BRAZIL-US: Clinton’s Visit will Leave Trade Issues Aside

By Mario Osava Reprint | | Print |

Mario Osava

RIO DE JANEIRO, Oct 13 1997 (IPS) - Brazilian and U.S. officials will put aside trade issues during US President Bill Clinton’s visit here in an effort to draw up a positive agenda on bilateral relations that most effect integration of the Americas, according to government sources..

Clinton will be in Brazil from Monday to Wednesday as part of his weeklong tour that also includes venezuala and Argentina. In the two days he spends here Clinton will visit Brasilia, Sao Paolo and Rio de Janeiro.

Given the trade discrepancies between Brazil and the United States, which have held up negotiations on the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), trade issues are being diplomatically put aside, or else treated in very generic terms, according to informed sources.

An agreement on cooperation in education, to be signed by Clinton in Brasilia, is being billed as a highlight of his visit. University exchanges, teacher training, evaluation of schools and instruction by television, satellite and the Internet are some of the areas the document is expected to cover.

Talks between Clinton and Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso will range over nuclear and aerospace cooperation, combating drug trafficking, technology and the environment, informesd sources said.

But even these modest measures will not contribute much to a positive bilateral agenda, observers said. The greatest collaboration in anti-drug activities, for example, is the donation by Washington of 1.26 billion dollars to the Brazilian government. This is a renewal of a program interrupted unilaterally last year by Brazil, when it rejected nearly 650,000 dollars.

Then Justice Minister Nelson Jobim said at the time the amount was ‘negligible’, and almost all of it earmarked exclusively to the police and the rest to the prevention and treatment of drug addicts. The donation was also reduced by administrative costs charged by the US Embassy, and carried commitments that led to even more costs, officials said privately.

Brazil is resisting pressure from Washington to incorporate the armed forces into the fight against drug trafficking.

In the nuclear area, there will be amplification of a bilateral agreement that was signed in 1970 but has never been in effect, because of Washington’s objections to nuclear programs developed in Brazil, one of them secret and the other in cooperation with Germany.

When Brazil signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty last June, the United States lifted restrictions on access by Brazil to sensitive technologies that could have military uses. The new agreement will formalize Washington’s recognition of the original accord.

Some Brazilians have been angered by a US Commerce Department document distributed to business leaders traveling with Clinton to South America. The report warns that corruption is endemic in Brazil and its political and judicial systems have many weaknesses, in addition to an education system that does not train workers for effective economic development.

Cardoso and leading parliamentarians criticised the tone of the US report which, nevertheless, suggested investments over the next few years in the strong-growth sectors of the Brazilian economy.

The President of the National Congress, Senator Antonio Carlos Magalhaes, condemn the report, declaring last Thursday that Clinton does not have the authority to speak of corruption in other countries, when he himself faced “several legal proceedings, including some very serious ones, about various accusations of wrongdoing.”

Clinton’s biggest objective, winning support for the fast-track approval of FTAA, will not have much resonance in Brasilia. The Brazilian government, with the backing of Brazilian business leaders and the unions, wants to delay hemispheric free trade for as long as possible.

Brazilian industry will not be able to handle an opening in the market to American competition before the year 2005, Brazilians argue. They also demand the elimination of strong barriers imposed by the United States against the most competitive products from Brazil, such as agricultural goods, textiles and shoes.