Why Lula Has More to Say to Europe Than Many Assume
- Gerald Schneider
- 5. Mai
- 4 Min. Lesezeit
On pragmatism, multilateralism, and the search for reliability in an unsettled world
Democracy, free trade, growth, multilateralism—there is hardly a clearer example of values‑based politics combined with political pragmatism than this. In an interview with Der Spiegel (paywall), Germany’s leading news magazine, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva lays out the guiding principles of his foreign and domestic policy and, through his strategic clarity, presents himself as a natural partner for Europe.
Brazil is seeking its own way in international relations
Brazil is a giant. Not only in terms of territory. With vast natural resources and a large, relatively young population, the country has everything it needs to play a far more consequential role on the world stage. Yet this tropical heavyweight has still not fully unleashed its potential—and that potential extends far beyond mere figures such as oil and gas reserves, rare earths, or an immense labor force. While elsewhere in the world both real autocrats and aspiring would‑be strongmen tighten their grip on power, Brazil is committing itself to something fundamentally different.
Lula outlines this “difference” with notable clarity in the interview. His ambition is not to turn Brazil into a new hegemonic power or global enforcer. What he advocates instead is a distinctly Brazilian path. And strikingly, that path is rooted in values and convictions that sound almost reassuring—perhaps even refreshing—to European ears: democracy, the rule of law, multilateralism, free and fair trade, growth and prosperity. All of this is carried by a political approach that is deliberately non‑ideological—without pathos, without lecturing, without any missionary impulse.
Multilateralism - not domination
Is this not precisely what a Europe, rudely shaken from a kind of strategic lethargy, has been searching for? At a time when a Trump‑era America is increasingly unpredictable and unapologetically power‑driven; when Russia has relegated itself to international isolation through aggression and war; and when an authoritarian China pursues its interests with little regard for others.
Against this backdrop, Lula’s tone is markedly different. He speaks of advancing his country through partnerships—without becoming dependent. He speaks plainly about what happens to coup plotters in Brazil. His predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, was sentenced to 27 years in prison for inciting a coup after calling on his supporters to storm the seat of power in Brasília, in a manner eerily reminiscent of events in Washington on January 6. Under Lula, he notes—without concealing a measure of pride—the justice system worked.
Despite being acutely aware of Brazil’s vast potential, Lula does not frame his ambitions in terms of dominance. His commitment to international law and multilateralism is unequivocal. Donald Trump, he states, is not the “emperor of the world,” and reforming the United Nations is unavoidable. For Lula, this means a stronger voice not only for Brazil, but for other countries as well—Mexico, India, Japan, and Germany among them.
While Europe, confronted with policy swings and provocations from the White House, often oscillates between activism and disorientation, Lula remains remarkably composed. Trump, he emphasizes, is an elected head of state—and therefore a negotiating partner. Neither friend nor enemy, but a political fact. If Washington chooses not to buy Brazilian goods or services, Brazil will look elsewhere. And if Lula negotiates with his counterpart in Washington, it will be, as he puts it, “on the basis of the interests of our nations.”
He applies the same restraint to China. Lula underscores the value of democratic transitions of power and rejects one‑party rule, yet at the same time insists on each nation’s right to pursue its own political development.
This is not laissez‑faire indifference. It is a professional foundation for diplomacy and engagement—one that makes the credible defense of national interests possible without moralizing reflexes or strategic panic. In Europe today, this kind of political sobriety often feels unfamiliar. Amid frenetic activism, rhetorical overreach, and strategic ambiguity, what is frequently missing is precisely the calm self‑positioning Lula demonstrates: clear interests, finite resources, realistic goals.
The membership in the BRICS alliance remains a source of irritation
Still, one source of unease remains. Brazil is a member of the BRICS alliance, which originally included Russia, India, China, South Africa—and Brazil itself. The group has since expanded to include countries such as UAE and Iran. Brazil’s place in this bloc only partially aligns with the image Lula presents. Strategically, participation is understandable as an attempt to reduce global dependencies and to counterbalance a Western order long dominated by the United States. But what BRICS has become troubles many Brazilians as well. Having endured a painful military dictatorship, Brazilians value and defend their democracy. That experience sits uneasily beside Putin’s Russia or the theocratic regime in Iran.
This unresolved tension may be one of the defining questions of the years ahead. Trump’s erratic policies, the weakening of traditional guardians of global order, and the vacuum between power blocs could give rise to configurations beyond the familiar alliances. A closer political and economic axis between Europe and countries such as Brazil or Canada does not yet exist—but it is no longer mere fantasy.
That Europe, after years of hesitation, has finally moved forward with a free‑trade agreement with Brazil is an early signal. Not of a romantic alliance of shared ideals, but of pragmatic cooperation between actors with different political cultures and similar concepts of order. Lula, at the very least, comes across as a head of state who knows exactly where his country stands—and where it refuses to be absorbed.
Kommentare