Newsweek | By Maria Christina Caballero | December 15, 2003
It's been almost a year since Fernando Henrique Cardoso finished out his second term as president of Brazil and left office. But few would expect retirement to slow the 72-year-old politician down. Nothing else has before. In the late 1960s Cardoso was arrested for his liberal views and interrogated by military intelligence agents, while right-wing terrorists bombed his research institute. From exile, he emerged as a major spokesman for democracy during the country's brutal 20-year dictatorship, and today he remains a powerful voice in the region.
Since stepping down, he's taken on projects at the United Nations and is writing his memoirs. And as Brazil has taken on a leadership role in the opposition to Western powers in World Trade Organization talks, Cardoso has emerged as a strong, respected spokesman in the region, calling for unity and strength to combat American hegemony. He spoke with NEWSWEEK's Maria Cristina Caballero recently at Harvard's Center for Public Leadership. Excerpts:
CABALLERO: In the Cancun WTO negotiations, regional leaders seemed more united. The U.S. has since negotiated bilateral agreements with a number of Latin American countries. Is the idea of creating a Free Trade Area of the Americas dead? And what happened to unity?
CARDOSO: The initial goal of having a broad agreement that would deeply address common issues has been undermined. In Cancun the countries were unified, saying we cannot accept a cheap negotiation. But some regional leaders have decided to sign an accord to present it as a political achievement. I am afraid that those countries are assuming high risks. I am afraid that things are being pushed in the wrong direction with the goal of presenting some concrete results before the next U.S. presidential election. The bilateral agreements are an opportunistic alternative that could become very harmful for Latin American countries.
Brazil has strengthened its relationship with Europe, South Africa, China, India and other emerging powers. Is that a way to say to the United States, "We have alternatives"?
It gives Brazil more space to maneuver. We were surprised to see in Cancun that the U.S. and Europe decided to have a common front to defend their agricultural subsidies. Sooner or later they will realize that they will have to change the subsidy policies. They are not only harming us in Europe; when we try to sell our products in the Middle East, for example, they say the European Union products are cheaper because of the subsidies.
You have been advocating new institutional structures that would create greater Latin American unity. Why now?
We have not been effective as a community. The Ibero-American presidents and leaders meet every year, know about many things, make many decisions and sign declarations, but then nothing happens. We should have a representative as the Arab League does, participating in some U.N. meetings and other scenarios with a unified voice.
How do you envision the future of the globalization process?
I know it's not popular to praise globalization, but globalization is to be credited with much of the fact that democracy has never enjoyed so many followers as it does today. I am against a one-size-fits-all approach to democracy. But all democracies are legitimized by citizen participation. It is not only important to have legitimacy by votes, but to have legitimacy by continued participation in deliberation. The citizens' contribution for global governance must be better understood and valued.
What is your assessment of the current structures and roles of the IMF and the World Bank?
The IMF needs to be reformed, no doubt. It is necessary to reform its voting structure. The developing countries must have a stronger participation in the decision-making process. When there is a strong crisis in a country, it is at the end the U.S. Treasury that decides what to do. Regarding the World Bank, it needs reforms and much more money to be invested in infrastructure projects... The World Bank has almost the same amount of money that the Brazilian Development Bank has. I am a critic of globalization, but not to destroy it--to improve it, and to provide more democratic governance in the process.
You recently said that women are the most effective agents of change. Could you elaborate?
My experience in Brazil clearly showed me that women have a stronger drive toward change than men in general do. Women are the ones who are demanding more reforms, more equality, perhaps because they were oppressed for so long. I saw that they are much more energetic and focused. Women in the schools are getting better grades than men, not only in Brazil. Mothers are more stable, more persistent. Fathers can be many, mothers only one, and generally mothers are in charge of the children. Fathers frequently leave, and the mothers embrace the children. If we are looking for constructive changes in Latin America, we must plan to mainly do it through our women.Newsweek:
