LIMA, PeruWere it not for a dizzying succession of corruption scandals, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva would have been easily re-elected on Sunday. As usually happens when left-wing leaders adopt center-right policies in government, the space was too small for those attacking him either from the nostalgic left or the frustrated right. But corruption, a symptom of an institutional problem that Lula failed to address in his first term, forced the president into a runoff election later this month against the center-right former governor of Sao Paulo state, Geraldo Alckmin.
Lula is still the favorite in the second round. He has preserved most of his own political following because the more radical options from the leftled by Heloisa Helena, a Workers Party dissidentscare many people. And he has attracted part of the conservative vote because some middle-class Brazilians see in his government a better guarantee of social containment than the center-right alliance of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party and the Liberal Front Party can offer. Since Helenas voters are more likely to support Lula than Alckmin, the president is expected to narrowly win re-election.
The governing Workers Party won only four governorships, out of 27. Sao Paulo, the giant state that is also the industrial heart of the country, is solidly in the hands of the opposition. In the outgoing Chamber of Deputies, Lula and his allies were 10 votes short of a majority. Now, thanks to the corruption scandals, his position will be much weaker. In Brazils labyrinthine political system, where governors have great power over legislators because they control local tax collection and Congress is endemically fragmented, this will translate into immobility and acrimony in the next several years.
Its bad news for whoever wins in the second round. Brazil urgently needs changes: The economy is plodding on when compared with many other emerging countries, and poverty has declined barely 1 percent since 2002. The suffocating state system is fostering corruption.
Last year, the economy grew 2.6 percent; this years growth will not exceed 3 percent. According to the Institute for Applied Economic Research, there are almost 54 million poor Brazilians, half of whom are indigent. Lulas Family Budget programpart of the Zero Hunger aid schemegives $24 a month to more than 11 million families, provided they send their children to school and have them vaccinated. Were it not for this non-productive aid, the government could not boast of having lifted 6 million Brazilians out of poverty. Clearly, this is a minor achievement in comparison with the accomplishments of China, India and South AfricaBrazils emerging counterparts.
Because Brazils political system makes it devilishly difficult to make decisions and its state system greatly limits the creation of wealth (some companies must pay as many as 61 different taxes), corruption has proliferated spectacularly. A deputy allied with Lula disclosed that in 2005 he had received bribes for his votes in Congress, as had other legislators. It was the tip of an interminable skein. The country uncovered a systematic scheme involving the purchase of legislative votes, the illegal bankrolling of parties, and entrepreneurial bribery that blanketed much of the so-called political class. Lula mounted a comeback after looking politically finished, thanks partly to the fact that Congressand his compatriotspardoned him. But the origin of the problem remains, eroding the peoples confidence in their institutions.
In Latin America as a whole, Lula should have represented a boost to the modernization of the left, but because his government maintains a foreign policy out of tune with his management of domestic affairs, the opposite has happened. Former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso told me that Lulas rhetorical and contradictory leadership has helped demagogic leaders gain space. The loose alliance his government (to a great degree under the guidance of his adviser Marco Aurelio Garcia) has forged with Hugo Chavez has reinforced the Venezuelans position. Brazil has pledged to support Venezuela in its quest for a seat on the U.N. Security Council and is backing the grandiose Venezuelan project to run an 8,000-kilometer natural gas pipeline through Amazonia.
Lulas bet on keeping the Mercosur trading bloc away from any increased commercial ties with the United States or other prosperous regions shows the degree to which his foreign policy clings to the old Latin American habits, even if Lula eschews the demagogical stridencies of his Bolivarian neighbor. Lulas probable re-election a month from now guarantees that for the next few years, Latin America will lurch about on half its cylinders.
|Alvaro Vargas Llosa is Senior Fellow at The Center on Global Prosperity at the Independent Institute. He is a native of Peru and received his B.Sc. in international history from the London School of Economics. His Independent Institute books include Global Crossings: Immigration, Civilization, and America, Lessons From the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, The Che Guevara Myth and the Future of Liberty, and Liberty for Latin America.|
(c) 2006, The Washington Post Writers Group
For reprint permission, please contact email@example.com
The erosion of national boundariesand even the idea of the nation stateis already underway as people become ever more inter-connected across borders. A jungle of myth, falsehood and misrepresentation dominates the debate over immigration. The reality is that the economic contributions of immigration far outweigh the costs.