Another week, another storm of tear gas and rubber bullets at a FIFA World Cup host city in Brazil. This time, the clashes were in the capital, Brasilia, where 15,000 protesters from the Landless Workers Movement marched from the Mane Garrincha soccer stadium to the Palacio do Planalto state office of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.
Riot police using batons and tear gas fought off several attempts to invade the building. The demonstrators threw stones and tore down railings which they used as weapons. In the fierce fighting, 12 protesters and 30 police officers were injured.
Rousseff was not in her office at the time, but this latest explosion of unrest is yet another headache for the president in what is supposed to be one of the most triumphant, feel-good years in Brazil’s history.
Illustration: Mountain people
Hosting the World Cup was intended to show that Brazil — the land long condemned as the “country of the future — that always will be” — had finally arrived. It seemed a shoo-in for success. The five World Cup wins of the Selecao, Brazil’s national soccer team, are arguably the greatest source of national pride among the country’s population of 200 million. Sure, given the nation’s relaxed lifestyle, there were always bound to be a few glitches along the way, but it was taken as a given that the land of carnival and samba would mark the tournament by throwing the best party ever.
Those glib assumptions have taken a battering in the past eight months, starting with the biggest street protest in a generation during the Confederations Cup in June last year and rising in violent, nerve-jangling intensity to the point where — just four months from kick-off — people are still being killed in protests, workers are dying in the rush to complete unfinished stadiums and the mood of the nation is far closer to unease than alegria — joy.
In the past month, the news has grown worse and the criticism sharper. Five stadiums that were supposed to be ready at the end of December last year are still under construction, prompting panic among FIFA executives. Last month, FIFA president Sepp Blatter said Brazil was further behind schedule than any host since he joined the global soccer organization in 1975, even though it has had the most time to prepare.
One stadium — the Arena da Baixada in Curitiba — is now in the last-chance saloon. Organizers in the city have two days left to prove they have accelerated the pace of building or FIFA secretary-general Jerome Valcke has warned the venue could be kicked out of the tournament. That is almost unthinkable given the logistical nightmare of finding a new venue at this late stage, but that the matter was even raised in public underscores the frustrations the delays have generated.
The dire progress is also at least partly to blame for several deaths. Of the six workers who have been killed in stadium construction accidents, four have lost their lives since late November last year as deadline pressure picked up. The latest casualty, Antonio Jose Pita Martins, was reported dead on Feb. 7, crushed in Amazonia Arena in Manaus where three people have died preparing the stadium where England will play their opening match against Italy. With no major domestic league teams in the city, the venue is thought unlikely to be filled again for soccer after July.
The waste of lives and money on such white elephants has added fuel to the anger on the streets. Initial public protests had nothing to do with soccer. Until June last year, most were small, relatively peaceful and focused on single issues such as bus fares, healthcare, evictions and corruption. However, FIFA’s mega-events have become a lightning rod for these and many other issues. “Nao vai ter Copa!” (No World Cup) is now a popular chant at almost every rally.
Violence is a growing problem. Although demonstrations are far smaller than June’s, they are often bloodier. The most recent victim was a TV cameraman, Santiago Andrade, who was killed when a protester’s flare exploded next to his head during a protest outside the Central do Brasil train station in Rio de Janeiro.
Police brutality has only added to the problem, both on the streets and in the favelas, where a “pacification” program aimed at driving out armed gangs has suffered a series of setbacks. Residents’ support for the operation has weakened since the torture and murder of a local man, Amarildo de Souza, by police last year.
His home — the Rocinha favela, which sits above the English team’s hotel — is now racked by gunfire almost every night. Elsewhere, Comando Vermelho gangsters have assassinated several police officers in what appears to be a resumption of tit-for-tat killings.
Soccer offers a far from safe refuge. More people die in stadium violence and supporter clashes in Brazil than in any other country. Players are no more immune and only slightly better protected. This was evident in the attack this month on the Corinthians training camp in Sao Paulo by about 100 angry fans who made a hole in the fence with wire cutters, then assaulted the team. Peruvian striker Paolo Guerrero, who scored the winner against Chelsea in the 2012 Club World Cup final, was throttled. Others had belongings stolen. The players have threatened to go on strike over the lack of safety, which will also be a concern at the World Cup, when Iran will use the same training facility.
For some analysts, such problems highlight the fundamentally disruptive and unhealthy impact of global tournaments, despite the promises of improvements.
“What we are seeing in Brazil is an aggravation of ordinary living conditions as cities prepare for the World Cup. Traffic is worse, prices are higher and there has never been any kind of institutional reform to Brazilian soccer. Violence is a part of daily life in Brazil and to assume that this will go away because people feel good about the World Cup is as irresponsible as it is naive,” said Christopher Gaffney, a visiting geography professor at the Fluminense Federal University in Rio de Janeiro.
Others, however, dismiss such views as curmudgeonly. FIFA’s ambassador, Pele, insists the tournaments will bring rewards for Brazil — as long as people do not ruin the party mood.
“Now we have three fantastic events: the Confederations Cup, the World Cup and the Olympics. The country can fill up with tourists and receive all the benefits. And Brazil’s own people are spoiling the party,” he said in a recent interview.
“I hope that people have good sense: Let the World Cup pass on. Then we’ll make up for the politicians who are robbing [us] or diverting [money]. This is another thing. Soccer only brings foreign money and only brings benefits to Brazil,” he said.
However, King Pele — as he was known on the pitch — has lost a great deal of respect among the public for an approach that comes across as a blind defense of anything that threatens his many corporate sponsors. Similar appeals last year only brought disdain.
Rousseff has also stepped up the public relations drive, according to local media who cite unnamed aides as saying that the president’s team plans an advertising campaign to remind people that infrastructure projects have been accelerated by the tournament and are partly funded by private money.
The president — who faces elections in October — has declared that the remaining obstacles to the World Cup are simple to overcome. However, with huge delays over airport and subway projects and suspicions of overly close ties between politicians and construction companies, there also appears to be a shift of emphasis away from the hardware and preparations and toward the soft side of the tournament as a great spectacle and a great party. The new mantra — constantly repeated this year by the president and FIFA’s Valcke — is that 2014 will be the “Copa das Copas” (Cup of Cups).
It is, of course, not too late for the tournament to be a success. The country remains on an upward, if somewhat wobbly trajectory. Jitters are normal before any big event and every hiccup is magnified by the unusually intense scrutiny of the global media. Past mega-events have all been plagued by negative news — Tibetan protests before the Beijing Olympics in 2008, crime fears before the South African World Cup in 2010, security concerns before the London Games of 2012. Brazil, it is hoped, will also overcome its current hitches once the focus is on what it is good at: soccer rather than organization.
However, for the moment, there is still a gap between how the event is seen by the politicians in the futuristic but old buildings of Brasilia and how it is perceived on the streets. A lot of work needs to be done to unify these two visions and time is not on Brazil’s side.
“This is a moment of unrest and uncertainty — both in terms of the Cup and also society,” 1970 World Cup winner and social commentator Tostao said.
“The Cup will happen. There is no way they will let it not happen. But what is success? For the Brazilian people, the Cup meant lots of public spending, a lack of lasting infrastructure, a lack of social projects, but for the government a successful Cup means something completely different. We’re all in doubt right now because we just don’t know what’s going to happen during the Cup,” he said.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with