The underlying message is about one way of displaying power implying that you actually don’t need to shout or indulge in exaggerated rhetoric; the hint of a capability of force works much better.
Brazil, the country where I now am privileged to represent India is a recipient of many labels: the most important in Latin America, a regional force, an emerging power, a potential global player and so forth. Some of its physical and economic attributes are there for all to see: it is the fifth largest country in the world, curiously also the fifth largest population at nearly two hundred million, and debatably also the fifth largest economy depending on how we measure the GDP. Many descriptive tags for Brazil are similar to what we say about India: an impressive growth in the last decade, a trillion and a half dollar plus economy, a huge consumer class fuelling domestic demand, and many more. So are Brazilians proud to be called a ‘power’, be it regional, or middle, or global?
Not necessarily. Which brings us to the question of ‘what is power’ and what are the attitudes towards it.
In international relations today, power is no longer seen only in military terms and it is easily conceded that the economic dimension is equally vital in judging a nation. But the richest nation is not the most powerful as we can see by thinking of Switzerland or Qatar. A more contemporary notion is that of ‘composite national power’—a mix of size, population, economy, industrialisation, military prowess and technological strengths. The generally accepted concept of power is ‘the ability to influence others to do what serves one’s desires or interests.’
If power is seen in these terms, Brazil presents a very interesting case. To start by looking at its external environment, Brazil has borders with nine nations. That is a large number but it is in a happy state of not having any border problems at all. These borders were settled in the nineteenth century and the last war that Brazil fought was in 1864 with Paraguay. Earlier there used to be some tension and a climate of mild mutual hostility between Argentina and Brazil and at one time both were suspicious of each other to the extent of nuclear rivalry.
The real fight
But in the last decades such militaristic competition has been abandoned and the real fight takes place only on the football field. The long land borders with its Amazonian neighbours such as Peru and Bolivia does not even require an on the ground alert military presence. I was amused when during a visit to the Amazonian jungle, when asked by one of our defence officers as to the mode of border demarcation, we were told that they know where the border is only by referring to the GPS!
If there are no external threats, what about terrorism, internal insurgencies and other forms of political violence? Virtually unknown is the honest answer. Of course, anything can happen anywhere as recent events in Norway demonstrate and no country can be sanguine. But hitherto, the only serious security problem that Brazil has relates to urban violence in terms of robberies, muggings, hijackings and such like. The priorities therefore are policing and not so much the military capability.
How does a country arrive at such an enviable state? By a combination of geography, history and good luck. (The contrast to India in terms of a difficult neighbourhood, a complicated history and at times bad luck is evident.)
All this is not to say that contemporary Brazil does not have challenges. Which State does not? Despite its size and enormous resources—agricultural, mineral, and petroleum—Brazil is still a developing country with poverty, inequality and illiteracy, although all of these litanies are coming down steadily.
It has other headaches like a low savings rate, insufficient investments in infrastructure; high costs and growing worries about competitiveness. But there is no question that the overall profile of Brazil today is positive and the outlook of people optimistic.
The easy going and non confrontational nature of Brazilians also adds to its ‘soft power.’ It starts with the advantages of being loved or at least smiled at, for many of its hedonistic attractions: the beautiful beaches, the sensuous Samba, the fancy fashion models. But going beyond, even Brazilian diplomacy explicitly espouses the power of persuasion and not of domination.
It has made unilateral concessions to its smaller neighbours as in the case of buying power from a jointly owned huge hydro electric plant with Paraguay, or demurring when its assets were nationalised in Bolivia. Its style is to avoid irritants, let alone conflicts.
A loss in negotiations or in football is often shrugged off and fique tranquilo or ‘stay cool’ is the admired behavioural norm. Ever heard of the ugly Brazilian despite his increasing wealth, influence and ambition? That would be the national nightmare.
Dance stylishly and carry no stick. An alternative approach to advancement?
(The writer is the Indian Ambassador in Brazil)