Former Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s victory over incumbent Jair Bolsonaro sends a powerful message to the rest of the world. Although he won only narrowly, Lula, as he is known, succeeded by building a broad democratic coalition spanning from the far left to the center right.
Facing a deeply divided country, the president-elect is now setting the tone for a four-year term that begins in January. In his victory speech, he promised to establish a civil, inclusive, conciliatory and green government.
By calling for healing and solidarity, he offered a sharp contrast to his predecessor’s divisive rhetoric.
Illustration: Yusha
Make no mistake: Lula is facing tremendous headwinds in governing the world’s fourth-largest democracy. Although his convictions were annulled, many Brazilians are outraged that a man formerly implicated in corruption scandals is returning to the presidency. Lula also must deal with a sizable far-right bloc of legislators, daunting economic challenges and a simmering culture war unleashed by Bolsonaro and his militant supporters.
Still, Lula has an opportunity to be a transformational president, and in ways that would exceed what he achieved during his hugely popular first presidency from 2003 to 2010. He will need to offer a blueprint that emphasizes four main priorities.
For starters, Lula must position Brazil as a green superpower and a global leader in the transition to a carbon-neutral economy. Home to more than 60 percent of the world’s tropical forests, 20 percent of its fresh water and at least 10 percent of the planet’s biodiversity, Brazil is particularly well suited to assume an environmental leadership role.
However, the public and private sectors will need to abandon business as usual and seize the opportunities offered by the global green and orange (creative) economies. That means supporting policies to align agricultural, livestock, pharmaceutical and commodity markets with conservation goals and investing in the technologies and skills needed to support the bioeconomy, biotechnology, environmental services and regeneration.
With the right incentives in place, Brazil is capable of building a 100-percent renewable-energy grid and a sustainable food-production system.
Equally important, deforestation must end, especially in the Amazon, where 94 percent of such activities are occurring illegally. Lula’s government must disrupt the complex illicit economies and supply chains that have been fueling this destruction.
Enforcing forest protections, empowering environmental authorities and indigenous groups, strengthening the rule of law, and ensuring that companies deliver full traceability and transparency in their supply chains are all essential.
Brazil can and should also ramp up multilateral entrepreneurship in the global south, including by promoting arcs of restoration and alliances to protect tropical forests across the Amazon, Great Lakes of Africa and Southeast Asia.
Second, Lula must promote reconciliation and coexistence at home. As he noted in his victory speech, political polarization has heightened the risk of violence. The new government must foster closer partnerships with civil society and major digital platforms to rein in disinformation and safeguard civic and digital rights.
Brazil’s divisions are constantly amplified on social media and messaging services, but solutions are within reach. Brazil’s Superior Electoral Tribunal played a critical role during this year’s election by working with eight leading social-media platforms, fact-checking agencies and civil-society organizations to detect and disrupt disinformation.
However, de-platforming anti-democratic actors and moderating digital harms is not enough. Brazil should absorb lessons from other countries that have reduced online and offline polarization.
For example, encouraging “intergroup contact,” such as through citizen assemblies, has been shown to reduce prejudices between constituencies, as have projects built around “superordinate goals,” such as the effort to make Brazil a green superpower.
Beyond that, Brazilian leaders need to foster a political culture in which citizens focus more on policies than on personalities — for example, by allowing for more open consultations and participatory decisionmaking.
Third, Lula should strive to reinvigorate global initiatives to address poverty, inequality and food insecurity. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war on Ukraine, many lower and middle-income countries’ sustainable-development efforts have suffered massive setbacks. As global financial and monetary conditions have tightened, many countries have been barreling toward punishing debt crises that could hit the most vulnerable communities the hardest.
Under Lula, Brazil should advocate a global agenda to promote not just UN sustainable development goals, but also closer “south-south cooperation” to deliver material benefits for the world’s poorest.
Brazil has a venerable diplomatic tradition of supporting global cooperation through multilateral institutions and other forums designed to serve developing countries’ interests. In a fragmented and divided world, its ability to build consensus and foster partnerships is more important than ever.
Lastly, Lula should leverage Brazil’s international credibility to spur multilateral action against new global risks. Political and diplomatic leadership is needed to reinforce fragile norms barring weapons of mass destruction, to reduce the harms associated with new technologies and to mobilize investments in climate-related mitigation and adaptation efforts — especially in countries that stand to incur the greatest costs from global warming despite being the least responsible for it.
Even though Brazil’s new government must attend to its domestic challenges, it can and should lead the charge against these systemic, interconnected global risks. The world needs Brazil’s voice, which means that Brazil now needs to emerge from the shadow of the past four years.
Ilona Szabo, co-founder and president of the Igarape Institute, is a member of the UN secretary-general’s High-Level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday was handcuffed and escorted by police to the Taipei Detention Center, after the Taipei District Court ordered that he be detained and held incommunicado for suspected corruption during his tenure as Taipei mayor. The ruling reversed an earlier decision by the same court on Monday last week that ordered Ko’s release without bail. That decision was appealed by prosecutors on Wednesday, leading the High Court to conclude that Ko had been “actively involved” in the alleged corruption and it ordered the district court to hold a second detention hearing. Video clips
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that
RSS