With the imminent American surcharge on Brazilian steel and aluminum, our government faces a dilemma; We are the second largest steel supplier to the US in volume, with 3.98 million tons (16.38%)
Brazil is in the eye of a hurricane. After dee Having antagonized, the way for conciliatory conversations may have become more difficult. The Brazilian president openly supported Democrat Kamala Harris against the winning candidate. The Brazilian comments about the Republican were aggressive: “It’s fascism by working with another face.”
As much as Lula is assessed with Brazilian diplomacy, considered one of the most competent in the world, when making the decision, like every leader, will be alone. It will be your last word. And the question is this: To what extent would he be willing to hit Trump and retaliate the imposition of a 25% surcharge on steel and aluminum?
Sarney’s adversities
Not always the best response to an attack is a counterattack. At times, the diplomatic game is more effective than any direct confrontation. A remarkable example of this type of strategy occurred in 1986, when then -President José Sarney faced a hostile reception in the United States, but knew how to reverse the situation with sharp skill and speech. Now, almost four decades later, Brazil is faced with a new commercial impasse with this US increase. Is it time to rescue lessons from the past?
In September 1986, Brazil faced a delicate economic period. Indebted and struggling to negotiate more favorable terms with international creditors. There were also other indigestible claims: maintaining the market reserve for Brazilian products and not paying additional fees for our exports. Sarney traveled to the United States in search of a constructive dialogue.
A civilized confrontation
Ronald Reagan, then American president, however, was not willing to be any diplomatic kindness. At the reception, Reagan stated that “no country should grow at the expense of others”, a clear pin to Brazil. Shortly thereafter, he insisted on the thesis that no country could continue to export if their internal markets remained closed.
Faced with this adverse scenario, Sarney did not revive immediately, but also did not leave the provocation unanswered. A skillfully, he elaborated a precise speech: “President Reagan said this morning that no country can grow at the expense of others. We agree with that. Brazil has always grown thanks to its potentialities, its work and the sacrifice of its people. ”
A diplomatic victory
This haughty but diplomatic tone marked the Brazilian strategy on that visit. While his ministers renamed, with technical facts and arguments, American criticism of Brazilian economic policy, Sarney adopted a conciliatory discourse, highlighting historical ties between the two countries, the similarity between his congresses and shared democratic values.
At the end of the trip, Brazil was strengthened, avoiding drastic measures from Americans and establishing a narrative more favorable to their position on the international scene.
An important market for Brazil
Now, with the imminent American surcharge on Brazilian steel and aluminum, our government faces a dilemma. We are the second largest steel supplier to the United States in volume, with 3.98 million tons (16.38%)behind only Canada. In values, we are the third largest exporter, with US $ 2.916 billion (9.93%)being behind Canada and Mexico.
Given this framework, the Brazilian government could take some initiatives to deal with the American decision. One of them, apparently the most practical, would be to resort to the WTO, an attitude that seems innocuous, given the slowness and ineffectiveness of the organization in such commercial disputes. Another would be retaliated, imposing overcrowding on American products – which would open a direct confrontation and not solve the problem of exporters. Finally, the one that would possibly be more effective, the negotiation.
Now there is an additional obstacle
This was the strategy adopted in the Temer and Bolsonaro governments, when similar measures were imposed by the US. As we have seen, however, the current government faces an additional obstacle: personal antagonism with Donald Trump, who won the elections and today has the knife and cheese in his hands, as it has a majority in the House, Senate and the Judiciary.
The 1986 episode reinforces an essential point: diplomacy is not only a game of forces, but also of words. And when well chosen, they have the power to change the course of history. It remains to be seen whether the protagonists of this clash will know how to find the right words.
Curiosity. At a dinner with José Sarney in São Luís (MA), I commented on this fact. He confirmed the veracity of the information and said that the international relationship was the few areas in his government that he did not have interference. Follow on Instagram: @polito
*This text does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the young Pan.
