Fernando Pedrosa

@Latinoamérica21

There is a widespread maxim among journalists and sports coaches: “The team that wins, does not touch.” The idea behind the phrase is very basic: why modify the same group of players or tactics if good results have been achieved with them? The idea sounds so reasonable that the world of politics wants to apply it.

In his third presidential experience, Lula adopted this motto as a mantra. And, at least as far as foreign policy is concerned, he began to rebuild the path of past mandates. Although the coaching staff has changed (because Marco Aurelio García is no longer there), the strategy is still the same as that promoted by the former foreign minister Celso Amorim. The results of this continuity were not long in coming, and there is Brazil reviving its geopolitical position around the bloc known as BRICS, which includes Russia, India, China and South Africa.

A new strategy?

What is striking about Brazil’s strategy is that it reaffirms players who did not produce very good results last season. In fact, Lula appointed Dilma Rousseff to head the BRICS New Development Bank, based in Shanghai, China, where the Workers’ Party leader made a hasty trip before completing his 100 days as president.

Lula repeats the scheme of the game. The legacy of authoritarianism that the left of the 21st century spread in Latin America does not seem to be a sufficient reason for the Brazilian politician to offer any self-criticism in this regard. The message is clear: if Lula does not change, it is because he judges that his past strategy did not go so badly. And in that, he is probably not wrong, because those were the golden years of his leadership and regional reputation.

New season of Unasur

Strengthening ties with China, and in the context of unfortunate statements about Russia and the war with Ukraine, Lula regained another part of the old team with which he led foreign policy between 2003 and 2010: the Union of South American Nations, better known by the acronym Unasur.

That organization played a key role in PT politics at the time, which can be described by the metaphor of “fireman arsonist”. In other words, while encouraging and protecting Hugo Chávez, Rafael Correa and Evo Morales, he presented himself globally as one who could keep them within the red lines that worried the major international leagues. That was enough for the United States in a region that has not been in the top geopolitical interest for a long time. On the other hand, for the citizens of Latin America who endured the brilliance of the Bolivarian leaders, the results were disastrous in terms of democratic decay, quality of life and the validity of human rights.

Nevertheless, one of the strong points that legitimized the existence of Unasur was the series of conferences, articles and books written by experts, internationalists and other academics. He soft power The intellectual legitimized Unasur by granting him a success that never materialized or was seen in reality. This is not surprising, because the authoritarian left has shown more skill in improving the quality of life of its intellectuals and think tanks than in improving the rest of the population.

Unasur: success or failure?

The return of Unasur was welcomed with joy by the old shareholders who continued to integrate it: Bolivia, Guyana, Suriname and Venezuela. However, she was also acclaimed by the new leaders of the regional left: Gustavo Petro and Gabriel Boric. Also the Peronist Alberto Fernández, who is also looking forward to the job opening in the general secretariat, reserved for the former president, since he will lose his current job at the end of 2023.

Unlike other Latin American areas, Unasur does not intend to function as a classic regional integration organization, but privileges political cooperation, where ideological coincidences play a key role. Unasur is a central part of the strategy maintained by a network of networks of international and transnational organizations that take the form of permanent meetings, meetings and summits.

These events are at different levels: governmental and non-governmental, presidential, ministerial, former presidents, supporters, experts, ideological, bilateral or multilateral. From UNESCO to Forum San Pablo, passing through the assemblies of Celac or Clacso. Namely, the announcement of Argentina’s return to Unasur was announced during the meeting of the Puebla Group and the Latin American Council for Justice and Democracy.

These collective spaces — and their constant meetings — contribute to the spread of active nationalism patriagrande, very fond of Latin American illiberal authoritarianism. In addition, it shows leaders in permanent activity and helps consolidate their discourses and national projects. First of all, it enables keeping under control, even isolating, those who at these levels do not form a group of the populist left or dare to challenge it.

The role of Unasur 2.0

Unasur gains an important place among transnational cooperation networks for two more reasons that have not been highlighted so far. First, because in the past it has directly intervened in national affairs to help its members in need. This was seen in the legitimization of the fake elections in Venezuela in 2013, the intensification of minor crises in Ecuador in favor of the authoritarian project of Rafael Correa, the participation in the dispute between the government of Santa Cruz de la Sierra and Evo Morales, or in Colombia’s conflict with the FARC, among others.

Second, because it is the first of the Latin American international areas to highlight the issue of defense and regional security through its South American Defense Council. No other organization has simultaneously emphasized the ideological state of its presidents and the coordination of the armed forces they lead.

Lula maintains the formation of its team and strategies implemented since 2003, but today’s world has changed radically compared to the one at the beginning of the 21st century. The possibility of opening the doors of Unasur — as has already happened with Celac — to China and Russia will allow them to play on previously forbidden ground. Thus, they could intervene in the national politics of South American countries with unprecedented legitimacy.

Despite so much artificially built enthusiasm, Unasur ended without pain or glory when several countries that were part of it decided to suspend their funding. Ultimately, it wasn’t much more than a well-crafted story, but that’s exactly what allows it to re-emerge today as a potential threat to the freedom of the region. Unasur is a giant with feet of clay. (OR)

*Text originally published in Political Dialogue