Laying the BRICS of a New Global Order: From Yekaterinburg 2009 to eThekwini 2013

17. Brazil in BRICS, a Manifest Destiny? Opposing views of Caracas and Itamaraty

312 CHAPTER 17 Brazil in BRICS, a Manifest Destiny? Opposing views of Caracas and Itamaraty María Gabriela Mata Carnevali ‘The unity of our peoples is not mere illusion of men but an inexorable decree of destiny.’ Simón Bolívar ‘Men know how to convert obstacles into new ways of doing things, because for life the space of a crack is enough to flourish.’ Ernesto Sábato INTRODUCTION T he building of a new World Order is one of the hardest tasks of world diplomacy. The BRICS initiative seems to be a successful model of South-South cooperation in the sense that it constitutes an example of dialogue and counterbalance of power. This appears to have endowed its members the right to become ‘the voice’ of the South, but among the poorest countries of this region there is the fear that these emerging powers speak mostly in defence of their particular interests. As Wheeler highlights: Countries of the South differ widely in character and their interests may diverge greatly […] Even though these States occupy a common position on some issues and share certain of their goals and ambitions, their interests do not necessarily converge, even in their relation with the developed North.1 These differences lead to fragmentation rather than cohesion in the efforts of the South to address its problems. Besides, the differentiation in power of the developing countries may be a limitation to participation at the multilateral level and even a potential risk in the sense that it can harbour a kind of predation on the South by the South. In other words, some may assume to speak for the rest, while actually, most of the time, they speak 313 BRAZIL IN BRICS, A MANIFEST DESTINY? OPPOSING VIEWS OF CARACAS AND ITAMARATY for themselves. The systematisation of the monopoly of their discourse is a risk for the poorer countries whose interests are marginalised. In the case of BRICS, as pointed out by Maria Regina Soares: A relevant point is that global recognition comes along with regional recognition . For some authors legitimacy at a regional level is needed to attend international projection due to the fact that the global powers tend to value the emergent’s contribution to regional stability; but this delegation of such a responsibility may reveal itself as a sort of sub imperialism carrying a loss of legitimacy or fear among their neighbors considering the differences of power potential.2 On this basis, the search for new political, economic and social practices represents a challenge to redefine new horizons in this matter. The necessity to familiarise ourselves with the different circumstances of our particular societies is a call to deepen the study, dissemination and promotion of the different experiences that take place daily in our continents. Brazil in BRICS, a ‘Manifest Destiny’? It seems so. Nevertheless, along with some authors we would like to warn about the dwindling of South America’s importance on Brazil’s foreign policy agenda precisely because of its status as a global player, which questions the legitimacy of its assumed advocacy on behalf of the region. We therefore invite you, dear reader, to keep your eyes wide open to the alternatives, in order to get a better understanding of this part of the South. This chapter will review the increasing leadership of Brazil in South America in contrast with the Bolivarian option represented by Venezuela, two different versions of the nationalist impulses that confront post-liberal regional counter-tendencies at a time when the region faces important challenges imposed by its satellite status inherited from colonial times. The proposed case of study is an example of the current problems in implementing the integration dreamt by Bolivar3 and prescribed by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (UNECLAC or ECLAC; Spanish: CEPAL)4 within the frame of the dependency theory. The argument is that the varying national strategies of insertion into the global economy are playing against it and explain certain regional reluctance against Brazilian foreign policy which is seen as a kind of sub-imperialism. 314 CHAPTER 17 SOUTH AMERICA AND THE FRAGMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGIES OF INSERTION INTO THE GLOBAL ECONOMY The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, is a step towards the formation of a political and cultural entity that aims to maintain the global hegemony held by the United States in the 20th...