Celso Amorim’s Remarks To The Financial Times Aren’t As Russian-Friendly As Folks Think

If Lula’s chief foreign policy advisor was really sympathetic to Russia, then he wouldn’t suggest that its total military defeat is inevitable, he’d unambiguously oppose any NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine, and he wouldn’t hint that the next Hitler might come from Russia either.

The Alt-Media Community (AMC) and the Mainstream Media (MSM) have vested narrative interests in misportraying Lula’s Brazil as Russian-friendly despite it voting in support of an anti-Russian UNGA Resolution in February demanding Moscow’s withdrawal from all the land that Kiev claims as its own. The first is driven to deflect from this self-proclaimed “socialist” leader’s political alignment with the US’ ruling liberal-globalist Democrats while the second wants to maximally pressure him to align even closer.

The following analyses should be reviewed by those readers who’ve been misled by either media camp:

* “Lula Just Backstabbed Putin By Ordering Brazil To Vote Against Russia At The UN”

* “The De-Dollarization Of Brazilian-Chinese Trade Sheds More Light On Lula’s Grand Strategy”

* “Don’t Be Fooled By Lula’s Latest Remarks On The NATO-Russian Proxy War”

* “Lula’s Planned Influence Network With The US Democrats Will Serve Liberal-Globalist Interests”

* “Don’t Let Lula’s De-Dollarization Success Distract From His ‘Peace Club’ Failure”

* “Brazil’s Abstention From 2014’s UNGA Vote On Ukraine Proves That Lula Changed The PT’s Policy”

* “Debunking Lula’s Latest Lie That President Putin Supposedly Isn’t Interested In Peace”

* “Lula’s Chief Foreign Policy Advisor Articulated His Boss’ Worldview In A Lengthy Interview”

* “Lula Just Discredited Brazil’s Foreign Policy By Placing Conditions On His Visit To Russia”

* “It’s Concerning That One Of Kiev’s Top Warmongers Was Pleased With Celso Amorim’s Visit”

* “Lula Lied When Tweeting That China & India ‘Condemn The Territorial Occupation Of Ukraine’”

* “Why Is Lula Presenting Himself As China & India’s Spokesman On The NATO-Russian Proxy War?”

The abovementioned sequence of events and associated insight sets the context for the present piece.

Lula’s chief foreign policy advisor Celso Amorim, who used to serve as Brazil’s Foreign Minister on two occasions and once as its Defense Minister, shared some remarks to the Financial Times about the NATO-Russian proxy war that were subsequently spun by the AMC and MSM to advance their false narrative. The reality is that his words aren’t as Russian-friendly as either of those two media camps are making them out to be for the reasons that will now be explained.

Amorim told the outlet that “We don’t want a third world war. And even if we don’t have that, we don’t want a new cold war.” The first part of this passage is perfunctory, while the second shows that he’s either truly ignorant of the West’s efforts to contain the Sino-Russo Entente or is playing dumb since he doesn’t dare criticize his boss’ ideological allies too harshly. Whatever the case may be, Amorim’s refusal to publicly acknowledge the ongoing New Cold War reflects poorly on his professional judgement.

Those preceding words were mostly ignored by the AMC and MSM, however, which instead twisted his next statement about how “All concerns of countries in the region should be taken into account, if you want peace. The only other alternative is total military victory against Russia. Do you know what comes after? I don’t.” Financial Times added that “Amorim said national security is one of Moscow’s chief ‘concerns’, referring to its complaints of ‘encirclement’ by western powers and Nato.”

While it’s true that this might superficially come off as Russian-friendly to many, those who fall under this false impression haven’t fully reflected on what Amorim was really conveying. Upon rereading what he said, the part about him asking “Do you know what comes after (total military victory against Russia)?” takes that outcome for granted. This is premature and implies that its defeat its inevitable, which indirectly extends credence to Western claims that Russia is supposedly on the brink of collapse.

As for Amorim’s reference to Moscow’s national security concerns about Western military encirclement, this suggests that Brazil doesn’t believe that Ukraine’s membership in NATO is a good idea. Once again, while this stance might superficially come off as Russian-friendly to many, it actually isn’t since the scenario that he’s alluding to isn’t realistic anytime soon. This isn’t speculation like Lula’s propagandists might instinctively claim but proven by official statements from France, the UK, and even Ukraine itself.

French President Emmanuel Macron called for “tangible and credible” security guarantees for Ukraine during next month’s summit in Vilnius in lieu of NATO membership. UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace, meanwhile, told the Washington Post in a recent interview that “We have to be realistic and say: [Ukraine joining NATO is] not going to happen at Vilnius'; It’s not going to happen anytime soon.” Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky then acknowledged that it’s “impossible” to join NATO right now.

Nevertheless, that former Soviet Republic’s lack of formal membership in this bloc isn’t sufficient for ensuring Moscow’s national security concerns unlike what Amorim suggested. Bilateral mutual defense pacts could still be clinched between Ukraine and NATO members to essentially serve the same purpose similar in spirit to the one reached between the US and South Korea after the armistice. Additionally, the possible deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine could de facto place it under their nuclear umbrella.

To give credit where it’s due, Amorim is spot-on when assessing that “We cannot judge the situation by the last 1.5 years. This is a situation of decades. [Russia has] concerns that have to be taken into account. That is not the fault of Ukraine. Ukraine is a victim, a victim of the remnants of the cold war.” Despite that, it still stands that his implied opposition to Ukraine’s NATO membership doesn’t make a difference in these military-strategic calculations, thus exposing it as nothing but misleading rhetoric.

The last part of his interview with the Financial Times to be constructively critiqued is where he said that “I am reminded of the situation in Germany after the first world war: The objective was to weaken Germany at [the Treaty of] Versailles and we know where that led.” As was earlier noted, Amorim takes NATO’s “total military victory” over Russia for granted, the impression of which is reaffirmed by this second related statement.

By referencing the end of World War I and everything that came afterwards, Lula’s chief foreign policy advisor is suggesting that Russia will capitulate throughout the course of Kiev’s upcoming NATO-backed counteroffensive, following which Zelensky’s 10-point “peace plan” will be imposed on Moscow. The Brazilian leader discussed that potential outcome with his Ukrainian counterpart during their call in early March as reported by the latter’s official website, which entails reparations and a war crimes tribunal.

Amorim’s allusion to the rise of Nazism after Versailles and the next world war that it led to hints that he fears something similar unfolding after NATO’s “total military victory” over Russia that he arguably takes for granted as was explained. Extrapolating from this forecast, he’s implying that the seeds of fascism have already been sown all across Russia and only need to be watered by an ultra-punitive post-conflict settlement to grow into another global bloodletting, which is deeply offensive to the Russian people.

Far from being Russian-friendly like the AMC and MSM have both misportrayed his latest remarks as being in pursuit of their polar opposite narrative agendas, Amorim’s words are actually loaded with criticism of that country if one reads between the lines. If he was really sympathetic to Russia, then he wouldn’t suggest that its total military defeat is inevitable, he’d unambiguously oppose any NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine, and he wouldn’t hint that the next Hitler might come from Russia either.