VZCZCXYZ0046
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHSO #0508 1311216
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 111216Z MAY 06
FM AMCONSUL SAO PAULO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 5031
INFO RHEHNSC/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA PRIORITY 6172
RUEHRI/AMCONSUL RIO DE JANEIRO PRIORITY 7084
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 2426

UNCLAS SAO PAULO 000508 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE INR/R/MR; IIP/R/MR; WHA/PD 
 
DEPT PASS USTR 
 
USDOC 4322/MAC/OLAC/JAFEE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KMDR OPRC OIIP ETRD BR
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: WESTERN HEMISPHERE: BOLIVIA, GAS 
NATIONALIZATION, BRAZILIAN REACTION; SAO PAULO 
 
 
¶1. "Fake Nationalism" 
 
Economist Paulo Nogueira Batista Jr. commented in liberal Folha de 
¶S. Paulo (5/11): "Brazil must not react violently to the Bolivian 
government's decisions.  First, because Bolivia has its reasoning 
and those reasons should not be underestimated.  Second, because 
aggravating the conflict is not in Brazil's interest.  Despite 
differences with [state-owned oil company] Petrobras and other 
Brazilian companies, Bolivia is our natural ally. Retaliations and 
drastic measures would affect not only our relations with that 
nation, but with the entire South American integration project.... 
It is true that Brazil actually does not need the rest of South 
America to build its economic and social development project. If our 
neighbors decide to take the course of chaos or of mere 
subordination to the US (one possibility does not exclude the 
other), Brazil will not need to follow them.... The US will never 
support the creation of a bloc in South America. But conditions 
continue to be basically favorable to South American integration. 
The so-called 'Washington Consensus' did not produce the expected 
results. Economic policies supported by the USG and multilateral 
financing organizations failed in many nations of the region. South 
American political forces aligned with the US have successively 
fallen either by electoral defeats or through popular rebellions. 
Thanks to President Bush's truculence, the US prestige is declining 
worldwide and in South America in particular.... The world will be 
multi-polar regardless of what the ideologists who have predominated 
in Bush administration want." 
 
¶2. "The Foreign Minister's Testimony" 
 
Center-right O Estado de S. Paulo editorialized (5/11): "The Lula 
administration's foreign policy is based on two big mistakes.  The 
first was to think that Brazil and President Lula da Silva would 
exert political and economic leadership in South America.... The 
second was to divide the planning and the execution of foreign 
policy between Foreign Minister Celso Amorim - who became 
responsible for trade negotiations and the 'rest of the world, the 
presidential advisor for international affairs, Marco Aurelio Garcia 
- in charge of Latin America and the relationship with 'brother 
parties,' and the Foreign Ministry's secretary general, Samuel 
Pinheiro Guimaraes - responsible for tailoring Brazilian diplomacy 
according to Third World patterns. All setbacks and failures of 
Brazilian foreign policy in these almost three and a half years have 
resulted from these two capital sins. The attack against Brazilian 
interests in Bolivia was just another one in a long series of 
fiascos. The fact is that by making concession after concession, 
Brazilian diplomacy has lost its strength, Hugo Chavez acts as 
regional leader and Evo Morales felt at ease attacking Brazil with 
the fait accompli of expropriating Petrobras' installations." 
 
¶3. "Lula For President... In Bolivia" 
 
University of Sao Paulo Economist Roberto Macedo underscored in 
center-right O Estado de S. Paulo (5/11): "President Lula's posture 
in the dispute between Brazil and Bolivia + Venezuela is shocking. 
He has always argued for our adversaries as if he were the Bolivian 
main leader.... In view of what has already occurred, the GOB should 
have at least the common sense to give up the idea of the highly 
expensive [Chavez-proposed South American] gas pipeline, which would 
make Brazil dependent on gas supply from another nation ruled by an 
unrealiable leader, Venezuela and its President Hugo Chavez.  The 
project's economic, environmental and political feasibility has not 
yet been considered.  Everything is based on the political will of a 
trio of leaders, which includes the Argentine president, in a bad 
arrangement according to which Brazil would assume the major risks 
and probably the highest costs. What is clear in the Bolivian gas 
question is that Brazilian interests have been poorly defended." 
 
McMullen