Back from the Depths: Brazil, the World, and the EU after Lula’s Electoral Victory

Remy Maduit | Authors published

Back from the Depths:
Brazil, the World, and the EU after Lula’s Electoral Victory

Dr. Kai Michael Kenkel is a Professor at the Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (known broadly as “Lula”) has defeated incumbent Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil’s presidential election. As the Global South giant emerges from the isolation and loss of influence imposed by Bolsonaro’s right-wing anti-globalist agenda, how can Germany and Europe best engage it intending to resume a key strategic partnership?

Brazil’s relations with the EU and Germany are at a historical postwar low. Normative differences with a Bolsonaro government driven by extreme right-wing domestic constituencies have stalled trade and climate negotiations, led to clashes on human rights and deforestation, and caused what were once regular high-level contacts to ebb to a trickle.

The election itself was decided by a razor-thin margin and marred by voter suppression, contestations of its legitimacy, and pervasive electoral violations by Bolsonaro. The incumbent has not formally conceded, and his supporters were still in the streets a week after the vote. Assistance in asserting the functioning of the country’s democratic institutions is urgently needed.

Lula will realign the country with its multilateral diplomatic traditions and seek to reinstate social policies canceled by Bolsonaro, such as poverty reduction, human rights, and safeguards for minorities, as well as environmental protection and sustainable development. This will align Brazil increasingly with Europe. But today’s scenario differs from Lula’s first two terms in office between 2003 and 2011: the National Congress is hostile to Lula’s agenda, there is no commodity boom, and a polarised and unequal international system has less room for the rise of an emerging power.

Policy Implications

Germany and Europe should actively and regularly engage Brazil and assist in its moves to consolidate its democracy, combat inequality, protect the rainforest and safeguard minority rights. To do so, it should use trade policy as an incentive, reinforce civilian control over the armed forces, engage subnational partners, and assist in combating fake news.

Brazil’s Foreign Relations after Bolsonaro

Jair Bolsonaro’s realignment of Brazilian foreign policy with far-right and isolationist precepts was a profound rupture, given the country’s previous active and integrated role in international affairs. During Bolsonaro’s term, the country’s habile diplomats have labored in unprecedented isolation and weathered a dizzying diminution of the country’s diplomatic influence and international goodwill. A foreign policy aimed at actively destroying previous elements of multilateral consensus placated domestic constituencies engaged in culture wars, such as evangelical churches and a growing sector of alt-right extremists. Previously a renowned globally progressive bridge-builder, the country is now aligned with the anti-democratic usual suspects to oppose gender equality, the human rights agenda, environmental protection, and other multilateral gains in global forums. [1] This approach was designed to balance the interests of the three main currents underpinning the Bolsonaro administration: evangelicals and cultural conservatives; neoliberal technocrats; and the security apparatus led by armed forces increasingly overstepping—often by invitation—their institutional bounds. [2]

The clash of norms that ensued had predictably damaging effects on the country’s relationships with the European Union and, by extension Germany, which at the end of Bolsonaro’s sojourn in power finds itself mired in perhaps its deepest crisis of the postwar period. The right-wing populist Bolsonaro is the first Brazilian leader since re-democratization not to visit an EU member state; he has instead engaged in personal slights against leaders such as French president Emmanuel Macron. Yearly cabinet meetings within the framework of a strategic partnership between Germany and Brazil have been suspended [3]; in 2019, Germany and Norway voted to suspend their contributions to a fund tasked with preserving the Amazon rainforest. [4] Distrust over Brazil’s commitment to environmental and sustainable development goals has stalled a key EU–Mercosul trade agreement and the country’s drive for membership of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Further, the Bolsonaro government has kept a formally noncommittal stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine because of the dependency of its agro-industry—a key sector of the economy and a solid source of support for the incumbent president—on fertilizer from Moscow. Normative clashes have persisted with the EU over issues ranging from deforestation—which has reached historically high levels in 2022 [5]—to human rights, democracy, civil society participation, and poverty and inequality reduction.

As Lula seeks to return Brazil to its traditional participative and constructive role in multilateral politics and to restore relations with key partners such as the EU and its members, he faces a different situation from his first terms in office (2003–2011). The country’s economy will no longer benefit from the wind a commodities boom brought to its sails at the turn of the millennium, nor will the renewed competition between the United States and China allow as much space in the international system for the rise of emerging powers from the Global South. Major partners’ attentions are elsewhere–such as Ukraine and Taiwan. Although Lula’s foreign policy orientation evinces significant normative commonalities with European states, Brazil, under his leadership, is likely to return to its critical stance regarding global hierarchies as they stand today.

The Immediate Post-Election Scenario: What Can the International Community Do to Strengthen Brazilian Democracy?

Throughout the 2022 electoral campaign, Bolsonaro took several pages out of the playbook used by Donald Trump in the United States in 2020/2021. He repeatedly cast doubt on the integrity of the electoral process and deliberately cultivated uncertainty about whether he would accept an eventual electoral defeat or seek to override it by force using the ideologically aligned armed forces. An attempt to replace the country’s highly secure electronic voting machines with a return to print ballot papers—which can serve as proof of how citizens voted when they are being intimidated or their vote purchased — was defeated in the federal legislature in July 2021. The federal armed forces and many police forces—a traditional redoubt of anti-left sentiment and a strong source of support for Bolsonaro—equally failed to commit to respecting the outcome of the elections. This deliberate institutional dereliction of democratic responsibility tinged the already polarised climate during the campaign period with the real possibility of violence and constitutional crisis.

Bolsonaro did not shy away from the unconstitutional use of government powers to influence the election, such as manipulating the price of gasoline and tailoring essential government programs to the electoral agenda. [6] Thus, on the day of the direct runoff between Lula and Bolsonaro, 30 October, the Federal Highway Police (Polícia Rodoviária Federal, PRF), under the command of a Bolsonaro loyalist, instituted extensive roadblocks throughout regions known to support Lula, as a form of direct voter suppression. [7]

Lula eventually won both rounds of the presidential election, eking out a victory with 50.9 percent of the vote in the second round. [8] Bolsonaro remained silent for two days while his disappointed supporters, fuelled by the extensive circulation of fake news orchestrated by his campaign, took to the streets to contest the legitimacy of the result, with many openly calling for a military coup. Pro-Bolsonaro long-haul truckers shut down highways across the country, immediately jeopardizing fragile supply chains. When, unsurprisingly, the same PRF that had impeded the mobility of opposition voters showed little zeal in breaking up these pro-Bolsonaro rallies, it bizarrely fell sometimes to organized football fan clubs to restore the flow of traffic (and therefore the functioning of the decisive round of the country’s top football league). The sitting president eventually called for the roadblocks to end and allowed the beginning of the transition in the executive branch, but never formally conceded victory nor congratulated his opponent. As of 4 November, Bolsonaro himself, as well as the armed forces, have made no formal moves to negate the election results; however many his supporters remain mobilized in the streets, prone to violence, calling for military intervention, and questioning the legitimacy of the result.

Within this context, the swift and unequivocal acceptance and legitimation of the result by international leaders was of fundamental importance in signaling to the incumbent that any unconstitutional attempt to remain in power would come with diplomatic and economic consequences. European and world leaders must continue to firm up the election result by engaging with the elected leader and swiftly condemning institutional abuses—such as those committed by the PRF — and any extraconstitutional moves by organs of state violence such as the armed forces.

This should extend, if violations take place, to the suspension of cooperation and financing until the presidential transition takes place, as foreseen by the Constitution, on 1 January 2023. Increased vigilance of ongoing challenges to democratic practice will be necessary past this date as well, as this occasion marks the opportunity for a last stand in the face of a profound reorientation of policies and an extensive reshuffling of the federal bureaucracy. Combatting fake news and information blackouts is a key element in any meaningful engagement for Brazilian democracy. Similarly, strong support for Bolsonaro from the agricultural sector and other influential economic actors may place German and European policymakers before the dilemma of whether trade relations can serve as a tool in alignment with their commitment to norms in the areas of human rights, democracy, and minority rights.

Rebuilding a Progressive Policy Programme under Difficult Conditions

The president-elect’s policy program will be primarily directed toward rebuilding initiatives instituted by prior Workers’ Party governments, which the Bolsonaro government had taken as its core mission to deconstruct. Both the domestic and foreign policy spheres are eminently relevant to how this will affect Brazil’s relations with European states. In both arenas, however, the former and future president face significantly more challenging scenarios than accompanied his first terms in office.

Domestically, despite Lula’s win in the executive branch, right-wing gains—in particular, radical right-wing and alt-right elements aligned with Bolsonaro, as well as representatives of evangelical churches—mean the new president will face an essentially hostile Congress. In Brazil’s semi-presidential system, this will render re-establishing the policy programs—especially in the social sphere—that marked the Workers’ Party’s previous terms in office considerably more difficult. Not counting the opportunistic parties comprising the Centrão (whose support can be effectively purchased by sitting governments through political horse-trading), the parties that would have formed Bolsonaro’s base, had he won, will control 187 of 513 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, while those naturally aligned to Lula control just 108. [9] The outgoing government will leave behind a deficit of BRL 280 billion (EUR 55 billion). [10] This does not include the so-called “secret budget” (orçamento secreto), a form of institutionalized corruption created under Bolsonaro that has allowed for BRL 44 billion (EUR 9 billion) in parliamentary amendments without transparency or effective oversight that has also been used for electoral purposes. [11]

On the internal front, Lula’s primary concern will be to rebuild programs designed to combat inequality, poverty, and hunger. Due to targeted cuts to these types of programs under Bolsonaro, food security in one of the world’s largest food-exporting countries has returned to crisis levels [12], with roughly one-fourth of the population (a number that increased by 10 million under Bolsonaro) being classified as living in abject poverty. [13] Together with combatting poverty, safeguarding human rights, particularly of minorities, women, and Indigenous and LGBTQ+ communities, will return to priority status after 1 January 2023. [14] These groups had experienced severe challenges to their rights under Bolsonaro, who had been elected on a wave of backlash against the identity politics that characterized the Workers’ Party’s approach to development and social policy. This approach reflected the interlinked nature of societal cleavages, violence, and socio-economic status in Brazil, which have been significantly exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Two further issues, both related to the quality of democracy in Brazil, present particular avenues for potential support from foreign partners. The first is the re-establishment of the hundreds of consultative bodies for civil society participation in policymaking the Bolsonaro government has extinguished or hollowed that out. These bodies represent a crucial connection between the government, affected groups, and the general population, as well as constituting a critical element of democratic accountability. The information blackouts that have accompanied this shutdown of participation, characterized by inaccessible government websites, funding cuts for statistical agencies, and other passive measures, will be remedied. The incoming government has pledged to stop the creeping process of militarisation by invitation practiced by its predecessor, limiting the armed forces strictly to roles foreseen in the Constitution and lowering the number of uniformed officers in discretionary posts in the federal executive, which under Bolsonaro, an ex-Army captain, grew to an astonishing 6,17. [15]

In terms of its relationship with Germany and the European Union, this normative realignment sets the stage for the reawakening of extensive political and diplomatic ties with Brazil, as well as a more facilitative atmosphere for trade relations. The country’s recommitment to human rights should immediately be reflected in a rejuvenated protagonist role in multilateral bodies at the global and regional levels, particularly in the United Nations Human Rights Council and bodies and processes related to sustainable development. The Lula government has committed to reversing destructively permissive policies regarding deforestation in the Amazon and has recommitted to aligning the country with the goals outlined in global climate change negotiations.

These developments will align Brazil more strongly with the norms and principles that orient international institutions, as well as EU foreign policy, but the country will not be a blind follower of the Western lead–this may be true about the Ukraine conflict, which involves its BRICS ally Russia. Although it faces a much more challenging outlook without a strong commodities market and finds itself in a more unequal and polarised world, Brazil will seek to regain its previous international presence, particularly in multilateral forums, and to restore its relations with international counterparts now again seen as partners.

Supporting Brazil’s Return as a Responsible Actor on the International Stage

As Brazil seeks to recoup its international position, Germany and its European partners can best engage with the country by assisting concretely with Brazilian democratic and economic consolidation. As mentioned, rapid recognition of the election result and its legitimacy was crucial, and constructive engagement means continuing in this vein. Support for democratic consolidation against threats from right-wing extremism and ambitious armed forces is not synonymous with domestic party-political positioning. They should accord support for the restoration of civil society participation priority, as should combat fake news and the erosion of the population’s ability to distinguish truth from manipulation, which must find its basis in a strong education system.

A return to the fold for Brazil also means the resumption of regular diplomatic and political contacts, through the mechanisms of state visits and the yearly cabinet meetings between Brazil and Germany that underscored the bilateral strategic partnership. This would bring about not only greater normative and policy synergies but also ultimately a greater understanding in Brazil of the impact of EU and NATO membership in individual countries’ policymaking in bilateral situations. Financial support, such as the resumption of contributions to the Amazon Fund, and increasingly to subnational governmental entities that have carried on important work in key shared areas of concern in the absence of commitments from the federal arena over the past four years, is crucial. This is true of food security and poverty reduction, as well as climate change, deforestation, and social inequality. As Brazil returns to the global stage as a constructive actor, there is ample opportunity to make up for the lost time in the bilateral friendship.

---

[1] Picanço, Lara Bartilotti, and Anya Prusa (2019), At the United Nations, Brazil Allies with Ultra-Conservatives on Gender and Sex-Ed, in: Think Brazil, Princeton, NJ: Wilson Center, 22 July, accessed 3 November 2022.

[2] Zilla, Claudia (2022), Foreign Policy Change in Brazil: Drivers and Implications, SWP Research Paper 08/2022, July, Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, accessed 3 November 2022.

[3] Stuenkel, Oliver (2022), Brazil: EU Relations at the Best and Worst of Times, in: Rosa Balfour, Lizza Bomassi, and Marta Martinelli (eds), The Southern Mirror: Reflections on Europe from the Global South, Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 5–18, accessed 3 November 2022.

[4] National Public Radio (2019), Why Norway And Germany Have Frozen Money Going To The Amazon Fund, in: All Things Considered, 23 August, accessed 3 November 2022.

[5] Freitas, João Gabriel (2022), Desmatamento na Amazônia bate novo recorde para o mês de setembro, in: Correio Braziliense, 7 October, accessed 3 November 2022.

[6] Carrança, Thaís (2022), Bolsonaro derrotado: 10 armas usadas sem sucesso na tentativa de reeleição, in: BBC News Brasil, 30 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[7] Camargo, Isabela, and Márcio Falcão (2022), PRF descumpre ordem do TSE e para pelo menos 610 ônibus de eleitores em blitze; Moraes intima diretor-geral, G1 (Globo), 30 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[8] Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (2022), Eleição Geral Ordinária 2022, 30 October, accessed 4 November 2022

[9] Lago, Rudolfo (2022), Novo Congresso é hostil a Lula. Veja perde a ganha das bancadas ao longo dos anos, in: Congresso em Foco (UOL), 3 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[10] Gerbelli, Luiz Guilherme (2022), Lula vai encontrar ‘bomba fiscal’ que pode chegar a 280,3 bilhões em 2023, in: Estado de São Paulo, 31 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[11] Neiva, Lucas (2022), Entenda o que é o orçamento secreto, e por que ele é criticado, in: Congresso em Foco, 18 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[12] Iwasawa, Nathália (2022), Entenda por que a fome aumentou no governo Bolsonaro, in: O joio e o trigo, 24 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[13] Madeiro, Carlos (2022), Sob Bolsonaro, cadastro federal ganha mais 10 milhões de pessoas na miséria, in: UOL Notícias, 26 October, accessed 4 November 2022.

[14] Fundação Perseu Abramo (2022), Diretrizes para o programa de reconstrução e transformação do Brasil, accessed 8 November 2022.

[15] Canário, Pedro (2022), Quem são e o que fazem os generais de confiança de Bolsonaro na campanha, Bloomberg Línea, 24 July, accessed 4 November 2022.

.

.