The world stage often seems sepia-toned, dominated by the dusty international structures of the post-second world war era, favouring the world’s richest countries. However, it is increasingly clear that this setup isn’t sufficient to respond to the interests of the global south, including combating climate breakdown and expanding economic development.
Recognising this mismatch, Brazil under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has positioned itself as an international leader, focused on the agenda of emerging economic powers who prize stability, and in fact have much to lose from conflict and power struggles between rich countries.
But in a world that is increasingly focused on competition between major powers like China and the US, Lula’s “active nonalignment”, which seeks to balance engagement between powers without picking one side, is often interpreted with suspicion. The Brics alliance that Brazil has championed as a forum for global south priorities – such as the reform of global financial institutions like the IMF, where developing states hold only a fraction of voting power – is consistently interpreted as “anti-west” by US and European analysts.
This year will be a test for Lula’s global strategy. Brazil holds the rotating presidency of the G20, and Brazil’s agenda for it is firmly grounded in the priorities of the global south. Lula promised to focus work on “the reduction of inequalities”, including social inclusion and hunger reduction; energy transition and sustainable development; and global governance reform. And next year, Brazil will host the UN Cop30 climate change conference in the Amazonian city of Belém.
Lula’s foreign policy has also long sought to reshape global institutions like the UN security council to create permanent seats for developing nations in addition to the existing cold war-era veto power balance. He has elevated Brazil’s negotiating power along with other emerging markets in the Brics alliance: Russia, India, China and South Africa. And he has sought a global role for Brazil in mediating international conflict, from Ukraine to tensions between Venezuela and Guyana.
But nonalignment is more difficult these days, as competing superpowers have hyper-polarised perspectives. “What I see is a more complicated world, with more closed spaces. As if it were a game, a jigsaw puzzle in which the pieces are very close, not fitted together, but very close, and where the space to act is less,” Celso Amorim, a special adviser to Brazil’s president and a former foreign minister, told me. Brics (which this year expanded to include Saudi Arabia, Iran, Ethiopia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates) will be difficult to sell as an nonaligned group – or one that doesn’t threaten western interests – when the leaders’ summit takes place in Russia later this year.
It doesn’t help that Lula is a peacemaker with a penchant for (perhaps inadvertent) offence. His efforts at diplomacy have been overshadowed in some cases by headline-grabbing positions, such as that Ukraine has a portion of blame in Russia’s invasion of its territory, and that Israel’s actions in Gaza are comparable to Hitler’s genocide of the Jews.
The uproar ignores discussion of the central thrust of his mediation: that balance and pragmatism will obtain better results than posturing and polarisation. That in apparently insoluble situations, the all or nothing of good v evil undermines attainable solutions. And, crucially, that it is fair for the global south to suggest new and disruptive innovations that might improve its position in the international system, such as his call to use alternative currencies for international trade, challenging US dollar dominance.
Far from western headlines, the diplomacy led by Lula has a strong impact. He often voices the opinions of emerging countries that do not align with the disputes of the great powers. Lula’s call for a ceasefire in Gaza reflects the opinion of a growing number of countries from the global south, including South Africa, which took the case to the international court of justice.
Lost in the uproar is the fact that Lula spoke those words in Ethiopia, at the close of the African Union summit – an example of how Brazil’s foreign policy has lateral connections to the developing world, outside the western-dominated international institutions.
Ultimately, Brazil’s foreign policy focus on peace is pragmatic as well as idealistic, said Amorim. “For Brazil to grow, it is important that the world is at peace. It is an illusion to think that we can win because the price of a commodity rises.” In a world of polarisation, Lula is betting on balance and attainable – rather than perfect – peace.
Lula must convince the sceptical major players that the global south’s interests can legitimately diverge from those of the developed world, and that effective global governance must reflect the geopolitical clout of emerging powers. That even though “the west and the rest” may disagree at times, they can still coexist amicably in a reformed international system.
Last week’s images of Emmanuel Macron frolicking in the Amazon rainforest with Lula could be an indicator of Brazil’s successful international diplomacy. During the French president’s three-day visit to Brazil, the two countries signed nearly two dozen cooperation agreements and an £855m investment plan for the Amazon, and Macron endorsed Lula’s G20 agenda, including a proposal to create a global tax for the world’s wealthiest people. France and Brazil “represent a bridge between the global south and the developed word”, Lula told the press, while Macron quipped that the “bromance” photoshoots represent a symbolic wedding and mutual love between France and Brazil.
It’s a long shot. But if anybody can leverage the importance of the global south on the international stage, it’s the one-name international superstar Lula.
Jordana Timerman is a journalist based in Buenos Aires, she edits the Latin America Daily Briefing
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
