A blog of the Brazil Institute
An Open Letter to 21st Century Leaders
Brazil's senior environmentalists point to hypocrisy in country's criticism of U.S. abandonment of global climate agreement.
Appalled by President Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement, Brazil鈥檚 former ministers of the Environment from the past quarter-century used the occasion to voice their alarm about Brazil's own lessening commitment to the historic deal's objectives. In a long joint letter published in daily Valor Econ么mico, they criticized recent actions in Congress by parties supportive of embattled President Michel Temer to reduce protected areas in the Amazon, which undermines Bras铆lia's stated commitment to the Paris Agreement.
The following piece can be read in the original Portuguese聽.
It鈥檚 already聽been nearly two decades since we turned the page of history and聽entered聽the 21st聽century. But decisions like President Donald Trump鈥檚, on the eve聽of聽World Environment Day, make us question聽the times聽we are really living in. By rejecting science and facts, Trump sent his signal to the world:聽no sense of responsibility will lead him to abandon聽his聽campaign promises. The Paris Agreement鈥檚 other signatory countries, companies,聽and environmental, political, and religious leaders all聽opposed聽the withdrawal and sent a clear message聽of their own: the climate agreement will continue without the U.S. government,聽which will be left behind in the new low-carbon economy.聽
In Brazil, there is聽also聽not much聽reason to聽celebrate the聽5th聽of June. The government criticized the United States鈥 decision. In a statement, the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment affirmed that 鈥淏razil remains committed to the global effort of combating climate change and to the implementation of the Paris Agreement,鈥 a position that was reinforced by President Michel聽Temer聽at the World Environment Day ceremony, where he signed the order聽turning聽the聽Paris Agreement into Brazilian law. Those who follow environmental聽issues, however, have not found聽evidence to support this聽claim.
A series of proposals to change the country鈥檚 environmental policies, presented in the National Congress with surprising speed and聽without聽input聽from society,聽has left聽both聽civil society and parts of the private sector聽concerned.
Legislative projects that reduce forest protection put climate goals at risk, as the forest and land use sector聽is聽Brazil鈥檚 largest source聽of greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond that, they threaten indigenous peoples and their lands, aggravating rural violence; and they compromise natural heritage sites, food and water security, and economic activities connected to the forest such as agriculture, which is responsible for nearly 25 percent聽of our GDP.
Members of Congress justify their support of legislation that聽permits聽irregular occupations and other illegal rural activities聽by saying that land needs to be聽made聽available for production鈥攂ut this is聽unsustainable.
Meanwhile, two symbolic provisionary measures await President聽Temer鈥檚聽approval, ironically, in the middle of Environment Week.聽Measures聽756 and 758 remove protected status from 588,800 hectares of forest聽in the Amazon region and聽decrease the size of聽the S茫o Joaquim National Park聽(SC), one of the聽Atlantic Forest鈥檚聽main聽biodiversity reserves, by 20 percent. Measures like these impact critical areas of preservation that, between 2012 and 2015, led the聽country鈥檚聽ranking聽for聽the most聽heavily聽deforested聽conservation sites.聽
The original motivation for聽Measure聽758 was to make available a strip of around 862 hectares of land from a national park that could be used to construct a聽passageway for聽Ferrogr茫o, a聽transnational聽railroad, near the city of聽Itaituba聽in the northern state of聽Par谩.聽Alongside this聽first聽provisionary measure, a second was drafted that proposed reducing聽other conservation sites by 300,000聽hectares for illegal occupation and prospecting, practically in the same region as the聽Ferrogr茫o聽and the BR-163 transnational highway.
The National Congress significantly altered these measures, however, arriving at the聽current聽proposal to reduce 600,000 hectares of protected land and shrink the park in Santa Catarina. Such proposals open聽the door to greater environmental degradation of the region and the minister of Environment himself,聽Sarney聽Filho, has already聽come out聽against their approval.聽
It is undeniable that Brazil聽is in need of聽infrastructure projects, principally in the logistics sector.聽But these measures compromise the image of聽the country鈥檚聽development by proposing ventures that ignore sustainability.聽
Amid the country鈥檚 political turbulence, it can seem trivial to worry about environmental policy. It isn鈥檛.聽
The rate of deforestation in the Amazon,聽which聽has risen to a worrisome level since 2014 and reached nearly 30 percent聽in 2016, can discourage investors and foreign markets that have come to lose trust in Brazil鈥檚聽ability聽to complete its obligations and international commitments.聽
As an example,聽take聽the investments from the Amazon Protected Areas Program (ARPA), one of the largest forest conservation projects in the聽world. The near US$ 215 million聽provided by international donors聽will only be disbursed if the country does not suffer losses in its conservation聽sites. Reducing forest protection is an antiquated strategy that diverges from what the international market expects of Brazil鈥檚 agricultural sector.聽
We need to understand this聽moment of crisis鈥攑olitical economic, and environmental鈥攊n a broad sense. It鈥檚 not just employment, investment, and the cost of basic services that are not going well. We are also living a moment that聽hinders聽the聽ability聽of the country to undertake and construct a just, mutually beneficial, and sustainable agenda for the future. On this front, leaders, representatives of society, and聽opinion makers聽must聽help us聽get back on track.
Therefore, leaders of the 21st聽century have no option other than to completely reject these measures, both to follow聽through聽with the Brazilian government鈥檚 condemnation of Trump鈥檚聽decision, and out of聽respect for the long path we have already tread in order to construct an agenda that makes feasible the sustainable use of Brazil鈥檚 soil.
We hope that President聽Temer聽can use his decision regarding these measures聽as an opportunity to show Brazil which聽side聽of history his government finds itself on. If it remains in the past, it will open a path toward destruction of the forest, ignoring the calls of both society and the scientific community. If it really is a part of the present, however, it will recognize that change in environmental policies requires dialogue,聽and it will reject these measures in order to restart the debate in a new way, with transparency and involvement of actors from the climate, forest and agriculture agenda. Twenty-first聽century, we鈥檙e聽rooting for you.
Image by Government of Brazil
