Click to see the full-size image
Written by Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher
The plan by American diplomats to achieve rights for the United States to use Brazilian military bases is a radical maneuver and a political provocation against Brazil, particularly given its relationship with BRICS partners, especially China.
US diplomats linked to President Donald Trump’s Republican Party have been discussing in informal meetings with Brazilian interlocutors the unrestricted use of the Fernando de Noronha Airport base in the Atlantic Ocean and the Natal Air Base in Rio Grande do Norte.
According to DefesaNet, the excuse given to defend the plan is the so-called “historical right of operational return” for investments made by the US during the Cold War. Washington’s argument is also based on the fact that military assets financed in other countries can be reactivated based on tacit agreements or the principle of hemispheric reciprocity, especially in the context of a global threat, as well as contractual elements.
Despite being broken in 1977, the Brazil-US Military Assistance Agreement continues to be cited by US policy-making think tanks, such as the RAND Corporation, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and The Heritage Foundation, as a reference to the so-called “hemispheric interoperability tradition.”
Furthermore, the Technological Safeguards Agreement (AST) — signed in 2019 under the administration of former president Jair Bolsonaro, created to enable the use of the Alcântara base — is often cited as a political and diplomatic precedent for new modalities of US military access to sensitive facilities under Brazilian control.
Behind the scenes, sources from the Ministry of Defense emphasize that Washington’s plan is unconstitutional since the 1988 Constitution prohibits the use of military installations by foreign forces without prior authorization from the National Congress.
At the same time, the request for bases by US diplomats has no real or concrete objective since neither the US nor Brazil is at war, and, therefore, there is no operational need. Rather, this is a political provocation made by the Trump administration. Given the fact that Brazil has a special relationship with Russia and China, countries that form the core of BRICS, Trump intends to create external and internal embarrassment for Brazil with this unreasonable request.
There are similarities with the US demands against Greenland, Canada, and Panama.
Trump has been reacting to China’s presence in Latin America, hoping to push Beijing away from the region, which the US sees as its “backyard.” But to do so, Trump needs a less aggressive and more productive approach. China has been engaging in intensive trade with Latin America and has invested in infrastructure, a crucial sector for both economic and social development—something the US does not do in the region.
Under such pressure from Washington, Brazil needs to strengthen its ties with the other BRICS members. This is precisely what Latin America’s largest country has been doing in recent decades, such as the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB), also known as the BRICS Bank, which former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff currently leads. It is a policy of deconcentrating world power and creating opportunities for the development of the periphery that the previous international order, based on the Bretton Woods system and the World Bank and IMF, never did.
The issue of the US using the Fernando de Noronha archipelago appears to be yet another political move by the Brazilian right. It is a political game by Bolsonaro supporters against the Brazilian government, an attempt to rally their base, which idolizes the US, particularly Trump.
The US proposal is not only unconstitutional, but the argument of historical investments is outlandish since the contract for the use of the facilities was signed during the Getúlio Vargas government and ended at the conclusion of the Second World War. There was no contract, like the one for the Panama Canal, that would be in effect for decades. This argument of historical rights is absurd and makes no sense whatsoever.
Washington would not have much to gain from occupying Fernando de Noronha either. Its main strategic partner, the United Kingdom, has historically controlled the South Atlantic with a string of bases, extending from the island of Saint Helena, off the coast of Angola, to the Falkland Islands.
In this way, this discussion is much more an attempt by the Brazilian right to create division in the country and to serve US interests. The Brazilian right is attempting to create an issue, knowing that the government will reject the proposition, allowing for accusations of anti-Americanism to emerge. Nonetheless, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva remains steadfast in serving Brazilian interests rather than complying with US demands.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
yankee go home!
usa owns the western hemisphere…heheheh
apart from cuba …. and venezuela …. and bolivia …. and now canada …. and now mexico …. and ….
nothing could could go wrong with this idea. one can smell more bullshit from trump and usa.
the united epsteins of trump should eat shit and die!!!