Event Reports
The gathering, which also commemorated the 10th anniversary of InfoRel, took place inside the Brazilian Parliament and brought together a selected panel of policy specialists and academics. The timing of the event, which was placed on the eve for Brazil to receive a new government, counted with the participation of more than 150 audience members as well as several representatives of the national print- and TV press.
Afte brief opening speeches given by the hosts, represented through the MP Pen. Almeida, EU Ambassador Ana Paula Zacaria, InfoRel President Marcelo Rech, KAS Represenative Felix Dane and CEBRI Representative Leonardo Paz, the conference was opened with a key note speech on the evolution of the nature of global terrorism given by Spanish General Fernando Reinares. A panel discussion under the title of “Foreign policy: emerging in world politics: an agenda for Brazil’s International Relations” followed. Moderated by MP Izalci, the panel saw the participation of Leonardo Paz from CEBRI, of Thiago de Aragão, director of Intelligence and Strategy as well as partner of Arko Advice, of Creomar de Souza from the Catholic University of Brasília and of Oliver Stuenkel from the Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV).
After the lunch break, two more debates were in order. The panel to start the afternoon was titled “Intelligence: State policy, strategic issues and national interest”. The mediator, MP Duarte Nogueira, facilitated a debate between Joanisval Brito Gonçalves, specialist in state intelligence from the FGV, General Maynard Marques de Santa Rosa, former chief of the division for counter intelligence of the Brazilian armed forces, André Woloszyn, ex-analyst of strategic issues in the secretary of the presidency of the Brazilian Republic (SAE), and Marcus Reis, specialist in counter intelligence. The conference ended with a debate under the banner of “Defence: discussion, industry, and development and projection of power”. The moderator was MP Perpétua Almeida and the discussants were Salvador Raza, director of the Center for Technology, International Relations and Security (CeTRIS), Gunther Rudzit, professor of international relations at the University IBMEC in São Paulo, Alexandre Fuccille, professor of international relations at the Federal University of the State São Paulo, and Antônio Jorge Ramalho, advisor for the Brazilian Ministry of Defence and director of the Pandiá Calógeras Institute. After closing remarks by MP Perpétua Almeida, Felix Dane, Leonardo Paz and Marcelo Rech, the participants parted in content with the outcomes.
General Fernando Reinares said that by acting on local as well as global levels, groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaida are a position to harm the interests of all members of the global community. Detailing the history of these and other movements, General stressed that the world is facing a protracted conflict spanning many regions of the world, should world leaders not be able to initiate a concerted effort on many theatres of relevance.
The participants of the panel on the outlook of Brazilian diplomacy took the occasion and the timing of the event for reflection, criticism and the opportunity to voice their ideas for the future. The panel was in concord about the poor performance of Brazilian foreign policy over the last few years. Thiago Aragão saw the reason in a shift towards presidential diplomacy started by president FHC 20 years ago. The president had become very active on the regional and global space, successfully securing for Brazil a status of a rising actor. This governing style was continued by President Lula who together with Marco Aurelio Garcia and Celco Amorim had devised and implemented a far reaching reorientation in strategic outlook, away from a close alignment to policies as associated with globalism towards a position which foresaw Brazil as a bridge between the Global North and the Global South. However, when President Dilma took on office of president, the system had become heavily dependent on the alignment and presence of key personalities associated with the new foreign policy outlook. Once President Dilma was unable to achieve such, Brazil was unable to cruise the ever changing dynamism of international politics. Drawing on these ideas, Souza said that in the past the Brazilian foreign ministry always occupied a central position in a partnership relation with the presidency in articulating strategy and in implementing policy. Recognizing the failure which came out by relatively neutralizing the influence of the foreign ministry, Souza called for a reverse course in government organization; only thus can president Dilma focus on pressing domestic challenges while also securing for Brazil a return to stable foreign relations. Leonardo Paz said that Brazil would be able to look on a long history of normative positions such as the upholding of human rights, the respect for sovereignty, the preference of diplomacy and mediation over conflict as well as remaining open for dialogue with all. He agreed with Aragão and Souza that the Brazilian presidency should devolve power to the bureaucracy. Brazil moreover abandon its strategy of denominating the world in broadly differentiated terms such as north and south, and follow a strategy of relations with all countries, should focus on training area experts, while also invest in proper understandings of what it means to be a bridge country and a carrier of potential vast soft power. Oliver Stünkel agreed that Brazil must invest in studying matters of importance to its own identity, its own insights into the workings of the world. He said that the world is moving towards a post unipolar world, and that Brazil must prepare to take up position of conviction in many areas, including what the meaning of failed states are, how it understands immigration and what Brazil general wants for herself and her region.
The panel on intelligence followed in the path of critical reflection as set out by the first panel, the speakers on the panel on intelligence argued that globalization and the process of redistribution of power among states, as well as other developments had led to a more complicated working of the world; what seemed before a clear cut process towards an all comprehensive global society of states has become a blurred picture in which opportunities and threats have become intermixed. André Woloszyn said that the role of intelligence thus should be to understand global trends, to decipher the meaning of global events and processes so as to enable democracies and their leaders to tailor their strategies in harmony to global forces. General Santa Rosa, in agreement with this outlook, said that Brazil must develop a culture which can take into account the working of intelligence. Differentiating between human intelligence and signal intelligence, Rosa said that both are salient, yet that both make sense only when the nation knows her interests in the world, which, according to him, Brazil did not know. Drawin on this same theme, Joanisval Gonçalves said that Brazil must engage its academic and political community in thinking about what the national interest is on the world stage, only thus, the country could follow up a comprehensive strategy in world politics. Further entering the concept of human intelligence, André Reis said that human intelligence is not exclusively about secret agents as popularized in movies such as James Bond, but also about understanding the meaning of messages hidden in the intertext and context of world politics; the deciphering of body language, of nuanced messages, of hints and word plays. Mastering such would enable the nation and her agencies to better understand others, and thus allow for more comprehensive action and reactions on the world stage.
The last panel was dedicated to the question of defence considerations. Equality critical reflective as the two other panels, the members of the panels were concerned with the ability of brazil to build up the capacities as necessary for a country which aspired to a central role in global politics. Returning to the issue of the national interest, Fuccille said that policy makers should consult the nation’s people, and elaborate together how the issue at hand should be defined. Questions such as what the priorities should be as well as the aspirations in the global realm must be clarified, so as to tailor a military which corresponds with these needs. Gunther Rudzit went into the same direction, saying that the Brazilian military had accepted that it needs to transform, yet he said that the political process over the last years was unable to come forward with a comprehensive plan. Moreover, he said that the military is still divided into several branches and agencies, with no centralized command and control structure, which in turn makes it difficult to implement reform. Salvador Raza said that more civilians need to enter the spaces of intersection between politics and military, guide the process of transformation and adaptation. Criticizing the outdate ideational and material framework on which the military is built upon, Raza said that that Brazil must invest so as to modernize both, the academic-education which military women and men receive as well as the hardware with which they do their jobs as defenders of the nation. Slightly shifting the outlook, Antonio Ramalho said that Brazil was set in a region of peace and cooperation, and that its plans must always come in harmony with it. He said that on a regional institutional level much had been achieved in the foregone years and thus peace and stability had become solidified. He continued by saying that strategy and national outlook should not be limited to the short term but rather think in long term dimensions. As such, he said that many projects are in a process of being implemented, yet that these projects take time until they will impact the status quo. As an example he took on the nuclear submarine, which he says will be ready in many years only, but which will be used so as to fill any potential power vacuum in the South Atlantic sea, though he stressed that Brazil will want to work together with other powers in the region and remain committed to securing peace and stability.
In closing, the hosts came together once again. Voicing satisfaction, they underscored once more that Brazil would find herself in a moment of transition, and that we all would have to wait for the new year to arrive so as to know what would come next.
once again that Brazil would find herself in a moment of transition, and that we all would have to wait for the new year to arrive so as to know what would come next.
A link to the videos of the speeches will be available soon on this website.