The weight of Brazilian diplomacy

As far as it could be seen, the evolution of Brazilian diplomatic strategies and positioning in trade matters is significantly determined by the modus operandi of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Mre) with respect to international issues. So being, we will leave momentarily¹ of this premise in order to identify the main characteristics of the form of action of Brazilian diplomats as well as some of its causes.

The study of international relations in the academic field is recent in Brazil, gaining a lot only from the decade of 1990. Until then and with the exception of the University of Brasilia and the Institute of International Relations (IRI), his study was fragmented in a few experts – each originating from different areas of the humanities, mostly history, right, economics and political science.

On the other hand, we can perceive an important presence of the topics of international relations in the governmental scope. Such topics were worked out both by the bureaucratic structure intended to deal with these issues – Ministry of Foreign Affairs – and by the Executive Branch (where we can highlight as one of his most significant examples the pendulum position of Getúlio Vargas in relation to Germany and the United States).

This mismatch between academic-analytical production and the importance of international issues for the Brazilian state framework is an indication of the presence of a set of factors that leave a strong legacy in the way in which Brazilian foreign policy is formulated.

A first point that must be raised is the idea that the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has the task of interpreting world issues and establishing how Brazil should be inserted in the international system.. This way of perceiving reality arises latu sensu with the rise of Barão do Rio Branco to the MRE, in 1902. It was at this moment that, according to Ricupero (1005, 51-53), the Baron defended national interests through "systematic methodical concentration, of all diplomatic resources and legitimate use, not violent, of power, without reaching the military conflict, for the successful solution of all these border problems ”.

It was also up to the Barão do Rio Branco to establish a “constructive moderation” international relations, that is, a Grotian reading of reality (Lafer 2003 b), so that law and diplomacy emerge as instruments to deal with conflict and cooperation. This tradition is combined with a realistic reading in the evaluation of the conditions of the power of international life, although this does not justify Machiavellian impulses; however, the search for new diplomatic-legal solutions in addressing issues related to Brazil's international insertion.

Since the Hague Conference (1907) and the Paris Peace Conference (1919) Brazil has developed the idea that there are general interests in the functioning and determination of the international system and that they are important for the pursuit of specific Brazilian interests. In this way, stability is established in the change-continuity game of Brazilian foreign policy, which is added to the privilege of international multilateral forums to deal with Brazilian international tensions..

The result of this was a strong and sustainable diplomatic heritage aimed at broader analyzes of international reality coupled with the affirmation of the international order legitimately given through multilateral international institutions. Thus, the Brazilian diplomatic style manages to “de-dramatize the foreign policy agenda, that is, to reduce conflicts, crises and difficulties to the diplomatic bed, preventing them from being exploited or magnified by conjunctural interests” (Fonseca Jr. 1998, 356).

In this sense, the question of continuity is a fundamental factor in the process of formulating Brazilian foreign policy. Since its formulation process is closed in the ERM, it becomes easier to maintain the major parameters guiding Brazilian positioning in the world.

According to Santiago Dantas, foreign policy changes must be considered, because they have a much greater impact than changes in domestic policy as they can affect the country's credibility. In this same sense, Lafer (2003 a, 112) defends that “the chancelleries work with antecedents. The relevance of antecedents lies in the fact that they allow analogies to be established between certain situations, in addition to ensuring the coherence and continuity of foreign policy, which is an important fact if your credibility ”. Still in the same study, highlights the importance of preserving some profound characteristics of the Brazilian way of dealing with international issues: “Preserve the development agenda and economic-trade negotiations to safeguard national interests without seeing them compromised by the new international security agenda. The second was to keep the circumstance of our diplomatic work in the best possible way” (Lafer 2003, 123).

In this study we will try to identify some of these factors as well as their bases of support and permanence so that we can better understand the dynamics of formulating foreign policy – both in its technical-bureaucratic dimension, regarding the great values ​​and worldviews of decision makers.

According to Lafer (2003 b), “The foreign policy challenge is, for each country, o to translate your internal needs into external possibilities. These internal needs vary from country to country and the external possibilities also vary depending on the international context and also on the regional insertion of a country.. That is why it can be said that a country's foreign policy is actually the result of its perspective on how the world works ”.

This position of the former Brazilian chancellor indicates for a double profile of the Brazilian diplomatic line. On the one hand, one can see a significant presence of the French School of international relations and, to a lesser extent, from english; on the other hand, there is also a strong pragmatism in the American style.

The French School can be seen when we analyze the methodological approach used by diplomats (as well as by a significant portion of academic analysts). This is because the object of analysis is constantly marked by structural perceptions of international relations associated with social relations. From this analytical profile, the foundations for the sustainability of a more universalist discourse emerge.

Another point that allows us to identify a strong influence of the French School is the tendency towards multidisciplinary analysis, establishing an articulation of the complexity of the factors sufficient to allow that the way that Brazil conceives the world can be discussed as a coherent whole.

However, whether it is possible to verify a strong influence of the French School in the great Brazilian interpretative lines, this way of seeing the world does not fully respond to Brazilian action. The constant concern with maintaining the high degree of professionalization of the bureaucratic foreign policy apparatus, Comment on The weight of Brazilian diplomacy².

__________________________

¹ Comment on The weight of Brazilian diplomacy, Comment on The weight of Brazilian diplomacy. Comment on The weight of Brazilian diplomacy.

² Comment on The weight of Brazilian diplomacy. Although the analytical macro-bases of the international system have been preserved, it was sought to adapt the way in which the Brazilian international insertion takes place to the new international systemic characteristics.

special CNPq

Yes IV – nº 41 / November 2004