma decisão.”
• “O poder é perigoso porque corrompe quem o possui e enlouquece quem o deseja.”
• “O esforço contínuo, e não a força ou a inteligência, é a chave para desbloquear o nosso potencial.”
• “É sempre bom olhar para frente, mas é difícil olhar além do que podemos.”
• “A história não será gentil com aqueles que não lutaram pela liberdade.”
• “Quando as águias ficam em silêncio, os papagaios começam a tagarelar.”
• “Na guerra, determinação; na derrota, resistência; na vitória, magnanimidade; em paz, benevolência.”
• “A imaginação consola os homens pelo que eles não podem ser. O humor os consola pelo que eles são.”
• “Já foi dito que a democracia é a pior forma de governo, exceto todas as outras formas que foram tentadas de tempos em tempos.”
• “Fanático é alguém que não consegue mudar de ideia e não pretende mudar de assunto.”
• “A verdade é incontestável. A maldade pode atacá-lo, a ignorância pode zombar dele, mas no final, aí está.”
• “Nós criamos nossos edifícios e então eles nos moldam.”
• “O pessimista vê dificuldade em cada oportunidade; o otimista vê oportunidade em cada dificuldade.”
• “Todos os homens cometem erros, mas só os grandes aprendem com eles.”

Gabriela Bruschi

Milanesa, formada, jornalista profissional desde 1986. Depois de colaborar com jornais e revistas sobre diversos temas, iniciou seu aprendizado na Espresso Letras Financeiras com Giuseppe Turani. Em 1987 mudou-se para Milano Finanza, participando de seu nascimento e desenvolvimento. Em 1991, mudou-se para a Reuters Itália, onde permaneceu até 2014 como vice-chefe de serviço da mesa do Tesouro. Competências específicas: financiamento internacional, contas públicas soberanas e locais, relações com as principais instituições (BCE, Banco de Itália, Tesouro), macroeconomia, cenários internacionais, economia real, empresas, bancos, seguradoras.

Book review: Victor Gaetan, Diplomacia papal e do Vaticano - Anne Marie Cammisa (H-Diplo Review)

 

Greetings Paulo Roberto Almeida, New items have been posted matching your subscriptions. Table of Contents H-Diplo: New posted content H-Diplo Review Essay 610: Cammisa on Gaetan, _God's Diplomats_ H-Diplo: New posted content H-Diplo Review Essay 610: Cammisa on Gaetan, _God's Diplomats_ christopher ball H-Diplo Review Essay 610 Victor Gaetan, God’s Diplomats: Pope Francis, Vatican Diplomacy and America’s Armageddon. Rowman & Littlefield, 2021. ISBN: 9781538150146. 22 January 2025 | PDF: https://hdiplo.org/to/E610 | X: @HDiplo | BlueSky: @h-diplo.bsky.social Editor: Diane Labrosse | Commissioning Editor: Daniel R. Hart | Production Editor: Christopher Ball Review by Anne Marie Cammisa, Georgetown University Victor Gaetan’s God’s Diplomats: Pope Francis, Vatican Diplomacy and America’s Armageddon, is an informative and highly readable book that takes a journey through diplomatic history, European history, and American diplomacy using the lens of Vatican diplomatic theory and strategies. Gaetan, a journalist who holds a PhD, sets out to answer the question of what “Washington fears about Pope Francis (Jorge Bergoglio), the first Jesuit pope, and Vatican Diplomacy” (1).[1] In doing so, he provides an intriguing history of the role of the Vatican (or more specifically, the Holy See) in preventing and ameliorating conflict. He does this through case studies involving several papacies, in particular that of Francis.[2] The short answer to the question of what Washington fears is the Vatican’s independence, and, from the US perspective, at least, the Holy See’s unpredictability. Gaetan’s extensive experience covering the Vatican, his important contacts and interviews, and his own professed Catholic faith contribute to a rich insider’s account of Vatican diplomacy. The book is worth reading for its thorough and thoughtful lifting of a veil over a somewhat hidden aspect of diplomacy, but it also has so much more to offer about that diplomacy. It does not claim to be a neutral work of scholarship. As Gaetan shows, the “unpredictability” of Vatican diplomacy has more to do with a worldview that runs counter to the worldview of the United States and other Western democracies than it does with any inconsistency on the part of Vatican diplomats. He argues that “God’s Diplomats” have different, though not necessarily competing, goals from those of other diplomatic actors. The Vatican’s goal of promoting the kingdom of God will necessitate different actions than the goal of promoting state or economic interests or power. Gaetan does not discuss the Holy See’s attempts to protect its own interest or power, but the examples he does provide show the Vatican’s unique approach to diplomacy.[3] Gaetan divides the book into two parts. Part 1 sets out to answer the question of what Washington fears about Vatican diplomacy. Gaetan answers this question by outlining the goals, tactics, methods, and resources of the Catholic Church in the realm of diplomacy. According to Gaetan, what the US wants in a pope is “a yes man. Francis is constitutionally unable to comply because he is a fearless truth-teller and the first pope to grow up in the global South” (13). Part 1 provides a history of Vatican diplomacy and case studies of such diplomacy under Francis as well as different popes.  Building on the framework set up in the first part, part 2 places Pope Francis’s policies in their diplomatic context and explicates his diplomacy as based on his distinct worldview. Gaetan argues that while Francis’s outlook is entirely consistent with the Vatican perspective, it is also colored by his experience as a Jesuit, a parish priest, a bishop, and an Argentinian who lived through the so-called “Dirty War.”[4] During the Dirty War, Gaetan describes Francis’ fearless leadership, his ability to combine his spiritual life with the defense and protection of potential victims. One student referred to Francis as “an eel” for his “ability to maneuver” in this dangerous environment (147). This part also includes in-depth case studies involving Pope Francis and Vatican relations with seven different conflict areas: Ukraine, Cuba, Kenya, Colombia, the Middle East (Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia), China, and South Sudan. The seven substantive chapters (each of which delves into one of those conflict areas) provide insight into Francis’s approach to diplomacy, which, Gaetan posits, is analogous to spreading the gospel. Part 1 offers a fascinating look at the Catholic Church as an especially important, and perhaps overlooked, actor in the diplomatic world. As such, it provides the background to and history of the Vatican’s approach to diplomacy and international relations (specifically pertaining to Europe). “The hallmarks of Francis’ diplomatic approach,” writes Gaetan, “are three: commitment to the centrality of personal encounters in problem-solving, respect for local perception, and patience” (11). These hallmarks, Gaetan argues, were shaped by Francis’s Jesuit education and pastoral experience, and are entirely consistent with the goals of Catholic diplomacy since the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. Vatican II called for a greater engagement with the world outside of Europe and a willingness to engage with nontraditional audiences.[5] He suggests that the Catholic Church has been steadfast in its adhering to its principled diplomacy in leading the effort that brought peace to war-torn Mozambique in 1992 (39-42), in its key role in mediating the Cuban Missile Crisis (84-85), and in assisting the normalization of relations between the US and Cuba (181-182). This is particularly true, he notes, when situations turn dangerous. Archbishop Jose Sebastain Laboa was able to successfully prevent further bloodshed by convincing Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega to peacefully surrender to the US in a series of negotiations (15-20). Gaetan argues that Francis’s approach is derived from Catholic doctrine and tradition.  As Gaetan explains, “Vatican” diplomacy is a misnomer. Vatican City is the territory occupied by the Holy See, which is the government of the Catholic Church. It is the Holy See which appoints diplomats and directs policy. Gaetan also tells the interesting and complicated story of how the Catholic Church has remained the only world religion with the same rights as a state (93-116).[6] Holy See diplomats are priests who are appointed as bishops and are expected to have five important characteristics: collegiality (a commitment to collaborate with other diplomats), efficiency, discretion, deep knowledge, and dedication (20). They report to the Pope, who is “an absolute monarch” whose job is to imitate Christ and “love to the point of martyrdom” (28). The diplomats themselves, who are known as apostolic nuncios, also represent God. These job descriptions do not describe the mandates of most modern diplomats. As priests, papal nuncios cannot have families and can thus devote themselves entirely to their jobs. Their mission is to represent the Holy See, to mediate, to preserve the faith, and to evangelize (the “great commission”) (46). Though the Holy See has an economy and economic interests akin to any other nation, its unconventional nature means that tariffs and economic sanctions do not have the same diplomatic weight as they might in other states. In addition, the constituency of the Holy See is not a nation limited by geographic borders: the Vatican considers its “citizenry” to include all Catholics (and Christians) worldwide. For example, a country such as China cannot be considered an enemy, if only for the fact that there are Chinese Catholics (with bishops of two different provenances, 271-298).[7] As Pope Francis articulated in an interview with journalist Norah O’Donnell on 60 Minutes, one can hate a government and its policies, but one must never hate its people.[8] Vatican diplomacy under Francis, in Gaetan’s telling, regards each individual human being (including dictators such as Manuel Noriega of Panama) as being made in the image and likeness of God.[9] Gaetan describes the Catholic Church as a diplomatic actor that is respected by its peers for its moral suasion and the professionalism of its diplomats.[10] That professionalism, he argues, is honed in the “Pontifical Academy of Ecclesiastical Nobles,” or Accademia, which was established in 1701 after the Peace of Westphalia (18-19, 73-80). The school teaches languages, history, and Catholic ministry. In 2020, two new courses were added to the curriculum: one on the pathology of pedophilia, and another on the plight of migrants and their relationship to the Church (71). Instruction is based on the case-study method, and more recently, through a year of missionary work. The school’s focus on ministry and its preparation for the intensity of the diplomatic career are hallmarks of its preparation. The focus is always on the sacerdotal role of the papal diplomats. Pope John XXIII (Angelo Roncalli), who was himself known for diplomatic successes (and who is presented here as a foreshadowing of Pope Francis), is quoted as saying “The Church’s only diplomacy is that of the priesthood. This is the diplomacy that I have always practiced” (65). Francis, too, practices that same diplomacy, according to Gaetan: “both elected in their late 70s, the most fundamental similarity between Francis and John XXIII is this characteristic: Angelo Roncalli brought a pastoral spirit to diplomacy, then to Rome; Jorge Bergoglio, too, is a pastor first and foremost” (66).[11] Part 1 ends with five long-standing diplomatic rules of thumb 1) Avoid creating winners and losers; 2) Remain impartial in the face of conflict; 3) Refrain from partisan politics; 4) Pursue dialogue with everyone; 5) Show faith through charity. There are also the five “Bergoglian additions” (139-144) that create “a culture of encounter”: 6) Start processes that God can finish; 7) Initiate encounters with humility and respect; 8) Proceed through concrete steps and gestures; 9) Allow mutual respect to grow step by step; 10) Find common ground and build agreement from there (117-144). Apart from the stricture to let God finish processes, these diplomatic rules of thumb are not overtly religious, though certainly Francis, in Gaetan’s telling, roots them in a religious worldview. Part 2 moves on from the framework developed in part 1 and provides in-depth case studies to show Francis’s diplomatic theories in action. As such, any diplomat facing contention, crisis, and conflict would do well to follow these rules. Part 2 of God’s Diplomats then gives examples of diplomacy in action. Part 2 focuses on Francis’s diplomatic skills. Gaetan’s introduction to this part posits that Francis’s gifts are threefold (a very Jesuitical number): manager, missionary, and mystic. Gaetan uses the seven cases to illustrate those gifts. As a manager, Francis focuses on practicality. His Evangelii Gaudium outlines four guiding principles of his leadership theory and style: the whole is greater than its parts; reality is more important than ideas; unity prevails over conflict; and time is greater than space (128-134).[12] Recalling Gaetan’s supposition that the US is afraid of Francis’s unpredictability, these principles demonstrate that his approach is based on a particular worldview that is itself internally consistent, though not necessarily obvious to outside observers. For example, the first principle means that in Ukraine’s (or any other country’s) religious conflicts, Francis should not prioritize one group of Christians over another (the whole is greater than its parts). Francis’s experience in the Argentine “Dirty War” means that he despises ideology; in his opinion, reality is more important than ideas.[13] His astonishing gesture of kneeling in humility to kiss the feet of Sudanese leaders during peace talks between Sudan and Uganda illustrated his principle of unity prevailing over conflict (299-316). Each leader was Christian, though only one was Catholic, and the Pope’s gesture was interpreted by Africans as a symbol of God’s love and blessing over all people. President Salva Kiir later said, “I was shocked and trembled when His Holiness the Pope kissed our feet. It was a blessing and can be a curse if we play games with the lives of our people.”[14] The idea of time being greater than space is illustrated in the on-again, off-again agreement between the Church and Beijing over what entity has the right to select bishops. Though the agreement fell through in February 2018, the Pope allowed time to “ripen” the agreement, which was formalized, in the fall of that year, after 70 years of stalemate (271-298). There are other examples, each illustrating the unique gifts or theories of Pope Francis or of Vatican diplomacy. Though Gaetan calls Francis the “first pope truly independent of the twentieth century’s ideological battles” (12), God’s Diplomats is not exclusively a hagiography and is well-grounded in Gaetan’s reporting and research. It is an excellent and compelling read, full of depth. Gaetan provides example after example as to how Holy See diplomacy can be a refreshing and successful alternative to more secular modes of diplomacy. The inclusion of case studies of Vatican diplomacy that did not turn out so well, with a discussion of what principles or rules of thumb were neglected or overlooked, would strengthen the argument. A concluding chapter which summarizes the overall lessons of the book, and, in particular, showing how those lessons might be adopted by secular diplomats, would also be useful. Though the book’s subtitle is Pope Francis, Vatican Diplomacy and America’s Armageddon, Gaetan does not fully explain what he means by “American Armageddon.” But these are just minor quibbles. God’s Diplomats is a book well worth reading.   Anne Marie Cammisa is a teaching professor in the Department of Government and in the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University, and a research affiliate at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University. She is the co-author with Paul Christopher Manuel of The Path of American Public Policy: Comparative Perspectives (Rowman & Littlefield, 2013) and Checks and Balances: How a Parliamentary System Could Change American Politics (Routledge, 1999),and the author of From Rhetoric to Reform: Welfare Policy in American Politics(Routledge, 1998) and Intergovernmental Lobbying: State and Local Governments in the Federal Arena (Bloomsbury, 1995).   [1] See Victor Gaetan, “The Pontiff, the President, and the Planet,” Foreign Affairs, 26 October 2021 and Gaetan, “Pope John Paul I’s Legacy Is Rediscovered,” National Catholic Register, 21 July 2024. God’s Diplomats is his first book. [2] See Pope Francis, Life: My Story Through History (Harper, 2024). [3] See Ken Hackett, The Vatican Code: American Diplomacy in the Time of Francis(Paulist Press, 2022); Anne Marie Cammisa, “The Pope and the United States: Faith as Dialogue,” in Alynna J. Lyon, Christine A. Gustafson, and Paul Christopher Manuel, eds., Pope Francis as a Global Actor(Springer, 2018), 143-168; Marshall J. Breger and Herbert R. Reginbogin, eds., The Vatican and Permanent Neutrality(Lexington, 2022); Peter Kent and John F, Pollard, eds., Papal Diplomacy in the Modern Age (Praeger, 1994). For recent issue-specific works see David Kertzer, The Pope Who Would Be King: The Exile of Pius IX and the Emergence of Modern Europe(Oxford University Press, 2018); Charles R. Gallagher, Vatican Secret Diplomacy: Joseph P. Hurley and Pope Pius XII (Yale University Press, 2008); Roman A. Melnyk, Vatican Diplomacy at the United Nations: A History of Catholic Global Engagement(Edwin Mellen Press, 2009). [4] See Antonius C. G. M. Robben, Political Violence and Trauma in Argentina (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007). [5] Massimo Faggioli and Catherine E. Clifford, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Vatican II (Oxford University Press, 2023), 621-754. [6] See Lawrence C. Reardon and Clyde Wilcox, eds., The Catholic Church and the Nation-State: Comparative Perspectives(Georgetown University Press, 2006), and Thomas J. Reese, Inside the Vatican: The Politics and Organization of the Catholic Church (Harvard University Press, 1998). [7] In China, there are two bishops with different provenances; one officially Roman Catholic and the other appointed by the Communist Catholic Patriotic Association. See Philip Pullella, “Vatican, China Sign Landmark Accord on Appointing Bishops,” Reuters, 25 September 2018, https://www.reuters.com/article/world/vatican-china-sign-landmark-accord-on-appointing-bishops-idUSKCN1M20ID/. [8] Norah O’Donnell, interview with Pope Francis, 60 Minutes, CBS, 19 May 2024. [9] The Catholic Church, particularly during the Cold War battle with Communism, struggled with its philosophy of “hate the sin, but love the sinner.” See Kertzer, Comrades and Christians Religions and Political Struggle in Communist Italy (Cambridge University Press, 1980); Patrick H. McNamara, A Catholic Cold War: Edmund A. Walsh, SJ and Politics of American Anticommunism (Fordham University Press, 2005). [10] Gaetan’s assertion is challenged most prominently by David Kertzer who contends the Vatican played an active role in the rise of fascism in Italy under Prime Minister Benito Mussolini (The Pope and Mussolini: The Secret History of Pius XI and the Rise of Fascism in Europe (Random House, 2014)), and in ignoring the Holocaust (The Pope at War: The Secret History Of Pius XII, Mussolini, And Hitler(Random House, 2022)). [11] On Pope John XXIII, see Peter Hebblethwaite, Pope John XXIII, Shepherd of the Modern World (Doubleday, 1985); Pope John XXIII, Journal of a Soul(Doubleday, 1999); Thomas Cahill, Pope John XXIII (Viking, 2002); Greg Tobin, The Good Pope: The Making of a Saint and the Re-Making of the Church (Harper, 2012). [12] For a discussion of how Argentinian “Theology of the People” influenced the development of the four “Bergoglian principles,” see Juan Carlos Scannone, SJ, “Pope Francis and Theology of the People,” Theological Studies 77 (2016): 118-135. [13] Gustavo Morello, The Catholic Church and Argentina’s Dirty War (Oxford University Press, 2015); Cindy Wooden, “Pope Francis: ‘I Did What I Felt I Had to Do’ During Argentina’s Dirty War,” America, 9 May 2023, https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2023/05/09/pope-speaks-painful-situation-jesuits-argentina-dirty-war-245254; Harold Maass, “Everything You Need to Know About Pope Francis and Argentina's Dirty War,” The Week, 8 January 2015, https://theweek.com/articles/466588/everything-need-know-about-pope-francis-argentinas-dirty-war; Nello Scavo, Bergoglio’s List: How a Young Francis Defied a Dictatorship and Saved Dozens of Lives (Saint Benedictine Press, 2014). [14] Brian Adeba,“4 Years Since the Pope’s ‘Shocking’ Kiss,’” Radio Tamazuj, 6 February 2023, https://www.radiotamazuj.org/en/news/article/4-years-since-the-popes-shocking-kiss-papal-visit-underscores-delays-in-peace-deal-and-suffering-in-south-sudan.

Vou ser seletivo no noticiário nos próximos quatro anos - Paulo Roberto de Almeida

 Desculpem a comparação, mas quando eu vejo Trump, Musk e seus acólitos fanáticos na TV, falando aquelas coisas absurdas, olhando a face e os gestos raivosos do chefão trambiqueiro, as suas declarações e as dos seus seguidores bovinos, eu tenho a impressão de que os EUA, nos próximos quatro anos, serão comandados por um bando de debeis mentais (com perdão dos próprios, geneticamente, mas eles o são voluntariamente).

Não quero ofender os verdadeiros, mas Trump e sua tropa de trogloditas políticos e falsamente religiosos, são debiloides perversos, perigosos para o próprio país, para a sociedade americana, para os miilhões de imigrantes (latinos, brasileiros) e para o mundo inteiro.

Costumo ver todas as notícias relevantes na TV, nas rádios, nos jornais, mas não vejo novelas, esportes ou programas de auditório. Pretendo desativar as matérias sobre Trump e sua tropa de alucinados seguidores. Não tenho estômago para isso.

Paulo Roberto de Almeida