so close yet so far

thoughts on Brasil's January intrusions

The images of thousands of Brasilians assaulting several branches of government in the capital yesterday was heartbreaking yet so familiar. Jair Balsonaro rejected the outcome of the presidential election in 2022 before his duly elected successor, Luiz Ignacio ‘Lula’ da Silva, took the oath of office again last week but Bolsonaro decamped to Florida. A hard-nosed ultranationalist upon his election in 2019, Bolsonaro shared a number of traits and policies with President Donald Trump. Both were hostile to LGBT advocates, both tried to coopt the military for support by appointing military officers to partisan political positions, and both rolled back many government regulations on environmental questions to name a few similarities. Both strained at the checks and balances of their democracies, preferring what could only be labelled authoritarian action.

Differences did exist, however. Bolsonaro served in the Brasilian army which Trump did not due to his heel spurs. Like the late Hugo Chavez Frias in neighbouring Venezuela, Bolsonaro advocated for greater rights and salary for the Brasilian military, though he did not wage a golpe de estado as Chavez Frias did unsuccessfully thirty-one years ago. Bolsonaro left his military service to assume an elected position in the Brasilian congress for more than a quarter century, meaning his professional life has been within the Brasilian state in one manner or another; Trump’s sole public service as as president between 2017 and 2021.

It’s the central role that the Brasilian military has played in this huge nation for the past century that is most fascinating—and potentially alarming. Brasil has always shared with us a number of national public policy debates but often resulting in more extreme outcomes. State governors historically have been the power base in that country with the presidency almost an afterthought. State governors operate in large, decentralised political entities highlighting the vast regional differences of a nation spanning the overwhelming majority of South America.

When the Portuguese Crown, the Braganzas, fled to Brasil during the Napoleonic era as Joseph Bonaparte served on the throne in Lisbon on behalf of his brother in Paris, Brasil went from being the periphery to the center of Portugal’s world. The King and Queen returned to Europe in the early 1820s, leaving the heir to the throne in Rio where within a couple of years Brasil declared independence, as did the remainder of the region. The monarchy bumped along in control of the government until a military decision to oust the Emperor also led to a Republic in 1889.

Coffee, sugar, and mineral interests aligned with the various local political forces, with a national military hovering in the background. That military primarily concentrated on domestic balance of power as Brasil faced no serious external threat certainly until concerns arose about German potential movements during World War II. As true with all Latin American armed forces, these forces traditionally worry far more about domestic stability and cultural purity than anything international. Even in the twenty-first century, the Brasilian armed forces are a relatively small force primarily responsible for border protection rather than traditional national security threats; does one seriously think Argentina or Bolivia will invade?

The military played a crucial role in the dictatorship governing Brasil from the beginning of the Great Depression through World War II. The armed forces coordinated efforts to impose Getulio Vargas as a dictator beginning in 1930, ultimately allowing him to establish the Estado Novo with fascist overtones. Ironically, Vargas ran afoul of the same military by 1946 when they overthrew him in favour of an over military head of state.

Dabbling with democracy in the 1950s and 1960s, the Brasilian generals aggressively took over the nation when they established a twenty-one year rule between 1964 and 1985. A strong statist policy coincided with substantial human rights violations during a period of great concern about the socialist forces would bring. The armed forces sought to control labour unions and the growing social consciousness movement in the Roman Catholic Church as two movements seeking to impose more equitable distribution of the vast natural resources. Brasil’s military also dangled the idea of the navy, the oldest of the services, developing nuclear weapons to raise the nation’s status globally as well as strengthening the nation’s security, even without articulating a clear threat justifying such expenditures or decisions.

Brasil ultimately ousted the military, in a turn, in 1985, embracing elected governments instead of uniforms running Brasilia. Democracy has been a bumpy road as the elected presidents survived various scandals, impeachment sagas (Brasil successfully impeached presidents in 1992 and 2016), change of power, fights over federalism in the country, and various debt problems.

President Lula da Silva himself had been a perennial candidate for president since the 1970s but a scary one for traditional forces in the country. A self-educated labour union organiser, Lula finally won the presidency in 2002 but observers at home and abroad were not certain he would ever receive the presidential sash of inauguration. The military and many others did respect his election but he actually managed, against odds and various scandals, to finish his first two terms of office in 2011. Lula was incarcerated for over a year on money-laundering after he left the presidency but remained a lightning rod until he ran again for the presidency in 2022.

Bolsonaro and Lula could not be much different except they are Brasilians and they have both been part of the political landscape of the country for decades. Bolsonaro’s rule was controversial over his disdain for democratic principles while Lula’s was upsetting because of his emphases on the millions of poor in Brasil over the elites. Lula never had the support of the armed forces yet they also did respect allow him to take office last week

What occurred yesterday was a manifestation of the fragility of democracy in this country some 38 years after the military formally surrendered the presidency. Bolsonaro, with his background in the army, probably still believes the armed forces will retain views similar to his own about the nature of Brasil’s future: favouring the landed and the rich over the radical, ‘socialist’, Marxist-inspired movement Lula and the Liberation Theology of the 1980s advocated. Bolonsaro has made clear his support for more traditional, rather authoritarian tendencies.

Lula acted immediately after yesterday to arrest thousands who overran the branches of government in Brasilia. The government offices was not meeting on Sunday so we did not see the same minute-by-minute threat against elected politicians that occurred in the United States on 6 January 2021. Brasil, sadly, came by its possible overthrow yesterday by its own history as much as watching our saga play out two years ago. Balsonaro’s avowed closeness to former president Trump was noteworthy to all but doubts about democracy still resound across Brasil. Lula is controversial and things could deteriorate quickly.

We should not assume that democracy will authomatically hold in this nation of 215 million. Democracy has struggled as noted. The armed forces have always seen their role as at last as important in determining the nation’s future as elected politicians. Indeed, Latin American militaries have always arrogated to themselves a high degree of responsibility for their nations’ futures; Brasil is not unique in this.

What we can do is remember that our actions offer context for others. We are not a cause nor are we a solution for Brasil but we do show how democracies struggle and words matter. We need remember this yet again. Actions have consequences. FIN