President Fernando CARDOSO: Globalization requires solidarity

How do you evaluate your negotiations? What prospects do they open for our countries?

I have been trying to come to see your country for the last three or four years, because first your president visited Brazil, then your prime minister came to Brazil with a group of businessmen. Many Brazilians of Ukrainian descent are putting pressure on us about this visit. Now I believe I came in the right time, because a series of proposals are now ready, and we can really implement them.

First of all, I mean the proposals in the space area. We have in Brazil a very good base to launch satellites, and we signed an agreement on this. Secondly, you have very good space technology, so you can transfer your technology to us. Third, you have also good programs on aircraft, primarily cargo aircraft. This is another possibility. Fourthly, you have interests in exploiting oil in the Black Sea, and we have good technologies to exploit it in deep waters. We are ready to launch these projects. Both sides have the political will, we have entrepreneurs interested in it and good technicians. So I believe this a basis for a solid interrelationship between Ukraine and Brazil.

Besides, we have more traditional trade in terms of raw materials; in general, we export coffee and other things, normally through other countries. So why not do it directly from Brazil to Ukraine?

Do you expect any obstacles to implementing the program on space cooperation?

I don’t think so. We have signed an agreement with the Americans. The Brazilian Congress is discussing this agreement, and the obstacles are in Congress, not with the government. Some opposition groups criticize some of the American restrictions. But with Ukraine there are no restrictions, including opposition, which is rather favorable. So I don’t really believe in any kind of obstacles able to prevent our program. It is important to stress that in spite of that there are some dual technologies in this program, we cannot utilize them for military objectives. This is not in our interest. Our interests are concentrated on trade and no more than that. Our Constitution provides a prohibition on such tricky things as dual technologies.

What do you personally see as most interesting about Ukraine?

I was really surprised to see how active your parliament is. Democracy is a natural value in your country. I have been in contact with people in parliament, and my impression is that democracy is highly evaluated in Ukraine. Secondly, I received some reports from my ministers who have been here before, showing the high degree of technological development Ukraine has. So this was not a surprise but a confirmation of what we believed before.

What do such different countries as Ukraine and Brazil have in common and what can unite our countries, besides the signed agreements?

First of all, part of my people belongs to your people. We have a half million Ukrainians in Brazil. You have peasant tradition in your country, and we also have it, and in part of Brazil these traditions are in fact Ukrainian. I cannot judge about the spirit of your people, as I don’t have enough acquaintance with your culture, but as far as I understand, you have old romantic traditions, which also corresponds to our people.

We are also united by the fact that we are not exactly in the center of the international system. We must be more active in debating in the worldwide decision making process.

What is now necessary is to encourage our people to visit your country and vice versa. I think it is very important to establish direct contacts between people. In these days distance becomes rather moderate; a direct flight from Kyiv to Brazil is no more than fourteen hours. The first Brazilian head of state to visit your country was Pedro II, the emperor, who came here in 1876. He visited Kyiv, Odesa, and Sevastopol, and it took him one year and a half to make a long journey to get to this remote part of Europe, but he came. And now it’s thirteen hours. We have to encourage people, maybe in terms of fellowships, to invite people from Brazilian and Ukrainian universities to get in touch and to have the possibility to look more directly at what is going on in our countries.

What kind of world did we get after the September 11 events?

I believe that after September 11 even the Americans have to take into account that it is impossible to have complete security. And the best way to get security is through political alliances and the legitimization of the international order. It is difficult, if not impossible, to cope with terrorism without establishing a set of consistent alliances between different peoples and countries. I think this can be a positive aspect of the September 11 events.

Will these alliances be stable and productive?

It is impossible to know beforehand, but I hope so, because otherwise the world will be submitted to hegemonic power. I believe what is good for the world is to have a multipolar system of international order.

What do you mean by multipolar system?

It means that not only the United States will control this international order.

What is, in this context, your opinion on the globalization process?

We have to put it separately. Globalization as an economic process; as a productive process it is a consequence of technological transformations all over the world: computerization, communication revolutions, the revolution in means of transport. This is like introduction of machinery. But this is one aspect. The other is the homogenization of cultures and the control over the world by a few. This is highly controversial. We have to recognize, first of all, that such homogenization is possible, and control does exist independent of the process of globalization. Secondly, the benefit of this control by a few is possible, but corresponds to a conflict-ridden world.

I believe that we must build globalization in solidarity. We cannot accept the fact that the concentration of wealth and possibilities will coexist with misery and poverty in some spots in Africa and other continents. I believe it is necessary to try to reorganize the international order motivated by the values of solidarity.

Do you believe that such homogenization or cultural unification is possible?

No, I don’t believe it. I don’t suppose that culture can be approached as a simple economic boom. Culture means feelings, life experience; it means certain aspects that cannot be transformed and commercialized for utilization in a unified way.

What are today the major values for humanity?

I think that now the idea of humanity is becoming a possibility. You know from reading the sociologists that humanity has always been used as an ideological instrument to disguise the existence of class conflicts. Now, I think, it’s no longer like that, because of the fact that we have the same environment, same system of international defence, and the wide spread information. I think that it is possible to think of a kind of planetary citizenship, a concrete Universum, as Hegel would put it, but in real terms, not ideological ones.