MEDIA REACTION: WESTERN HEMISPHERE: BOLIVIA, GAS

UNCLAS SAO PAULO 000508 SIPDIS SIPDIS STATE INR/R/MR; IIP/R/MR; WHA/PD DEPT PASS USTR USDOC 4322/MAC/OLAC/JAFEE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KMDR OPRC OIIP ETRD BR SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: WESTERN HEMISPHERE: BOLIVIA, GAS NATIONALIZATION, BRAZILIAN REACTION; SAO PAULO ¶1. "Fake Nationalism" Economist Paulo Nogueira Batista Jr. commented in liberal Folha de ¶S. Paulo (5/11): "Brazil must not react violently to the Bolivian government's decisions. First, because Bolivia has its reasoning and those reasons should not be underestimated. Second, because aggravating the conflict is not in Brazil's interest. Despite differences with [state-owned oil company] Petrobras and other Brazilian companies, Bolivia is our natural ally. Retaliations and drastic measures would affect not only our relations with that nation, but with the entire South American integration project.... It is true that Brazil actually does not need the rest of South America to build its economic and social development project. If our neighbors decide to take the course of chaos or of mere subordination to the US (one possibility does not exclude the other),Brazil will not need to follow them.... The US will never support the creation of a bloc in South America. But conditions continue to be basically favorable to South American integration. The so-called 'Washington Consensus' did not produce the expected results. Economic policies supported by the USG and multilateral financing organizations failed in many nations of the region. South American political forces aligned with the US have successively fallen either by electoral defeats or through popular rebellions. Thanks to President Bush's truculence, the US prestige is declining worldwide and in South America in particular.... The world will be multi-polar regardless of what the ideologists who have predominated in Bush administration want." ¶2. "The Foreign Minister's Testimony" Center-right O Estado de S. Paulo editorialized (5/11): "The Lula administration's foreign policy is based on two big mistakes. The first was to think that Brazil and President Lula da Silva would exert political and economic leadership in South America.... The second was to divide the planning and the execution of foreign policy between Foreign Minister Celso Amorim - who became responsible for trade negotiations and the 'rest of the world, the presidential advisor for international affairs, Marco Aurelio Garcia - in charge of Latin America and the relationship with 'brother parties,' and the Foreign Ministry's secretary general, Samuel Pinheiro Guimaraes - responsible for tailoring Brazilian diplomacy according to Third World patterns. All setbacks and failures of Brazilian foreign policy in these almost three and a half years have resulted from these two capital sins. The attack against Brazilian interests in Bolivia was just another one in a long series of fiascos. The fact is that by making concession after concession, Brazilian diplomacy has lost its strength, Hugo Chavez acts as regional leader and Evo Morales felt at ease attacking Brazil with the fait accompli of expropriating Petrobras' installations." ¶3. "Lula For President... In Bolivia" University of Sao Paulo Economist Roberto Macedo underscored in center-right O Estado de S. Paulo (5/11): "President Lula's posture in the dispute between Brazil and Bolivia + Venezuela is shocking. He has always argued for our adversaries as if he were the Bolivian main leader.... In view of what has already occurred, the GOB should have at least the common sense to give up the idea of the highly expensive [Chavez-proposed South American] gas pipeline, which would make Brazil dependent on gas supply from another nation ruled by an unrealiable leader, Venezuela and its President Hugo Chavez. The project's economic, environmental and political feasibility has not yet been considered. Everything is based on the political will of a trio of leaders, which includes the Argentine president, in a bad arrangement according to which Brazil would assume the major risks and probably the highest costs. What is clear in the Bolivian gas question is that Brazilian interests have been poorly defended." McMullen