Fernando Henrique Cardoso, president of Brazil from 1994 to 2002, in a major Library of Congress address criticized the recent unilateral direction of U.S. foreign policy and emphasized the need for the United States to participate, even lead the way, in global democratic governance.
In a scholarly, inquisitive manner, Cardoso questioned how the United States could promote democracy within nations, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, but not among nations, through organizations such as the United Nations and other deliberative entities. "What is the reason for this contrast between democracy being ever stronger as a form of governance inside nations and being, on the contrary, increasingly curtailed, restricted, reduced as a model of global governance?" he asked.
Former Brazilian president Fernando Henrique Cardoso spoke at the Library on the subject of international democracy on Feb. 22. - John Harrington
On Feb. 22 Cardoso delivered the fourth annual Henry Alfred Kissinger Lecture at the Library. He examined the recent bent of American unilateralism, the state of modern democracy and, at the end, engaged in a humorous and charming question-and-answer period. Kissinger attended the lecture, which drew a large audience in the Library's Coolidge Auditorium.
"On the world stage, there is little collective deliberation," said Cardoso, who is a sociologist as well as a politician. Unilateralism, he said, seems to be the rule in an agenda dominated by security concerns and the fight against terrorism.
"Unilateralism in Iraq is the bluntest example of an isolationist trend in U.S. foreign policy, whose signs were already visible long before the strikes of 9/11," Cardoso said. He cited examples of the trend: the United States' refusal to sign the Biodiversity Convention and an attempt to seriously undermine the Kyoto Protocol on Greenhouse Gas Emissions; the refusal to sign the treaty creating the International Criminal Court, in which alleged criminals such as Saddam Hussein might have been tried with due process of law; and the lack of compliance with International Humanitarian Law in connection with the treatment of war prisoners suspected of terrorist activities.
Cardoso asked, "How can one proclaim the victory of democracy and freedom to be the most important goal in the world and try, at the same time, to disrupt the only mechanisms in place for democratic global governance? Can fragile, national democracies survive without appropriate international institutions and rules?"
He also asked whether transborder issues, such as climate change, chronic disease, drug trafficking and the fight against terrorism, can be satisfactorily dealt with in the absence of a global, rule-based, democratic governance framework.
Cardoso said the best way to protect nations, or the state system, is "to strengthen simultaneously the institutions and principles required for a truly global democratic governance." A better-run world would result in states that could operate effectively as democratic entities.
"And here, may I insist on one point: without the full involvement and without the leadership of America, there can hardly be any global democratic governance. For, due to its economic and military might, due to its cultural influences and power of attraction, due to its traditions and history, the United States still is an example and a beacon for millions of people everywhere," Cardoso said.
Cardoso examined the "changed reality of democracy." He said democracy must "live up to concrete expectations of the population. It has to deliver better living standards for all. Otherwise it will fail in the long run."
According to Cardoso, the voter today is different. "The voter does not identify himself solely with the ideas of any political party. Citizens today have multiple interests and identities. They may be either workers or ‘bourgeois,' but equally relevant to them is their ethnic origin, their age group, their religious creed, their sexual orientation, their consumption patterns and their lifestyles."
He explained, "This allows for multiple and overlapping identities and for layers of individual or group aspirations moving in different directions. Nationalities, for example, do not have the same importance they once had. A Portuguese may be a national from Portugal, but he or she is also a European and is interested in how decisions in Brussels affect his or her life."
Cardoso speaks with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, at left, in whose honor the annual lecture is given. - John Harrington
Cardoso said modern democracies must meet the challenge of adapting to the rapidly changing world. "What we know is that democracy will remain a vigorous movement in each nation as long as it promotes the advancement of the collective well-being, while, at the same time, taking due care of specific demands resulting from the multiple identities people adopt today."
While democratic governance can easily be achieved within a nation, there is a need for it among nations, he said. "Democracy is still largely confined to the reality of individual nations. This is something which I have difficulty accepting," said Cardoso.
He lamented the unilateral international direction of the United States in its "preemptive attack doctrine used for the first time against Iraq, without a clear mandate from the United Nations and in conflict with international law."
Cardoso said, "This attitude by the current U.S. administration represents a denial of all existing machinery and law for dealing with threats to international peace and security. This machinery was put in place after World War II, at the leadership of America, and it has served America well in the past, including the first Gulf War in ‘91."
He continued, "There seem to be no heirs to the legacy left by extraordinary and successive generations of American leaders who had an internationalist mindset. Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, George Bush, Clinton, to name just a few, all of them, in their own way, had a clear sense of the importance of the leadership of the U.S. in the world. Yet they were prepared to defend American interest using the available international institutions and legal framework."
Nonetheless, Cardoso said, Latin America and the United States are closer today, and they share not only a common attachment to the values of democracy but also the common daily practices of democracy. "It is also the wish of Latin America that our shared commitment to democracy be complemented by the engagement of our countries in advancing towards a truly democratic international order. This certainly requires the active participation of the United States."
During a brief question-and-answer period, Cardoso won over the crowd with anecdotes of his experiences in Europe and his friendships with other Latin Americans. One person asked whether the distant relationship between Brazil and Mexico could be more integrated and if hemispheric integration was possible. Cardoso, who said further integration is definitely possible, related how, as a student in France, he realized he had more in common with Spanish-speaking Latin Americans in France than with the French. "Our sense of humor is similar. We play football. We are better."
An audience member also asked, "You seem to be rather disapproving of unilateralism and yet do you think democracy would have been forwarded in the Middle East without it?" Cardoso said the end result, the elections in Iraq, is positive, but it would have been achieved better and easier if the United States had more support around the world.
Another question: "Too often the United Nations and international donor organizations ignore democratic movements in repressive countries simply for security reasons and do not pursue the democratic idealism. Can you explain the contradiction?" Cardoso said that was true and some aspects of the United Nations need to be reformed.
