BrazilWorks
Information and Analysis about United States-Brazil Relations
Information and Analysis about United States-Brazil Relations
Security
| Brazil and United Nations Voting Coincidence with the United States |
SHAPING
GLOBAL
GOVERNANCE:
A BRAZILIAN
PERSPECTIVE
MARCEL F. BIATO
Published by CEBRI,
January-March, 2008
Never has the international community
looked to multilateral institutions
more searchingly and found them to be so
wanting. We live in the midst of new and
growing threats from climate change, global
terrorism and diseases, transnational
crime and intra-state violence. At the same
time, old ones, such as poverty and
the arms race, are still with us. Yet, there
seems to be few signs that the world
community is any nearer to coming to terms
with the urgent need for effective
global governance. Is it any thing beyond a
distant chimera?
The most recent report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) brings both the immediacy and the
long-term implications of this question into
sharp focus. The Panel’s most signifi cant
conclusion is not that the weather has
become fickle – we have known that for
some time – but rather that human activity is
now a major contributing factor. Whose
responsibility is it then? In today’s
environmentally conscious world, these
findings serve as a cautionary metaphor for
the wider challenge facing us: how to
adequately allocate responsibilities between
those wishing to preserve their present-day
affluence and those seeking to achieve
comparable levels of prosperity?
How to set up an international framework
for dialogue and cooperation that makes
interdependence, a force for collaborative
endeavor, rather than an excuse to seek
unilateral advantages in the best free-rider
tradition? Read more.
GLOBAL
GOVERNANCE:
A BRAZILIAN
PERSPECTIVE
MARCEL F. BIATO
Published by CEBRI,
January-March, 2008
Never has the international community
looked to multilateral institutions
more searchingly and found them to be so
wanting. We live in the midst of new and
growing threats from climate change, global
terrorism and diseases, transnational
crime and intra-state violence. At the same
time, old ones, such as poverty and
the arms race, are still with us. Yet, there
seems to be few signs that the world
community is any nearer to coming to terms
with the urgent need for effective
global governance. Is it any thing beyond a
distant chimera?
The most recent report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) brings both the immediacy and the
long-term implications of this question into
sharp focus. The Panel’s most signifi cant
conclusion is not that the weather has
become fickle – we have known that for
some time – but rather that human activity is
now a major contributing factor. Whose
responsibility is it then? In today’s
environmentally conscious world, these
findings serve as a cautionary metaphor for
the wider challenge facing us: how to
adequately allocate responsibilities between
those wishing to preserve their present-day
affluence and those seeking to achieve
comparable levels of prosperity?
How to set up an international framework
for dialogue and cooperation that makes
interdependence, a force for collaborative
endeavor, rather than an excuse to seek
unilateral advantages in the best free-rider
tradition? Read more.
Under President George Bush (2001-2009)
Brazil did not vote with the United States very
often at the United Nations. According to the
U.S. Department of State, the overall General
Assembly voting coincidence for all UN
members with the United States in 2008 was
25.6 percent, up significantly from 2007, when it
was 18.3 percent. During President Clinton's
last years in office, 1999-2000 the coincidence
was closer to 40%, including 43% in 2000.
Brazil lagged behind the overall United Nations
voting coincidence from 2000 to 2008, with a
high of 39.7 in 2000 and a low coincidence of
10.7 in 2007. The large margin in voting
coincidence, especially on important votes
related to Arms Control, Human Rights, and
the Middle East reveals the fundamental
differences in foreign policy and multilateral
behavior adopted by these two country's during
former President Bush's tenure in office. See
the votes from 2008-2006
BRAZIL 2008
Voting Coincidence Percentages
Overall Votes (88): Agree 16, Disagree 63, Abstain 9, Absent 0:
20.3%
Including all 192 Consensus Resolutions: 76.8%
Arms Control: 28.6%; Human Rights: 20.0%; Middle East: 0.0%
Important Votes (13): Agree 1, Disagree 7, Abstain 5, Absent 0:
12.5%
Brazil did not vote with the United States very
often at the United Nations. According to the
U.S. Department of State, the overall General
Assembly voting coincidence for all UN
members with the United States in 2008 was
25.6 percent, up significantly from 2007, when it
was 18.3 percent. During President Clinton's
last years in office, 1999-2000 the coincidence
was closer to 40%, including 43% in 2000.
Brazil lagged behind the overall United Nations
voting coincidence from 2000 to 2008, with a
high of 39.7 in 2000 and a low coincidence of
10.7 in 2007. The large margin in voting
coincidence, especially on important votes
related to Arms Control, Human Rights, and
the Middle East reveals the fundamental
differences in foreign policy and multilateral
behavior adopted by these two country's during
former President Bush's tenure in office. See
the votes from 2008-2006
BRAZIL 2008
Voting Coincidence Percentages
Overall Votes (88): Agree 16, Disagree 63, Abstain 9, Absent 0:
20.3%
Including all 192 Consensus Resolutions: 76.8%
Arms Control: 28.6%; Human Rights: 20.0%; Middle East: 0.0%
Important Votes (13): Agree 1, Disagree 7, Abstain 5, Absent 0:
12.5%
|
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| BrazilWorks P.O. Box 65630 Washington, D.C. 20035 Tel. 202-744-0072 www.brazilworks.org |