Interview With Estado de Sao Paulo

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I would answer your question this way: We focus in South America on our friends, on Brazil, on Argentina, on Chile, on Colombia, on Peru, on Ecuador. You know, all the friends that we have. All the countries. This is what we focus on. In Washington, when we think about our policy and strategy for South America, frankly, what you try to have in diplomacy is a positive agenda. We have a positive agenda with Brazil, with President Lula. We have a positive agenda with President Uribe in Colombia. We do not have much of a relationship with Hugo Chavez because he has decided not to have a relationship, not us. Frankly, in our view, his politics are the politics of negativity, of division. He tries to create a movement against the United States. How are we going to have, in our hemisphere, which we share together, progress on climate change, biofuels, trade, poverty alleviation, social justice, tourism, if we do not integrate and work together? So the agenda of Brazil is positive. The agenda of Argentina is positive. The agenda of Peru is positive. But the agenda of Chavez is negative. This is his choice. He is free to make his choice. But we do not have to follow him. So frankly, as I told some reporters in Sao Paulo two days ago, we do not obsess about Chavez. We do not think about him every day. But we think about Brazil every day and we think about Argentina every day. Because we have to find a way to work with people positively. Chavez is -- I think he isolates himself from the world by being so negative. He is negative. Everything is negative.

QUESTION: But don't you think that it is having a (unintelligible) in some places in Latin America like Bolivia or Dominican Republic? And that maybe working with Brazil and Argentina and Chile can try to adjust (unintelligible)?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Well, first of all, I think it is really a question for South America to work out. We do not want to interfere. We will not interfere in Mercosur. We should not do that. It is really up to other countries to decide how they want to relate to him. We are not going to give advice. That would not be right. But we know what we think. There is a global agenda right now. We have to cooperate globally on all these challenges that we have. It is important that countries find a way to be positive and to trust each other and work together. His agenda is negative. It is also, frankly, in our view, the politics of the past. Nationalizing industries, giving speeches against the United States – that is the past. That is not the future, in our view.

QUESTION: So do you think that Brazil has a role in this situation, that maybe stronger Brazilian leadership in South America would be a good influence to -- on (unintelligible) and not just --

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Well, we have great respect for President Lula and for Brazil. There is no question that Brazil is the most powerful country in South America. Its size, its geographic size, its population, its economy. It is a major force. We think that Brazil is following a very responsible, very cooperative, very positive agenda in South America in South-South relations and South America. That is why we have such a good relationship with Brazil. I do not think it would be right for me to give advice. I should not give advice to Brazil on how to deal with Argentina. You know Venezuela. You know better how to do that than we do. But I can tell you how we relate to Venezuela. We admire the Venezuelan people. We wish the Venezuelan people all the best for success, for improvements in the economy. But Chavez, he is -- you know, I think around the world when people look at him, they say, not very consequential. Not part of the global agenda to solve problems.

QUESTION: As far as I know Brazil -- President Lula and President Bush have a very good personal relationship.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Yes, they do. They do have a good relationship.

QUESTION: Do you think this can -- even with the problems Brazil has in (unintelligible) having trade, this relationship has consequences in decisions and (unintelligible) to accomplish it's good (unintelligible) solve these problems with this personal relationship?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I think it is. You know, politics is -- it follows the laws of human nature. Politics is not impersonal. Relations between countries are not impersonal. There are objective factors. But there are also personal factors. The fact that President Lula and President Bush like each other, trust each other, admire each other, this is good for Brazil and the United States. It is good for our relationship, because the signal it sends to the rest of us working for them is President -- well, to me, for instance, President Bush believes that Brazil is important. He admires President Lula. He wants us to succeed with Brazil. So we try very hard to make that happen. I do think it makes a difference and I think hopefully it makes a difference for the average person. I come from Boston, Massachusetts. We have 200,000 Brazilians in my state. Many of them have become American citizens. It makes a difference that they are there. It makes a difference that they are the face of Brazil in my country, in my part of the country. It makes a difference that President Lula is on the television and he is in the newspapers in Boston because of the big community. It helps to build bridges. I think that is important in politics. I really do think it is important. We see it in other relationships that we have. President Bush's relationship with Prime Minister Singh of India is similar. Great admiration. That helps to inspire confidence. So we are looking forward -- we take leadership from President Lula and President Bush and I think it is good for the relationship.

QUESTION: Okay. Recently the former Brazilian ambassador in Washington gave an interview for a magazine here, and he said there are some anti-U.S. feelings in the Brazilian policy. You must have felt it in some moments. Are there really -- in the diplomatic relationship -- these problems with Brazil's diplomacy (unintelligible) there's some ambassador or something that they do not like about the U.S. or prefer not to work on with the U.S.?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I am going to be very careful in answering your question, because it is a sensitive issue, obviously. First of all, I have great respect for Ambassador Abdenur. He did a very fine job and we all liked him and he is a friend. Secondly, I have good friends in the Brazilian Foreign Ministry. Antonio Patriota is a friend of mine. He is coming to the United States in two weeks as the Brazilian ambassador. Everton Vargas is the new Under Secretary. He and I have become friends. I know that Secretary Rice believes that Foreign Minister Amorim is her friend and she likes and trusts him. They have a good relationship. I think that our two foreign ministries work very well together. I would say that -- and I think that most Brazilian diplomats agree with this -- the relationship between Brazil and the United States is a good one. But it can be stronger. It can be better. I think the goal of both of our governments should be to build a stronger relationship where we talk more frequently, where we call each other more frequently, where we try to work together to resolve problems. So I do think that there is more room to improve the relationship between the two governments. We diplomats have some responsibility for that.

QUESTION: Okay. One of the things that is of most concern in Brazil and its foreign policy is the option of working with underdeveloped countries. We call it South-South relationships. I do not know if it is used in the U.S. But (unintelligible) this kind of relationship instead of the (unintelligible).

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I believe that every country has to make its own decisions. You do not need me to come down here to Brasilia to tell you what to do. Brazil is a great country. It should make its own decisions, first. Second, it seems to me that Brazil is right to have an orientation South-South, because Brazil is one of the great leaders of the world. There is an appeal that Brazil has with some poorer countries of the world, because they see that Brazil has been successful. You know, Brazil has ties of ethnicity and language to some African countries. Brazil has ties of ethnicity to European countries. So if, on a South-South basis with Africa and with other Latin countries, Brazil can have a good relationship, I think this is positive. But I do not think it is a zero-sum game. In addition to that, obviously we would hope that Brazil would want to have a good relationship with the United States, of course with Europe. I think we are going to achieve that. So I do not think that any country can put all of its eggs in one basket. You know, countries have to be global. There are only a few countries in the world that must be global. The United States is a global country. India, China, Japan. The European Union and Brazil. Brazil is a global country. So its foreign policy has to be not only South-South, but also global. I think it is, so I have no criticisms to make whatsoever. I think Brazil makes good choices but we Americans want to have a close relationship, too. So we hope to build it further.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, just on biofuels, this is one of the main issues you have come to discuss here in Brazil. But why has the U.S. decided now to try to build -- how do you say this?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: The ethanol industry?

QUESTION: Yes. But in what way do you hope to work with Brazil on that?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I think that we have been developing our ethanol industry for a generation, slowly building. Right now we have an energy problem around the world. We are too addicted to oil. It is not good for us economically. It is not good for the environment. President Bush said two weeks ago we have to develop alternative fuels. We have to decrease our gasoline consumption. We produce corn ethanol largely, because we have a great corn crop. You have sugar ethanol. We are the two leaders of the world. We have -- Brazil and the United States together -- over 70 percent of the market globally. So it seems to us that this is a connection point with Brazil. It is an area we can grow together with Brazil. Hopefully, together we can lead the worldwide development of a market that will have very positive consequences for the environment and for the economy. So it is a positive issue for Brazil and the United States. I have been talking to the government about it and I imagine when our two leaders -- President Lula and President Bush -- get together, this is going to be a big issue. In many ways maybe biofuels will become the major issue, the major positive connecting point, between Brazil and the U.S.

QUESTION: How does this work? I know you want to open a new market for the biofuels, but how can Brazil and the U.S. work together?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: I think in three ways: First, our scientists can have research and development cooperation so that we can improve the efficiency of both sugar and corn ethanol. That is very important, to improve our productivity. Also to help think about distribution networks because that is very important. Once you produce something, you have to deliver to markets. Second, in the region of the Americas, can Brazil and the United States stimulate ethanol production in Central America, in the Caribbean, in South America? Third, we should want a global market. There is a global market for gas. There is a global market for oil. Why not a global market for ethanol? Because if the demand increases around the world, it is good for Brazil, it is good for the United States. It will stimulate production in both of our countries. It will have environmental benefits globally in terms of greenhouse gases and climate change. So it seems to us this is a very positive agenda and we should pursue it with Brazil. I think you will see us doing that.

QUESTION: (Unintelligible) biggest oil producer today, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela (unintelligible) decision?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: It is. Energy has become a big diplomatic issue. Energy is -- it sometimes distorts and magnifies the power of a country beyond what it probably should be. In some cases that can be positive. In some cases it can be negative. We would say it is negative in terms of Iran and in terms of Venezuela. We should not want to be dependent on these countries forever. We should care about our environment and we should try to help diminish global climate change. So really, ethanol and biofuels have many, many advantages: economic, political, environmental. We really should pursue this together.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, the U.S. decided to (unintelligible) is talking about environment and the climate change globally. But the U.S. has always seemed like the big (unintelligible) trying to change an image. It's a very -- it's a really important issue inside of the U.S. today.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: It is. I'm glad you asked this question because this is a very interesting topic to me. I know that the image of the United States is we are not part of Kyoto, that we are responsible for a large percentage of greenhouse gases, you know? We understand this is a global problem for our generation, for our children, big problem. That we have a responsibility to be part of the solution. So I think you are going to see most Americans are environmentally conscious. There was a big campaign when I was a child, against litter, you know, throwing things in the street. A big campaign for unleaded gas. We were ahead of Europe on unleaded gas but we have fallen behind in some other areas. We have an obligation to diminish global climate change, and we can do it by relieving our addiction to oil and by developing renewable energy sources and clean energy. But I hope that your readers -- and this is why I thank you for asking the question -- will know that we are not the villain. It is a more nuanced picture. We have spent in government money, the U.S., since 2001, 29 billion U.S. dollars on research into clean energy technologies. So that is biofuels, nuclear power, clean coal technology. And this coming year, 2007, we will spend 6.5 billion. We spend more money than any other government in the world in trying to develop, in a sense, base new technologies that will help with climate change. So I hope people give us some credit for that. You know, we have not joined Kyoto. This was a decision not just by one man, George Bush. Our Senate, a hundred Senators, would have had to ratify the treaty and they would not do it. It was very unpopular in our country. I think what we have to do now is look ahead, we have to have a global discussion of how we can all contribute. India and China are not part of Kyoto, but they are the two largest emitters of carbon greenhouse gases along with my country. How can there be a solution on global climate change without India and China? I think you are going to see an evolving international debate where America will be at the center of it. I think you will see America trying to help be a positive partner with other countries to resolve the problem.

QUESTION: Do you think that other countries like Brazil, for example, is doing its part on climate change? You are talking about China and India that have to do something. What about Brazil?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: If I had to name one country in the world that is leading, it is Brazil, because of the ethanol production, because of the flex fuels. Eighty-two percent of your automobiles, I was told, will be flex fuel. Brazil is a leader and it is a positive leader. This is a good thing for the rest of us. I think Brazil is doing a very good thing. We met six governors just now. They all talked about this. They all talked about biofuels, climate change, as important issues for them. I think if you talk to American governors, you would get the same answer. America is becoming a greener country in a sense in this respect, in the consciousness of the people, that we all share the world. We all have to help take care of the world. We are not so

QUESTION: Well, I appreciate it.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Thank you very much.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Nice to meet you.

QUESTION: It was nice to meet you. Real pleasure.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Yes, a pleasure.