Opinion – Latinoamérica21: Environmental policy and sovereignty in Brazil

In the 21st century, the environment and climate change have become priorities on the global agenda, but as interest in the ecological crisis grows, so do concerns about the alienation of national sovereignty in areas such as the Amazon and the consolidation of a right of ecological interference in those countries that fail to protect environmental assets of international importance. For these reasons, one must ask: how has environmental policy been putting Brazil’s sovereignty at risk?

Hans Morgenthau is one of the main theorists of International Relations. From a Jewish family, he emigrated from Nazi Germany to the United States, where he acted as an academic and organic thinker, contributing to the definition of the directions of American foreign policy and to the establishment of the current of thought that came to be known as Classical Realism. When Morgenthau wrote his major works, debates on climate change did not carry the weight they do in world politics today. However, if we use his teachings to think about the present, the conclusion is clear: Brazilian environmental policy can put national sovereignty at risk.

The concept of national power is one of the pillars of Morgenthau’s legacy. For the author, power is not limited to war capacity, but includes a series of material and ideational elements that allow the State to continue functioning and developing autonomously and safely. Therefore, in addition to military strength, geography, possession of natural resources, agricultural and industrial potential, as well as population are sources of power. Also included in the calculation is the perception that other international actors have in relation to their power, which leads Morgenthau to conclude that a prestige policy can boost the insertion of a country in the international game between nations.

Based on these teachings, we can argue that Brazil has been adopting a policy that reduces its power on the international scene, which leaves the country in an unfavorable position in the political game between nations and, therefore, reduces the ability to dissuade external threats. If natural resources are elements of power, a loose environmental policy puts the Brazilian reserve of drinking water at risk, an essential resource for all living beings and which is in progressive scarcity in the world.

In addition, water is essential for the production of foodstuffs, which is a source of power listed by Morgenthau, since a State that cannot guarantee the food and survival of its population is more vulnerable to external aggressions. Finally, climate change puts Brazil’s biological wealth at risk, which is an increasingly relevant potential resource with the genetic revolution.

If we look at it from the perspective of international prestige as a source of power, Brazilian politics is also deteriorating Brazilian sovereignty. An organized country, with strong institutions and public policies that yield results, entails the image of a strong State, facilitating the dissuasion of obscure interests that could harm sovereignty and national interests. With the increase in illegal deforestation, predatory mining, the murder of environmental activists, the action of loggers, as well as the advance of criminal groups such as the First Command of the Capital (PCC) in the Amazon region, the image that Brazil passes to the world is one of a country incapable of implementing the rule of law and effective public policies. As a result, the perception that other international actors will have when looking at the country is one of fragility.

Currently, international rules and norms for climate change are favorable for Brazil and other countries in the South. The consolidation of the principle of a historical reading, which assigns greater responsibility for climate change to the more industrialized countries; the removal (albeit temporary) of the discussion on the internationalization of forests; and the right to sustainable development are examples of this. Brazilian diplomacy, along with other countries, was very skilful in defending national interests in negotiations in international forums.

When Brazil abandons this negotiating posture and adopts another one that is more averse to any type of concession, in the long term, its capacity to act is reduced. The country loses opportunities to express its opinion and influence discussions. Decisions will be taken with or without the participation of Brazil, generating norms potentially contrary to national interests, which will inevitably restrict the country’s sovereignty.

The dystopian combination of a diplomatic posture that isolates Brazil from international negotiations with an insufficient environmental policy to effectively combat the challenges of protecting the country’s biomes and their populations is a serious risk to Brazil’s sovereignty. The Brazilian tradition always reinforces the importance of established principles in international relations, as well as the appreciation of international law and multilateralism. It is a posture that has historically yielded results for the country, since it does not hold excesses of power, compared to world powers.

Morgenthau recognizes that international law and morality are factors that limit abuses by states in using force in the international arena to achieve their goals. However, the author also points out that these limitations are specific to their time and, therefore, may vary. Throughout the 20th century, there has been an emergence and consolidation of the understanding that the international community has a responsibility to protect individuals and populations who are at risk if their States fail to fulfill their duties.

This understanding is a response to serious violations of human rights that were observed, with the genocide in Rwanda being the most symbolic case. How long until they decide that States that do not combat environmental crimes in their territories also require a response from the international community?

COP27 is a sign that Brazil must change its stance in international negotiations. However, a correction of course in the diplomatic sphere is insufficient if it is not accompanied by concrete results in the domestic sphere. As long as Brazilian actors are not aware of this internally, environmental policy can continue to be a risk to sovereignty itself. That is, it is the duty of every patriot to take care of the environment, to protect his country.