Brazil has elected a new president by electing an old president. Former Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of the Workers’ Party, who held the office from 2003 to 2010, defeated the far-right incumbent, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, in the second-round runoff.
However, that does not mean what Bolsonaro represented has been defeated.
That there was a runoff underscores the fact that Brazil’s electorate, like many around the world, is deeply polarized. Bolsonaro, whose appeal is particularly strong among the military and conservative Christians, received more than 51 million votes in the first round, and more than 58 million in the second. He also receives considerable behind-the-scenes support — financial and ideological — from powerful economic interests, especially agribusinesses.
Illustration: Mountain People
Agribusiness accounted for 33 of the 50 largest donors to Bolsonaro’s campaign. It is a highly industrialized sector in Brazil, responsible for more than one-quarter of GDP and 48.3 percent of total exports in the first half of this year. Its geographical reach is vast, covering much of the north above Sao Paulo; a significant swath of the southern states; two powerful central-west states — Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul — and Roraima in the north. Most of the income gains in Brazil during Bolsonaro’s presidency went to these regions, as the agricultural sector benefited from a devalued national currency and high international commodity prices.
The rest of Brazil was not so lucky. High inflation — consumer prices rose by 8.3 percent last year — has severely strained a large share of the population, with more than half of Brazilians (125.2 million people) living with some kind of insecurity and 15 percent of the population (33 million people) facing severe food insecurity. In a country that touts its status as the “world’s barn,” this is a sad irony.
Not surprisingly, regions dominated by agribusiness were more likely to support Bolsonaro than Lula.
However, the president is just one part of the political puzzle. Even without Bolsonaro in power, agribusiness enjoys extensive legislative representation. Last year, members of the Parliamentary Agricultural Front (FPA) — Brazil’s powerful “rural bench” — comprised 46 percent of Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies and 48 percent of the Senate. The Instituto Pensar Agropecuaria, which includes 48 entities in the agricultural sector, advises the FPA.
The political machine that agribusiness has built in Brazil has proved highly effective. Under Bolsonaro and former Brazilian president Michel Temer, the FPA promoted, in an organized and systematic way, its interests, especially by contesting indigenous territorial rights to legitimize the use of native lands for agricultural production. The FPA also helped to articulate proposals and amendments on a range of regulatory issues, including workers’ rights, environmental licensing, regularization of land tenure and pesticides.
Further illustrating the farm lobby’s influence, former FPA president Tereza Cristina was nominated to head Bolsonaro’s Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Food Supply in 2019. On Oct. 2, in the first round of this year’s national elections, Cristina — also known as “Mrs Deforestation” and the “muse of poison” — was elected Mato Grosso do Sul’s senator, winning more than 60 percent of the vote.
Cristina was not alone. A whopping 70 percent of the FPA’s representatives in the Chamber of Deputies were re-elected. The organization expects to hold at least 40 of the 81 seats in the Senate next year, and even expects new “memberships,” which could bring the total to 45.
Brazil’s Congress is to also include Bolsonaro’s former Brazilian minister of environmental affairs Ricardo Salles. In 2018, Salles was convicted in court of the first instance of “administrative impropriety” while heading a Sao Paulo state environmental agency. Yet he became environment minister a month later, and presided over a surge in deforestation in the Amazon rainforest and major cuts to environmental protection programs, before being forced to resign last year over allegations of involvement in a timber trafficking scheme.
The agricultural sector’s political influence thus matches its oft-professed status as a “pillar of the economy.”
However, there is also an important social and cultural component to its influence. For much of the population, rural life is a kind of national identity, embodied by the romantic image of the sertanejo, or countryman.
From rodeos and vaquejadas — a sport involving two cowboys on horseback driving a bull into a goal — to country music and festivals, rural cultural traditions are as popular in some areas as soccer and carnival. Agribusiness uses such activities as opportunities to advance the narrative that it is central to Brazilian identity. It is no coincidence that many of Brazil’s leading country singers publicly backed Bolsonaro.
Bolsonarism has the economic, political and cultural influence to outlive Bolsonaro. In many ways, agribusiness — and the FPA — could make or break Lula’s presidency, particularly when it comes to environmental policy, land-tenure regularization, and the defense of indigenous and quilombolas’ rights. If the agents of Bolsonarism gain even more influence in the midterm local elections in two years, the challenge for Lula would grow even larger.
Bolsonaro’s defeat merits celebration, but no one — least of all Lula — should forget that the forces that empowered him have not gone away.
Camila Villard Duran is an associate professor of law at ESSCA School of Management.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
As India’s six-week-long general election grinds past the halfway mark, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s messaging has shifted from confident to shrill. After the first couple of phases of polling showed a 3 percentage point drop in turnout, Modi and his party leaders have largely stopped promoting their accomplishments of the past 10 years — or, for that matter, the “Modi guarantees” offered in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) manifesto for the next five. Instead, making the majority Hindu population fear and loathe Muslims seems to be the BJP’s preferred talking point. Modi went on the offensive in an April 21
The people of Taiwan recently received confirmation of the strength of American support for their security. Of four foreign aid bills that Congress passed and President Biden signed in April, the bill legislating additional support for Taiwan garnered the most votes. Three hundred eighty-five members of the House of Representatives voted to provide foreign military financing to Taiwan versus only 34 against. More members of Congress voted to support Taiwan than Ukraine, Israel, or banning TikTok. There was scant debate over whether the United States should provide greater support for Taiwan. It was understood and broadly accepted that doing so
As Ukraine leads the global fight for democracy, Taiwan, facing a potential war with China, should draw lessons from Ukraine’s cyberwarfare success. Taiwan has been enhancing its arsenal with advanced weapons from the West in anticipation of a possible full-scale invasion. However, Taipei should also consider Ukraine’s effective digital warfare, notably the “IT [information technology] Army,” a decentralized force instrumental in Kyiv’s cybercampaigns. In February 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine marked the onset of a significant cyberwar, where fears of a “digital Pearl Harbor” in Ukraine were unmet, thanks to robust cyberdefenses backed by Western public and private support. This led
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is attempting to create an alternative international world order to the US-dominated model. China has benefited hugely from the current order since former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) opened up its economy five decades ago. Countries can be categorized as continental or maritime, and to a great degree this determines their optimum foreign policy. China is continental, as is Russia. The US initially followed a continental foreign policy, before it settled on a maritime model. The British empire was so successful because a tiny island kingdom built a formidable naval presence. The US-dominated world order, stabilized by