The Foreign Service Journal, April 2006

sources). Brazil’s infrastructure of ports, roads and railroads is anti- quated and in need of moderniza- tion. Reform of the tax structure, labor law and business regulation is essential if Brazil is to play its prop- er role in the global economy. Above all, Brazil must tackle the grinding inequality of income that allocates roughly 14 percent of GDP to the richest 1 percent of the population — about the same amount that goes to the poorest 50 percent. Brazil’s “Gini Index” mea- suring its relative income inequality has showed some improvement in recent years, but is still generally judged to be the worst in the world among major coun- tries. An open trade in drugs and arms in the slums of Rio and other major cities has led to de facto loss of gov- ernment control in these areas; there is a pressing need for better-trained, better-paid law enforcement at the local level. The American Connection Such problems in Latin America’s largest country would seem to call for close and continuing U.S. engage- ment — and, indeed, Brazilian-American relations are multifaceted and complex. American companies have a considerable stake in the large Brazilian market; accord- ing to the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service, Brazil remains one of the three top locations in the world for American foreign direct investment. Brazilian visitors are traveling to the United States, particularly Florida, in unprecedented numbers and, despite some post-9/11 restrictions, Brazilian students still come here in large numbers to study. There is constant scientific and technological inter- change between our two societies: NASA satellites track rain-forest burning and the agency cooperates closely with its Brazilian counterpart; the Centers for Disease Control works with Brazilian and international bodies on field testing and surveys of Brazilian populations; and there are frequent private and governmental exchanges in fields such as agronomy, biodiversity and energy. In addition, strong mutual interest in the Amazon’s rain for- est and biodiversity has spawned a plethora of construc- tive bilateral, multilateral and NGO-supported efforts between the two countries’ environmental communities. A sometimes overlooked point of people-to-people contact con- cerns what might be called the sociology of race. Mindful of our own mixed-race society, Ameri- cans, particularly African-Ameri- cans, have always been fascinated by the Brazilian experience. From a common history, including the importation of millions of Africans into slavery during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, the two soci- eties evolved in ways that are both singular and comparable. The myth of Brazil’s “racial democracy” has collapsed in recent years in the face of damning statistics: black Brazilians still lag economical- ly at least a generation behind whites and experience higher infant mortality and mistreatment at the hands of the criminal justice system. As the United Nations Human Rights Commission has commented: “Brazil lives in two worlds: it has a vibrant multicultural and multiracial street life, which is the image we get over- seas. But Afro-Brazilian and indigenous communities are not part of the political, economic, social and media power structures.” Brazilian policy-makers largely accept such observa- tions. In their search for solutions, they are willing to look at some U.S. models; e.g., affirmative action pro- grams in public universities and required teaching of Afro-ethnic history in the public schools. One would hope to see greater exchanges in this area in the com- ing years, whether of legal and educational experts or through greater African-American tourism to Brazil. On broad geopolitical issues, the U.S. and Brazil have always been generally in step, as well. The two nations were close allies in World War II and during much of the Cold War. Following the 9/11 attacks, the Cardoso government took the lead in pressing the Organization of American States to invoke the 1947 Rio Treaty, declaring the attacks as being against all nations of the hemisphere — an act of diplomatic solidarity much appreciated by the Bush administration. While skeptical of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and critical of F O C U S 30 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / A P R I L 2 0 0 6 As with all consequential nations, day-to-day dealings can be scratchy, complicated by a perception on the Brazilian side that the U.S. does not take it as seriously as it should.