Analysis: US vetoes Brazil’s attempt to condemn sanctions against Russia

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Joe Biden’s government refused to accept a proposal from the Brazilian government to modify a resolution at the United Nations (UN) that would point to the negative impact of sanctions against Russia on the world food supply. The incident adds to a series of disagreements between the two countries.

This week, the UN Human Rights Council met on an emergency basis to examine the Ukrainian crisis. The resolution that was eventually approved, including Brazil’s vote, gave a mandate to the commission of inquiry to investigate atrocities recorded in the outskirts of Kiev and other Ukrainian cities.

But, subject of intense negotiation, the text also dealt with the impact of the conflict on the world food supply. According to the Brazilian government, the problem is that the approach given by the European authors of the proposal cited only one part of the problem: the interruption of agricultural production and exportation from Ukraine because of the military operation. No reference was made to the embargo imposed by Western powers against Russian banks and trade.

The text indicated that global food insecurity was occurring “in light of the impediments to Ukraine’s agricultural exports as a result of the blockade of its seaports and the destruction of relevant critical infrastructure, as well as the theft of grain from the Ukrainian territories under the control of the Russian armed forces in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.

For Brazil, however, the draft resolution would be unbalanced and biased if it dealt with the supply problem only from the war point of view. For Brazil’s Foreign Ministry (Itamaraty) the West’s sanctions against Russia affect food and fertilizer supplies in as profound a way as the inability to export Ukrainian grain.

However, the US government refused to accept a text that dealt with both the war and the sanctions. Brazil even proposed that the entire sentence be deleted, which was not accepted by the proposal’s authors either. In the end, the original text was kept.

When voting, the Brazilian delegation asked for the floor and publicly “regretted” that their suggestions were not incorporated.

For diplomats, the lack of understanding between Brazil and the US and Itamaraty’s decision to complain in public this week that it was not attended to were elements that revealed how the two great countries of the Americas suffer today to find points of convergence, especially on the issue of war.

The column found out that, with each vote on Russia in international organizations, the Brazilian government has been the target of intense pressure from Americans and Europeans to adopt a position closer to the Western bloc.

But Itamaraty is committed to avoiding Russia’s “diplomatic cancellation” and maintains a certain level of dialogue with Moscow. Both out of self-interest to secure a fertilizer supply and for a more constructive position to save the UN system.

Moscow’s cancellation of the international trading system would carry a heavyweight for some countries. While Russia and Ukraine represent a relatively small share of world trade and production, in a technical note published in April, the WTO indicated that the two countries are “important suppliers of essential products, notably food and energy.” “Both countries supplied about 25% of wheat, 15% barley, and 45% sunflower product exports in 2019.”

Reduced shipments of grains and other food will increase global prices for agricultural products, a situation that will have negative consequences for food security in poorer regions. According to the World Trade Organization (WTO), Africa and the Middle East are the most vulnerable regions, as they import more than 50% of their grain needs from Ukraine and Russia. In total, 35 countries in Africa import food, and 22 import fertilizer from Ukraine, Russia, or both.

Some countries in sub-Saharan Africa are facing the possibility of price increases of 50% to 85% for wheat due to the war’s impact on grain shipments from the region. “The current crisis could exacerbate international food insecurity when food prices are already historically high due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other factors,” the WTO secretariat warns.

With information from UOL