Brazil versus USA

The newspaper “The New York Times” published some days ago one interesting news about Brazil, written by Larry Rohter telling that the Brazilian president is having serious problems with alcoholic drinks, and that all country worried about this.

First of all, my reaction was to laugh, sure. People in Brazil know that the president Lula enjoy to spend his free weekends with friends doing barbecues in his house, etc. It doesn’t mean that just because he enjoys drinking beer sometimes, or even a “caipirinha” that he is an alcoholic.

As published in official note from the government: “The habits of the president are not different from the average of the Brazilian population”. Yes, he drinks a beer sometimes! What is the problem with it? Hey, Brazil is not a country of alcoholics…

It’s very strange this situation with NYT and also with USA, let me remind you about some facts that happened between Brazil and USA lately. USA has a strong policy of anti terrorism, what made them increase the security in airports and borders after 11/09/2002.

For citizens of many countries it’s harder to be in USA, due to bureaucracy with visa, etc. They are also making digital photos and taking finger prints of some citizens from some countries. Brazil is one of these countries. The problem began when they asked this for a Brazilian famous diplomat (with diplomat passport), and not satisfied also asked him to take off his shoes to check if there was something “inside”.

The reaction of Brazilian people was terrible, sure. We understand that kind of security that USA needs now, and the “normal citizen” was not really upset with all this process of photo, finger print, etc. But hey, that guy is a diplomat; it was no necessary for all this for him.

Few days later for all American citizens when arriving in Brazil, it was necessary to make photos and also take finger prints. And what’s the problem with it? It’s “International Law”, the principle of ‘reciprocity’. You do for me, I do for you.

Collin Powell called Brazilian Ministry of Foreigner Affairs Celso Amorim and asked to please, cancel this attitude do American citizens because there was no reason for that kind of control. The answer of Mr. Amorin was simple and fantastic and was something like this: “We can cancel all this process for the American citizens when USA cancels all this process to Brazilian citizens”.

The American autorities told that it was not possible due to great number of Brazilians who try to enter the USA with illegal passport. And since this day in Brazilian airports and borders this actions are being made.

In January of 2004, a pilot from American Airlines showed his medium finger (yes, a sign of “fuck you”) when they took his photo in airport of Sao Paulo. Dale Robin Herch was arrested and just came back for USA after paying a fine.

More two situations as this happened in Brazil, one more because of a “medium finger” and another one because one “lovely American citizen” lost his patience during his flight because a baby was crying beside him. His reaction was to take a glass of water and through this water in face of this baby.

In all this cases no one could enter Brazil they paid a fine and came back as soon as possible (in this case of this “short patience guy” no air company wanted to “transport” him back to USA).

But why does Brazil and USA have some unpleasant moments during these last times? Do you believe in Santa Claus? Or do you still believe in the fairy of teeth? These problems between these countries are about “money and power”.

USA is trying to create a “common market” in all Americas (and it reminds something: all persons born in North, Central and South America are “Americans”, not only the USA citizens), but USA wants many many privileges just for them. And for the rest of “America” remain the crumbs of this policy.

Brazil was one of the countries that were totally contrary to this policy, and a country that is fighting for a more fair policy to all members of this future “common market”, sure Brazil is a country in development but they are not idiots.

Now the biggest “problem” to the concretization of this American plans is the Brazil. It’s not hard to understand why these incidents are happening lately. It’s a big game. Brazil borrows USA, USA try to “break the image” of the Brazil as good country. It’ll be great for USA to have a “so big nice ‘yard’ as Brazil”, isn’t it?

But as we see in last news Brazil is not doing reverences to USA, opposite Brazil is showing that they are a country that respect the interests of its people and that they are not going to “open our borders” for everyone so easily.

Regina Martins is working in a PhD thesis about how Brazil is related in “The New York Times”, and she affirmed that the biggest part of news about Brazil is negatives. “I think that it’s abusive the treatment that is given to Brazil. There news is always about negative points, homeless children, violence, etc. There’s a great nonsense between how they treat others countries and Brazil”.

Now the Brazilian government decided to expel the journalist Larry Rohter from Brazil, with the statement that this problem is not a matter of “press freedom”, but due the fact that this was an act that was used to diminish the image, slandering the dignity of the president.

The Brazilian government asked the NYT a retraction, but the direction of the newspaper limited itself to publish a letter sent by the Brazilian Ambassador in NY, Roberto Abdnur.

Celso Amorim told that “as they do with every State Heads, they invited Lula to visit the newspaper. This invitation edges the irony”.

This is not the first time that an American citizen is “invited” to leave Brazil; the last one involved the inspector of the Agriculture of USA, Hossein El-Nashaar. He was obliged to come back to his country after solicitation of the Brazilian government to the American Embassy in August of 2003, after doing improperly analysis of soy tilling in Bahia state.

This polemic decision was condoned by Bush’s administration and by organizations that defend the “press freedom”. The government of USA told that “Obviously the article of NYT don’t represent the vision of the USA”, said Richard Boucher in a press conference.

The Human Rights Watch, organization of defense of Human Rights, told that this act of expelling will provide a “damage incurable” to the Brazilian “press freedom”, while the Interamerican Society of Press (SIP) affirmed that this attitude was “unsuitable”. Where are these guys from Human Rights? This situation in Brazil is not “so important”, but what about that situation in Iraq where soldiers from Iraq are being tortured by request of “Uncle Sam”? Human Rights always search “smaller things to show service”, or weaker countries, isn’t it?

The Brazilian politicians are divided between so radical decisions of government; politicians from opposition see this action as unnecessary. “Total solidarity to the president Lula, but total rejection to this decision”, as told Senator Heraclito Fontes (PFL–PI).

And the politicians from “situation” think that it was right decision. The deputy Prof Luizinho (PT-SP) told: “What was done here was a torture to the country. A country that is recovering itself, that is entering again the world scene can be slandered by an irresponsible?”

The official speaker of the president Lula (Andre Singer) told that Brazil won’t make restrictions to the work of NTY in Brazil and that the newspaper can bring anyone else to work in Brazil to substitute Larry Rohter.

He also told that the government is not doing censorship the press. “There’s no hypothesis of censorship of “press freedom” in Brazil, the Brazilian government is compromised with the “press freedom. This episode is not about this freedom, but is related to the responsibility that is necessary when publishing information with world repercussion”. The decision to expel Rohter, as Singer, was not hasty. It was decided because there was no retraction from NYT. “Due the indifference of the newspaper to write a retraction that could be mending, even partial, to the damages caused to the image of the president and to the Brazilian Institutions, the government decided to study the suitably measures”. The decision was supported by the Brazilian law 6.815, from 1980 about the Foreigner’s Statute.

From the financial side, the director of Bank Fator (Sap Paulo), Americo Reisner, agrees that this was a wrong decision: “It was a huge diplomatic mistake. It’ll create comments and demerits to Brazil, because it was a hard decision”.

The people are also divided, the taxi driver Raimundo Pereira da Silva thinks that “government did right because the journalist is American and Americans think that they are the owners of the world”. The counter Carine Moreira agrees that this article from NYT is false, “but the decision of expel is radical and is against “press freedom”.

The professor Clovis de Barros Filho believes that the government wants use this episode to obtain solidarity. “The incompetence of the government was breaking the lace between those who elected him. The strategy is close to what was used in Mexico, to use the anti Americanism to inflate the national pride”.

The problem is complex and divided the public opinion in Brazil; I’m still digesting all this information… Maybe it was just a coincidence that NYT publish just bad things about Brazil, maybe Uncle Sam is really a nice guy. Maybe “money and power” are not so important anymore…

I don’t believe that this incident violate the “press freedom”, I think that we should protect the image of our country. Yes, Brazil have many problems, nobody hides this. Brazil shows the true, but we must protect ourselves against lies that have as objective to destroy our image and the sovereignty of our Nations.

This is what I think.

Автор: Dunha

Опубликовано: 13.05.2004