Por: Robinson Salazar

BRASIL: Lula ante los dilemas de la izquierda tradicional

El peligro de ciertas ideas actuales sobre el poder y la izquierda fue parte de la aguda reflexión sobre Argentina y Brasil que realizó Marco Aurelio García, hombre clave del gobierno de Lula.

Márcio Resende. PERIODISTA.

MARCO AURELIO GARCIA. MANO DERECHA DEL PRESIDENTE BRASILEÑO.

Para Marco Aurélio Garcia, mano derecha y asesor en política exterior del presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, "los argentinos se autoengañaron". Aunque se graduó en Derecho y Filosofía, Garcia, de 61 años, se destacó en dos aspectos: como profesor de Historia en universidades de Brasil, Chile y Francia, y como secretario, por más de una década, de Relaciones Internacionales del Partido de los Trabajadores. Abierto e incisivo para abordar cualquier debate, habló de temas polémicos como el fracaso de la izquierda tradicional y concluyó que Chiapas, si se prolonga en el tiempo corre el riesgo de "transformarse en un parque temático de la izquierda mundial".

• ¿Lo que ocurrió en la Argentina puede repetirse en Brasil?

No. Lo que llevó al colapso argentino fue lo que muchos anticipábamos: la política cambiaria. ¡Pobre de aquél que osara decir en público que la convertibilidad llevaría al país al abismo! Era un tema tabú. Recuerdo que hace algunos años, Lula fue invitado a un programa de TV en Argentina y alguien le pidió: "Por favor, no hable en contra de la convertibilidad". No se trata de una profecía autocumplida sino de algo que iba a cumplirse inexorablemente pero que era negado. Y cuando sucedió, la gente empezó a preguntarse cómo había podido creer en ese modelo. Evidentemente, como a nadie le gusta ser engañado y menos aún cuando se trata de un autoengaño, la tendencia fue buscar un chivo expiatorio: De la Rúa, Chacho... El caso brasileño es diferente. Estamos en una situación muy difícil pero controlable. La deuda social brasileña, si se pudiera cuantificar, es mucho mayor y más grave que la deuda interna. Pero en el plano de los sentimientos, de las opiniones, de las expectativas, elementos todos esenciales en la economía de hoy, estamos logrando resultados muy importantes.

• ¿La gran deuda social de la región es lo que contribuyó al avance de la izquierda?

• Los dos grandes paradigmas de la izquierda en el siglo XX fueron el comunista y el socialdemócrata, con una vertiente nacional desarrollista en Latinoamérica. Pero esos paradigmas entraron en crisis. Esa izquierda tradicional fracasó. Nosotros en el PT buscamos construir más una propuesta política que ideológica. Nutrida de ideales generosos de democracia social, de igualdad, de presencia soberana en el mundo. Casi daría un decálogo de lo que debe ser hoy un pensamiento de izquierda en América latina.

• La llegada de Lula a la presidencia marca el fin del neoliberalismo?

• Es un golpe fuerte, pero nada termina de un momento a otro. Hoy la sociedad no se reconoce más en aquel proyecto que tanto la movilizó en el pasado. La gente estaba a favor de las privatizaciones no porque fue engañada o porque el ex-presidente Cardoso la hechizó durante 8 años. Tampoco es que de repente el hechizo terminó y todos se volcaron a Lula. Es que la gente fue aprendiendo. Como en la vida. Hoy existe un peligroso vacío que puede sacar de la agenda política algunos temas importantes para la reflexión. Por ejemplo, en Argentina hay una idea de que el poder no interesa, que se trata de un ámbito de corrupción, que se necesita crear redes alternativas en la sociedad, que las elecciones no sirven... Mientras la gente piense así, otros ganarán las elecciones y harán lo que les parezca. Las redes y los movimientos sociales son importantes. El PT, inclusive, surgió también con ese componente. Pero hay un momento en el que lo importante es saber quién y cómo va gobernar el país. Chiapas no va a existir para siempre. Si sigue existiendo, será una especie de parque temático de la izquierda mundial que las personas van a visitar para luego decir: "¡Qué maravilla! ¡Qué bueno sería si el mundo fuese así!". Será como los niños que van a Disneyworld a zambullirse en la fantasía. Yo no descalifico la experiencia, pero no tengo ninguna ilusión de que el mundo pueda transformarse en una gigantesca Chiapas.

• El PT giró hacia el centro. ¿Se lo puede llamar un partido de izquierda todavía?

• La sociedad brasileña giró hacia la izquierda. La prueba es la elección de Lula. Los que están preocupados por las alianzas que hicimos con determinados sectores políticos de centro y de centroderecha pueden estar seguros de que ésa es una alianza con hegemonía de izquierda.

• Pero el propio Lula asumió una posición mucho más moderada...

• No fue una posición más moderada. Varias de las posiciones que nosotros defendimos durante la última campaña estuvieron durante las campañas anteriores. Evidentemente, cambió la situación brasileña. Había una exigencia mayor que no era sólo la de los mercados sino del conjunto de la sociedad brasileña.

• ¿Cuándo podríamos comenzar a ver los efectos de esa política?

• El primer año tendrá algunos impactos negativos, heredados del gobierno anterior, como la presión inflacionaria. Si adoptamos una política prudente, pero al mismo tiempo hacemos una fuerte inflexión en la dirección del modelo que queremos implementar, será posible tener crecimiento con baja inflación. El alza del dólar (que durante la campaña llegó a 3,99 reales) fue especulativa. Esa especulación no puede mantenerse. Es una forma de excitación de la economía. Nadie puede vivir excitado todo el tiempo.

• ¿Puede cumplirse simultáneamente con las metas del FMI y con el pueblo?

• Tenemos metas sociales y económicas. El FMI ya tiene actualmente una cierta percepción de que ya no sirve involucrarse exclusivamente con una política de estabilización si la economía del país no crece.

news.ft.com By Richard Lapper, Latin America Editor in Sao Paulo Published: February 24 2003 17:13 | Last Updated: February 24 2003 17:13 Global political uncertainty on the scale we are witnessing at present ought - on the face of it - to be bad for higher risk assets. But you would not get that impression from a cursory glance at what is happening in Latin America.

So far this year investors in Latin American bonds have made total returns of 3.1 per cent, following up on last year's gains of 7.1 per cent. Returns in some equity markets have been even more impressive, although shrinking liquidity means it has been very difficult to take advantage.

Since the beginning of November when it became very clear that fears of a debt default in Brazil had been exaggerated, yields have been dropping. In the last two months alone average spreads of all emerging market bonds over US Treasuries - the most widely accepted measure of political risk - have fallen by half a percentage point, with Brazil's yields down by one-and-a-half percentage points over the same period.

In January Latin American borrowers raised $4bn, the biggest amount of new issuance for three years. Liquidity is still pretty thin but dealing spreads are smaller than in the US corporate bond market and a number of banks have moved to overweight positions.

So why is this happening ? After all, the risks that have bedevilled the region in recent years seem to have been increasing. Venezuela faces especially serious problems, with local business confidence all but dead in the wake of an unsuccessful two month general strike against President Hugo Chávez. Argentina - which defaulted on its debt just over a year ago - is still some way from rehabilitating itself in international financial markets. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is making good progress in Brazil but his economy is struggling, and last week's one percentage point increase in overnight interest rates - the fifth rise in the same number of months - will further damp consumption and investment in the short-term.

Part of the reason is that specialist emerging market and higher risk investors, high yields - and the good returns of last year - are attracting more buyers at a time of falling interest rates and depressed equity markets in Europe, North America and Asia.

Investors are encouraged that fiscal and monetary fundamentals are still intact in most parts of the region. Investors are hopeful that war could be good for some countries. Peru, now the world's second biggest exporter of gold as a result of massive foreign investment in the last five years, will benefit from the recent hike in gold prices.

Only Chile and the smaller Central American and Caribbean countries would be really badly hit by a rise in the oil price. Since most countries are either self-sufficient or net exporters. Even Brazil now produces about four-fifths of the oil it consumes.

Finally, as David Lubin, chief emerging markets economist at HSBC in London points out, the supply of emerging market assets has shrunk, as countries adjust to the broader increase of risk aversion since the Asian crisis and Russian debt default of 1997 and 1998 by reducing current account deficits.

"The collapse in capital flows has been very devastating but we are now living in a post-collapse world," says Mr Lubin. "This has created a more balanced market."

The problem though is that Latin America - in particular - is also extremely vulnerable to any heightened risk aversion among investors that might ocur if the war in Iraq were to be longer than is generally expected or if it were to be followed by a spate of terrorist attacks.

Guillermo Calvo, the chief economist of the Inter-American Development Bank, says that Latin American bond yields have been increasingly correlated with other high risk assets such as US corporate bonds, implying that any increase in risk aversion will directly impact the region.

"This is a completely different kind of contagion. It is very visible and coming from the north," says Mr Calvo. "You could have very strong winds blowing from the capital markets."

reuters.com Mon February 24, 2003 10:51 AM ET (Recasts with details, analyst comment, background, share price)

By Nicholas Winning

SAO PAULO, Brazil, Feb 24 (Reuters) - Brazil's AmBev ABV.N AMBV4.SA , the world's fifth-largest brewer, on Monday posted slightly stronger-than-expected fourth quarter earnings as price rises and cost cuts offset a drop in sales volumes.

Companhia de Bebidas das Americas (AmBev) failed last year to match 2001 sales volumes as Brazil's economy posted sluggish growth, although a drive to expand into new Latin American markets helped it bolster international beer sales volumes.

Although sales were stronger in the last three months of the year than they were over the same period in 2001, the volume of beer sold in Brazil dropped 1.7 percent in 2002 while soft drink volumes fell 1.1 percent.

Nevertheless, price hikes in October to compensate for higher dollar-linked ingredients and packaging costs, coupled with greater direct distribution, and more sales of premium and new more expensive niche brands, boosted Brazil beer revenues.

Costs of beer sold fell due to "better U.S. dollar prices for aluminum cans, malt and hops, as well as a shift in the packaging toward returnable bottles," AmBev said in a statement.

Fourth quarter earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), the gauge of operating performance many analysts focus on, jumped to 1.1 billion reais ($304.6 million) from 761.5 million reais in the year-earlier period.

The market expected the company, which was formed from the 2000 merger of Brazil's two biggest beverage firms, to post EBITDA of 1 billion reais, according to an average of five forecasts collected by Reuters last week.

Fourth quarter net profit leaped to 431.4 million reais from 178.7 million in the same period in 2001. That fell short of the analysts' average forecast of 653 million reais after the firm unexpectedly hiked its provision for taxes.

"The operational side was above what we were expecting, and they made a much bigger provision for tax than they normally do which is why the net profit was below expectations," said Fabio Zagatti, an analyst at HSBC CTVM Research.

AmBev stock dipped 0.4 percent to 513 reais in early trade in Brazil. The country's benchmark Bovespa .BVSP stock index was 0.5 percent higher at the time. AmBev's stock has lost 5 percent of its value this year, while the Bovespa is about 8 percent weaker.

ALREADY RECOUPING BRAZIL BEER MARKET SHARE

AmBev's share of the Brazilian beer market fell to 67.1 percent at the end of December from 70.1 percent at end-September and 68.5 percent in December 2001, but it said it had started to recover some of the lost ground this year.

"During the (fourth) quarter the decline was concentrated in supermarkets, and is the effect of strong discount levels in the marketplace," AmBev said. "We already recovered some market share in early 2003, reaching 67.9 percent."

AmBev's beers include Skol Pilsen, the third-biggest selling brand in the world. It also makes Brahma, Antarctica and Bohemia. Its main rival is Kaiser, brewed in Brazil by Canada's Molson Inc MOLa.TO with Dutch giant Heineken NV HEHN.AS .

AmBev's share of the Brazilian soft drink market, where it trails Coca-Cola Co. KO.N , dipped to 16 percent from 16.6 percent in September. The firm's main soft drink is Guarana, a sweet fizzy pop made from an Amazon berry of the same name.

Although AmBev sold more beer abroad in the fourth quarter of 2002 than in the previous year, currency depreciations in Argentina and other countries reduced earnings while a general strike and political crisis in Venezuela hit sales there.

A near-6 percent strengthening of Brazil's currency, the real BRBY , in the fourth quarter gave AmBev a financial gain. It raised prices to counter cost increases linked to the real's 35 percent slump over 2002.

AmBev has nevertheless continued to expand across Latin America through an alliance with Argentina's top brewer Quilmes Industrial QUIN.LU , which will give it greater access to Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay, and Uruguay, and a plan to build a brewer in Peru by early 2004.

AmBev executives have scheduled a conference call to discuss the results on Wednesday.

($1 = 3.62 reais)

www.chron.com Feb. 23, 2003, 11:04PM Houston International Scene By MAE GHALWASH Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle

Latin Americans are closely watching the newly elected leftist Brazilian government's reform policies, which are a middle ground between socialist and free-market strategies, Enrique Hidalgo-Noriega, a senior analyst for the New York-based Eurasia Group, said in Houston last week.

Having been hit by a series of political upheavals and economic crises, Latin Americans have reached a "crossroads," with people wondering whether to continue with political and economic reforms toward democracy and free markets, Hidalgo-Noriega said.

Some politicians blame the reforms for the crises, while others insist the reforms are insufficient, Hidalgo-Noriega said. The Brazilian government of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva believes that the solution lies somewhere in between: reforms are necessary but should be coupled with some government control, Hidalgo-Noriega said.

Lula's people criticize past economic reforms for giving too much autonomy to state companies and too much power to regulating agencies.

"The government wants to have a greater say in planning and administration," Hidalgo-Noriega said. "The objective is to take back some of the autonomy and the power."

One example is the planned sale of major hydroelectric plants, which, according to energy reports, are not likely to be auctioned off to the highest bidder but to the company that will offer better terms for consumers. Also, the government appointed some loyalists to the state-oil firm Petrobas but kept many of the company's experienced career employees.

Energy pundits have said the moves hint of socialism, but they are not absolute dismissals of free market policies. Hidalgo-Noriega agrees and points out that Brazil is not heading in the direction of Venezuela, where President Hugo Chavez has appointed political comrades with little or no business or energy experience to run the state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela S.A.

While Hidalgo-Noriega says he supports more autonomy and power for companies and agencies, he points out, for example, that Brazil's energy sector has had failings, like the blackouts of 2001. Whether the government's new approach will correct these failings is something pundits are waiting to see, he said.

As for Latin America, the looming war with Iraq is hindering its emergence from its crises, the analyst said. The effect the war will have on world economy undoubtedly will delay any economic recovery in countries like Argentina, which has just started to recover from its crisis.

For Mexico, whose development depends on the United States, the war is particularly troublesome. The government of President Vincente Fox is caught between wanting to appease America in its move toward war and its fear of alienating the Mexican people, who are largely against the war, in an election year.

A delay in economic recovery would cause the general populations to "not equate democracy with prosperity, but with poverty," Hidalgo-Noriega said.

International calendar:

·Brazil/Venezuela: Paulo Sotero, Washington correspondent for the leading Brazilian newspaper O Estado Des Paulo, will discuss how the leaders of Brazil and Venezuela might direct their countries through reform or crisis at 11:30 a.m. Wednesday at the Westin Galleria Hotel, 5060 W. Alabama. Reservations are required. Call the Houston World Affairs Council at 713-522-7811.

·Eurasia: The Greater Houston Partnership will present a workshop on Eurasia, focusing on oil and gas projects and the investment opportunities there. The event is at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday at the GHP, 1200 Smith St., Suite 700. Today is the last day to register. Call Cari Broderson at 713-844-3635.

·United Nations: The United Nations Association-Houston is organizing a group for young professional people of diverse ethnic backgrounds who are interested in international affairs. The meeting starts at 10:30 a.m. Saturday at the Whole Foods Market, 4001 Bellaire Blvd. Reservations are required. Call 713-626-7410.

·Great Britain: Louis Markos, professor of English at Houston Baptist University, will discuss British romantic poetry. at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Briar Club, 2603 Timmons Lane. Reservations for the event, which includes dinner, are required. Call the English-Speaking Union at 713-666-1044.

·Japan: The Kodo Drummers of Japan will perform in Houston to help commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Japan-U.S. relationship and the 100th anniversary of the Texas-Japan relationship. The event starts at 8 p.m. Friday and Saturday at Jones Hall, 615 Louisiana. Reservations are required. Call 713-2274772.

www.tnr.com by Robert Lane Greene Only at TNR Online | Post date 10.29.02

Rarely does a candidate for high office in a major democracy enjoy simultaneous billing as both a moderate and a radical. Never does it happen as often as it did to the Brazilian president-elect, Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva, during his recent campaign. Often within the same article commentators would seize on various physical attributes and use them to make conflicting points. On one side, there was the finger Lula lost in an industrial accident, a symbol of his years of activism within the country's labor movement. On the other side, there was the trimming of Lula's beard, which was supposed to symbolize his transformation from radical union agitator to statesman. (Not since Jimmy Carter reversed his part in 1979 has a candidate's hair seemed to portend so much.)

In truth, Lula is neither the market-embracing moderate some say he has become nor the unapologetic hard-leftist who previously made three unsuccessful bids for the Brazilian presidency. He has renounced a pledge to "renegotiate" (that is, stop paying) Brazil's huge debt, promised to honor the terms of an IMF deal that requires Brazil to run budget surpluses, and has, in principle, agreed to aim for low inflation. But his party is hostile to many aspects of orthodox economics. Free trade is one: The Workers' Party has sworn to prevent the "annexation" of Brazil in the American-inspired Free Trade Area of the Americas. Using higher interest rates to control inflation is another: Lula has simplistically argued that America lowered rates during its recession, so why not Brazil? And while he has said he will spend responsibly, his campaign promise to double the minimum wage would be costly, driving up public wages and the pensions that are indexed to them.

Taken together, Lula gives the impression of a leftist, but in a mold familiar to moderate social democrats in Europe and America. And that's what makes his victory so comforting.

Latin America's history with democracy has been an unruly one, to say the least. The region's strong illiberal tendencies have come in various forms over the years--whether military autocracy (Brazil 1964-85, Chile 1973-90, Argentina 1976-83), populist quasi-democracy (Mexico under the 71-year rule of the PRI), or the rule of corrupt upper-class elites (take your pick in Central America). Though there has been progress recently--witness Chile since Pinochet and Mexico since President Vincente Fox's victory in 2000--it has come only in fits and starts. Ecuador faces a choice between a hard-left former colonel and the country's richest businessman in its upcoming presidential poll; Peru is desperately trying to put the trauma of Alberto Fujimori's staggering corruption behind it. And in Brazil's neighbor, Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, a leftist and former paratrooper who was elected after spending time in jail for a failed coup, has polarized his country, shamelessly altering the constitution and driving the economy into the ground. Needless to say, the march of liberal democracy and free economies is not inevitable.

In this context the Brazilian system, chaotic though it can be (there are 19 parties in congress), stands out as a refreshing example. The military plays no role in politics. A lively press keeps politicians on their toes (aggressive journalism led to the resignation of a corrupt president in 1992). And this year's election was technically smooth, with electronic voting machines used across the vast country that would put Florida to shame.

In fact, the peaceful shift from moderate right to moderate left is something to be cherished politically even if it is less than perfect economically. Lula's predecessor, Fernando Henrique Cardoso stabilized the economy with sometimes-painful orthodox measures after his election in 1994. But the electorate proved patient and resilient enough to renew his mandate in 1998--rebuffing a left-wing populist named Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva along the way. The upshot was that the experience brought Lula to the center, where he could draw attention to the ill effects of inflation-fighting and budget austerity in ways that resonated with Brazilians without scaring them. So when the government's handpicked candidate, José Serra, offered more of Cardoso's increasingly unpopular neoliberal policies, he was greeted with a polite "thanks, but no thanks" from voters, giving the reconstructed Lula his long-awaited presidential term. For his part, Lula, in a gesture most Americans demanded (and received) from their own president-elect in 2000, graciously accepted his victory by promising to govern "for all Brazilians."

Of course, all this goes out the window if the markets don't believe Lula is sincere. Pre-election fears of this scenario battered Brazil's currency and bonds, as nervous investors pulled out of the country for fear of a debt default or runaway inflation. The governing party played on the fear that Lula would cost Brazil its hard-won stability, and he had to respond with a campaign ad denying that he was "the bogeyman." Since Sunday's election the markets have been quiet but expectant, hoping that Lula will appoint a cabinet and central bank chief investors can trust.

But in the end markets are most at ease when democracy is sturdiest. After all, it does little good for a country to follow a strict liberalization regimen if that regimen promptly undermines political stability. Thankfully, this year's election proved that Brazilian voters can repudiate those policies without demanding a radical lurch in the opposite direction. If Lula can live up to his promises and govern from the middle-of-the-road left, he may do as much to satisfy the markets as his neoliberal predecessor.

Robert Lane Greene is countries editor at Economist.com