Changing the command in a Brazilian Ministry used to be a domestic affair, but the resignation of the renowned rainforest defender Marina Silva from the Environmental Ministry has sparked global reactions. Ms. Silva’s replacement was quickly announced by President Lula, through the designation of Carlos Minc, former environmental secretary of Rio de Janeiro State and one of the founders of the Green Party in Brazil. Here are some comments from local bloggers on the shifting sands of public environmental policy.

By leaving the ministry, the ex-rubber tapper and ex-domestic worker, who learned to read only when she was 17 years old [and later to become Brazil's youngest senator at the age of 36], has generated — inside and outside the country — a reverberation that overshadows those that eventually occurred with the fall of former powerful finance ministers. She hopes that her replacement in the ministry, Carlos Minc, will be able to assure the continuity of the government environmental policy, resisting the pressure that comes from Blairo Maggi, the governor of Mato Grosso State who is working against retaining the National Monetary Council resolution that will oblige the financial system to require conforming with environmental regulations as a precondition for access to rural credit in the Amazon…. Marina Silva has declared that when you are in a position of power, even if it is something small (the editor of a newspaper column, for example), we suffer the temptation to look at people from the top down. — “I’ve learned, and it was not now but with many people I had the opportunity to meet along my life, people like Chico Mendes and Dom Moacir Grechi, that we have to look from the bottom up. From the bottom up we are able to watch what is above us. The Amazon is above us. And with such a look we are able to see that, in order to do something that is really good, we have to put ourselves in the perspective of service, which can also mean the gesture of cleaning the path so that another person can take your place. I’ve said before that it’s better to see your son alive on someone else’s lap than to see him dead on your own lap.”
“The Amazon is above us” - Altino Machado

Read the rest of this entry »

A blame game seemed to start as soon as Brazil’s Foreign Minister Celso Amorim and Indian Commerce Minister Kamal Nath walked out of the G4 talks with their counterparts from the US and the EU Thursday in Postdam, Germany. The meeting between these four key players in the World Trade Organization was formulated as an attempt to salvage global trade talks from a six year stalemate on the issues of farm subsidies and open markets. It turned into a fiasco and now charges over who or what caused the failure has become an open dispute, which is evoking interesting reactions from the media. Brazilian bloggers are trying to understand what’s going on… and they too are offering explanations.

In Washington on Thursday (21 June), the White House spokesman declared that President Bush was ‘disappointed’ with the collapse of the talks in Postdam. The US President blamed Brazil and India for the meeting’s failure. “The president is disappointed with some countries that are blocking an opportunity to expand global commerce”, remarked the White House spokesman, Tony Fratto. “Big economies as Brazil and India should not stand in the way of the progress of small nations, the poor developing countries — but that seems to be what happened in Germany this week”, Fratto said.
Lula culpa ricos por fracasso em Doha; Bush critica o Brasil - Mercosul e CPLP

No, Mr. Bush. That was not exactly what happened in the city of Postdam, in Germany, where the G4 met. In fact, the powerful nations seem to be opposed to the growth of the less affluent countries, but this kind of relationship is not what happens between Brazil, India and the poorer countries. This pattern exists between the US, the EU and the poorer countries. The core issue seems clear to me — the rich countries refuse to cut the agriculture subsidies to their farmers, and this situation can’t be seen as fair “commerce”. End. Brazil and India properly left the talks. The Europeans said that the emerging countries were not ready to make concessions, and I should ask: what more do they want? Meantime leaders are still thinking that social policies are to be restricted to national borders, we won’t have any development in the “better world” project. The attitude of the Lula Government in the case of the Bolivian refineries was, in my view, iconic. It would be indecent if the Brazilian president cared only for the national interests [of Brazil]. The well being of a Bolivian citizen is worth the same as mine or yours, dear reader. But this is not the line of thought of Europeans and Anglo-Americans. That is the reason why the Doha Round is dwindling. Just like Mercosur, Alca, etc.
Às favas com o comércio justo - Expressão Literária

Read the rest of this entry »