Finger-pointing may draw applause, but it seldom saves

Frequent criticism at home has pointed out Brazilian diplomacy’s alleged indifference to  or even collusion with  countries accused of violating human rights. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Brazil wishes all other countries the same it seeks for itself  the full exercise of democracy and respect to human rights, whose consolidation and improvement has been one of the core concerns of President Lula’s administration.

We consider, nevertheless, that public reprimands or condemnations of other States are not the best way to achieve this goal. In fact, choosing intimidation over persuasion is most often ineffective, if not counterproductive.

A pointing finger may draw applause to its owner, but it rarely saves the gagged journalist, the death-row convict, the population denied access to the ballot box or a woman deprived of her dignity. To isolate those we wish to convince or dissuade is poor strategy.

We prefer to set the example and, at the same time, engage in straightforward dialogue  a generally more effective route. In Brazil’s case, the ability to act with discretion does not arise from any exceptional skill; it is the expression, in our relations with other sovereign States, of the conciliatory nature of Brazilians.

Such actions are far less visible than the made-for-media scolding carried out by some countries against a handful of governments, selected in a manner that is neither consistently judicious nor politically neutral. The choice of the culprits, in addition to being subject to a political agenda, is often racially or religiously biased.

In fact, many of the countries that see themselves as models maintain relations with non-democratic regimes, so long as it conforms to their economic or strategic and military interests. The examples are so abundant that even the most complacent gaze cannot fail to spot them.

Furthermore, some of them actually apply capital punishment, or treat immigrant laborers in an inhuman and degrading manner. They also transfer untried prisoners to secret prisons, in secret flights. Not to mention unilateral military actions decided outside the UN Security Council, which victimize thousands of civilians.

We consider that specific references to other States in the human rights domain should be preferably made within the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), which, incidentally, Brazil helped to create. That body allows a non-selective, objective and multilateral assessment of human rights situations in each and every UN member State.

In 2011, the HRC working methods will be subject to reassessment. We will seek to improve them, so as to make that body increasingly effective and to bring about direct benefits to those whose rights are violated. As I have stated several times, with regard to human rights, all countries have something to teach, and all countries have something to learn.

In its effort to persuade, Brazil resorts to cooperation with organizations or countries within the same region of the country in question, which have a far higher probability of being heard than former colonial powers or other nations whose actions are perceived as a reflection of arrogance and superiority complex.

They can be said  as in the Bible  to perceive more easily the speck in the eye of their brother than the beam in their own eye. That is what came through when we proposed, in the former Human Rights Commission, a resolution stating that racism was incompatible with democracy.

When dialogue proves unfruitful, Brazil does not refrain from condemnation, as our voting record in the HRC demonstrates. In fact, Brazil has recently supported a resolution condemning a State that refused to heed recommendations aimed at advancing its human rights situation.

One must also bear in mind that, through multilateral action and cooperation projects, Brazil has made concrete contributions to improve human rights situations  in Haiti, in Guinea-Bissau and in Palestine, to mention only a few. The positions of Brazil are the result of a much less simplistic set of considerations than the deceitful dichotomy between good and evil.

Brazil is not indifferent to those who defend freedom of expression or worship, who fight for democracy, or who rise against all sorts of discrimination. On the contrary: without boasting, without interference that creates resistance and resentment, but aiming at actual results, our diplomacy is constantly working to promote human rights.