MEDIA REACTION: HONDURAS

UNCLAS SAO PAULO 000642 SIPDIS STATE INR/R/MR IIP/R/MR WHA/PD DEPT PASS USTR 4322/MAC/OLAC/JAFEE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC OIIP XM XR BR XF KMDR SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: HONDURAS "Brazil did all it could; it was little" Analysis in liberal Folha de S. Paulo (10-31) by columnist Clovis Rossi states: "[Brazil's actions] was clearly insufficient to solve the situation, what only ended up happening was when the U.S. called the coup maker and the ousted President to talk....Bolivarianism is the main loser in the whole [Honduran] crisis. "Less powerful. And indispensable." Article in liberal Folha de S. Paulo (10-31) by columnist Clovis Rossi says: "For a country that conventional wisdom condemned to an inevitable decline, the United States emitted continuing signs of unsuspected vitality. I'm not saying Washington has stopped losing strength, but some strength at least. But that's not a reason for a country to be less indispensable.....all the talk surrounding Brazil's leadership, all the scenes that Hugo Chavez always makes, the Bolivarian emergence - none of that has blocked the old empire from revealing itself again as indispensable. And what's best is this time for the good." "U.S. solution" Editorial in center-right Folha de S. Paulo (10-31) notes: "....the outcome [of the Honduran political crisis] leaves the Brazilian government and regional peers in an uncomfortable situation. Even though it is praiseworthy to have the claim of Latin American countries solving regional conflicts in an 'autonomous' way, without the direct interference of the major global power, the fact is the deal in Honduras only became viable when the U.S. entered the scene. The episode is a lesson to Brazil, who performed the role of a wizard's apprentice in this story...It assumed an attitude almost of a teenager, inept, intransigent. It made itself not feasible as a negotiator....Abdicating the role of mediator and letting the [Brazilian] embassy in Tegucigalpa be turned into the headquarters of a committee of political agitation, the Brazilian government showed amateurism in taking on new responsibilities...." "The ones who can, can" Op-ed in liberal Folha de S. Paulo (11-1) by Eliane Catanhede states: "The crisis in Honduras was a mark in many ways, but the principal one was to revive Latin American and Brazilian memory of a reality: the U.S. is the U.S. With Bush, the power lost gradual importance in Latin America and especially in South America....[but] since the beginning [of the Honduran crisis] it was clear that only the U.S. had the resources.....to solve the crisis.....By luck, the central protagonist of the negotiations is called Thomas Shannon....A very important bridge between the power the U.S. never stopped having and the leadership Brazil wants to have....." "Deal in Honduras" Editorial in center-right O Estado de S. Paulo (11-2) says: "....The Honduran case shows one of the best sides of President Barack Obama's foreign policy....The U.S. government only interfered when all the mediation efforts from the OAS failed and when an impasse was reached. With this, Washington showed that it supports the action of multilateral organizations and that it is in the past when it supported right wing dictatorships. But it also made clear that [the U.S.] will use all its powers of persuasion of a super power when needed.....U.S. diplomacy performed with ability, but with energy, with the two sides of the dispute. And was able to reach a good deal. Brazilian diplomacy did the opposite...." White