No Good Reason at All

`Tis the season for cherished holiday traditions: decorating, caroling, wrapping gifts and, of course, chasing a drunken turkey in the backyard.

Now, I have not personally participated in the latter, but my parents have. As children, they were both tasked with running after turkeys that had been liquored up with a few rounds of potent "aguardiente."

It sounds barbaric, I know, but the practice was once quite common in Colombia. The exact reason is unclear – everyone seems to have a different explanation: My mom says the chase causes a bird’s blood to pool in its head, making the meat whiter; a friend claims it dilates the bird’s capillaries, which tenderizes the meat; my dad simply believes the meat of a drunken turkey tastes better. In other words, there’s no good reason.

It’s a bit like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent visit to South America. Ahmadinejad, of course, is no turkey, much less a drunken one. But the varied explanations from his hosts and pursuers – Bolivia, Brazil and Venezuela – as to why he was invited to participate in high-level talks left me thinking there was no good reason at all.

Venezuelan officials explained the visit in terms of commercial ties and mutual interests. They cited Iran and Venezuela’s shared status as large oil producers and a common desire to counterbalance U.S. power. This is more of the usual folly from Caracas, particularly considering that Iran doesn’t even rank among Venezuela’s top 50 trading partners – while the United States is No. 1.

Bolivian President Evo Morales used the occasion of Ahmadinejad’s visit to speak out against leaders who undermine their people’s sovereignty. He emphasized the inherent threat of having a foreign military presence in Latin America, referring to a recent agreement to increase U.S. military cooperation in Colombia. Never mind that Iran was directly implicated in two terrorists attacks in Argentina in the 1990s – the only acts of terrorism in the entire hemisphere connected to a foreign group, other than the attacks of Sept. 11.

Even more puzzling was Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s justification for Ahmadinejad’s visit – the first one to Brazil by an Iranian leader in 44 years. Lula explained that the world needed to engage the Islamic Republic and spoke of Iran’s "right to develop its nuclear program for peaceful uses."
Perhaps such a position would have made more sense before Iran’s long-hidden nuclear enrichment plant was revealed in September. Or before Ahmadinejad began to back away from a deal signed in October to send most of his country’s low-enriched uranium abroad for additional processing that would render it less of a threat.

The international community has grown increasingly skeptical of Iran’s assertions that its development of nuclear technology is strictly for civilian use. On Nov. 27, the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency voted to censure Iran.
Not surprisingly, Argentina cast its vote against Iran, from which it has tried unsuccessfully to extradite five suspects – including Iran’s current defense minister, Ahmad Vahidi – implicated in the 1994 bombing in Buenos Aires.

In the end, 25 of the 35 board members voted against Iran. Even China and Russia, which in the past have been reluctant to rebuke the Islamic Republic, supported the censure, demonstrating the broadening international disenchantment with the leadership in Tehran.

Meanwhile, Cuba and Venezuela voted against the censure, and Brazil abstained. Bolivia is not a member of the board.
Apparently Ahmadinejad’s visit to South America a few days earlier paid off. Venezuela’s opposition was not surprising, but Brazil’s abstention seems naive and just plain wrong.

Sure, Brazil has long considered itself a special case and has made decisions that countered conventional wisdom. Sometimes that approach has been a force for good, and has allowed Brazil to claim the moral high ground.

That might be said about its position in Honduras, where Lula appears to be taking a strong, principled pro-democracy stance. Determined not to let a dangerous precedent be set in the region, he has insisted that he will "definitely not" recognize the results of the Nov. 30 Honduran elections that took place under a de facto regime.

But then how can Lula cozy up to Ahmadinejad, whose re-election he recognized despite widespread accusations of fraud and brutality?

Clearly, Brazil is an emerging global powerhouse: It is leading Latin America in the recovery from the global economic crisis; it has pushed for a new international agreement to combat climate change; and it outbid the U.S. to host the 2016 Summer Olympics.

But its recent unsavory pursuit of Ahmadinejad suggests that Brazil is not quite the principled leader it imagines itself to be. As a new type of global player, Brazil remains a work in progress.