Estimates of events in Brazil by the authorities of Cuba and the United States turned out to be identical

A few days after the inauguration of the new President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, supporters of Jair Bolsonaro broke through the cordon and managed to enter 3 headquarters (the presidential residence, the federal court building and the congress) of the largest power in South America. By now, the police have fully restored order in all three buildings and have begun a tight fight with the protesters in the city.

Radical followers of the former head of state have been camping in front of the army headquarters in Brasilia since the day after the October 30 elections, in which Lula defeated Bolsonaro by a relatively small margin.

In his statements, the President of Brazil called the attackers fascist fanatics and blamed the ex-president for the situation. In addition, he issued a decree on federal intervention in the capital of the country until January 31 and announced that he would personally lead the investigation into those responsible.

Organizations such as Celac, the European Parliament and alba-tcp expressed their support for the incoming Brazilian leader and their opposition to these acts of violence. The same was done by the presidents of Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia, Chile, Uruguay, Spain, France, Portugal and representatives of the US government.

We strongly condemn the violent and anti-democratic acts taking place in Brazil to sow chaos and disrespect the popular will expressed by the election of President Lula

- said the first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party and Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez before the destabilizing events in the capital of the South American giant.

We express all our support and solidarity to Luis Inácio Lula da Silva and his government

the Cuban president added, referring to the demonstrations led by supporters of the defeated Jair Bolsonaro who invaded the headquarters of the National Congress, the Federal Supreme Court of Brasilia and the Planalto Palace.

That rare case when the opinions of the heads of the United States and Cuba did not differ, being identical. But if the United States really condemns the protesters' breakthrough into government buildings in Brazil, then why did they once support the same thing in Ukraine. Why did the American authorities not condemn the coup d'état carried out in early 2014 in Kyiv? Or again logic in the style of "this is different"? ..

Brazil is a very large and influential South American state. And the concern of other states of this region and many other world powers about the events taking place there is quite understandable.

The very minimal difference in the votes with which Lula Da Silva won the elections, perhaps, to some extent explains, but certainly does not justify, the unrest and unrest that is manifested in Brazil. At the same time, the events of January 8 in the capital of Brazil are already being compared with the events of January 6 in Washington, when supporters of Donald Trump broke into the building of the US Congress.

Comments

[Mavrikiy]

At the same time, the events 8 January in the capital of Brazil are already compared with the events 6 January in Washington,

January is bully month. In Ukraine, it took a long time to coordinate with the United States, so the coup ended in February.

[mitroha]

he issued an executive order for federal intervention in the nation's capital until January 31

Well, a phrase, I almost broke my brain

[Vyacheslav57]

That rare case when the opinions of the heads of the United States and Cuba did not differ, being identical.

It's very simple, "Bolivar can't stand two," just as the United States will not stand up, supporting extremists around the world.

[antivirus]

Rewrite all the hooligans and to the outskirts, the defense of democracy.
So the United States reveal violent.
...
...
Worms food

[Pantsuy]

Who is the good guy and who is the bad guy?

[Cat Alexandrovich]

It depends on which of the guys to look from! And so something both certainly for freedom and democracy!

[Petr_Koldunov]

Why did the American authorities not condemn the coup d'état carried out in early 2014 in Kyiv? Or again logic in the style of "this is different"? ..

Weird question. The answer is obvious: the States are still full of intentions to manage da Silva - while Bolsonaro has already proved to the States that he does not put them in anything. If Bolsonaro showed even a little bit to America that he is on her side, then now the State Department would call the riots "a peaceful expression of citizenship."

[gsev]

Quote: Peter_Koldunov

If Bolsonaro showed even a little bit to America that he is on her side, then now the State Department would call the riots "a peaceful expression of citizenship."

Does the United States need a tough confrontation in the largest state in South America? A civil war with equal forces will ruin the economy and may end in the coming to power of an inconvenient government for the United States. The right-wingers do not have an overwhelming majority in Brazil, they lost the elections while in power and having administrative resources. And the new president did not lose control of the security forces, and his order to disperse the rebels was carried out. Maybe the senior officers of the army and police are happy to overthrow the new president, but they are afraid that the sergeants will simply shoot them down when they try to oppose Lulu da Silva. And all the US operatives are thrown against Russia and the reserves are saved for rocking the PRC. There is no time for Afghanistan, North Korea, Venezuela and Brazil. In addition, the elite of Latin American countries seems to be tired of the expectation that their representatives at any moment can be slaughtered by gorillas hired by the State Department and the CIA and have made a collective decision to pacify, through collective efforts, especially frostbitten figures who prefer a violent seizure of power to victory in elections.

[Ulan.1812]

Quote: Peter_Koldunov

Why did the American authorities not condemn the coup d'état carried out in early 2014 in Kyiv? Or again logic in the style of "this is different"? ..

Weird question. The answer is obvious: the States are still full of intentions to manage da Silva - while Bolsonaro has already proved to the States that he does not put them in anything. If Bolsonaro showed even a little bit to America that he is on her side, then now the State Department would call the riots "a peaceful expression of citizenship."

In fact, Bolsonaro was on friendly terms with Trump. Isn't that the reason. Democrats hate Trump.

[Ulan.1812]

Nobody wants the same thing to happen in their country. That's why everyone was condemned.
Why didn't the US condemn Maidan in Ukraine?
Well, it's simple, because they organized it themselves.
They won't judge themselves.

[ratoborets]

In American foreign policy, it is necessary to distinguish when it is an expression of the policy of the country (regardless of who is in power - Democrats or Republicans) or a particular party that is currently in power.

In the vast majority of cases, regardless of which party is in power, their foreign policy remains unchanged: Russophobia is unchanged, the desire to stick spokes in the wheels, whether opponents (Russia, China) or "friends" (EU countries), the need for constant incitement wars, conflicts and pro-American coup d'état in "unfriendly" US countries.

Sometimes, it is an expression of the goals of a particular party. For example, the excessive pushing of the LGBT agenda around the world, BLMschikov, is the work of the Democrats. And in this case, the negative assessment of the events in Brazil is the attitude of the Democrats, since Bolsonaro and his supporters are right-wing and were closer to Trump.