Amorim warns of erosion of international law in The Economist

In an article on The EconomistCelso Amorim compares the global crisis to the principle of uncertainty and warns of the risk of a world without rules and predictability

In an increasingly unpredictable world, Celso Amorim, international advisor to President Lula, publishes an impactful article in The Economist. He compares current geopolitics to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, highlighting how military interventions, such as the recent one in Venezuela, undermine global stability. Amorim defends multilateralism and sovereignty, positioning Brazil as a leader in the search for peaceful solutions.

The text reflects concerns about the decline of international law, especially after events in Caracas that evoke dark memories of past coups. Amorim argues that external powers ignore established norms, such as the United Nations Charter, and this threatens peace in South America. He emphasizes the need to diversify partnerships and invest in technological autonomy for developing countries.

Furthermore, the article celebrates advances such as the Mercosur-European Union agreement, the result of long negotiations. Amorim criticizes foreign interventions and calls for reforms in global institutions to give a voice to the Global South. This vision reinforces Brazil’s commitment to peace and dialogue, even in turbulent times.

Intervention in Venezuela shakes regional confidence

Explosions in Caracas in the early hours of January 3 mark a breaking point. They destroy the illusion that South America remains an oasis of peace. Images of military planes over the capital create a surreal and unprecedented scenario. Furthermore, the kidnapping of a sitting president is more reminiscent of the capture of Saddam Hussein than the Latin American coups of the 1960s and 1970s.

For example, the death of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 carried a heroic tone, something missing now. Most people in the region viewed military interventions as relics of the past. However, between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, external powers used naval blockades to protect private interests. This happened before modern international law was consolidated.

Therefore, instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the UN Charter prohibited such acts. They are based on sovereign equality and prohibit the use of force against territories. Even in the Cold War, disputes over spheres of influence prevented flagrant border violations. However, intelligence agencies secretly interfered, overthrowing governments under anti-communist pretexts.

At the end of the 20th century, the region was committed to economic integration. She transformed peace into development. But that trust evaporates now. The intervention in Venezuela raises the question: how to survive in a world without rules?

Erosion of international law threatens everyone

Pillars of international law crumble. They regulated collective security, trade and human rights. Now, simultaneous erosion weakens them. Once started, reversing it is difficult. Many experts warn: we have returned to a Hobbesian state. In it, military strength defines real independence. War is once again a legitimate means of change.

When laws between countries are lacking, unpredictability becomes power. She intimidates. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle from quantum physics resonates here. Werner Heisenberg formulated: particle position and momentum do not know each other precisely at the same time. Today, we apply this to States: anything can happen at any moment.

Countries rethink national strategies. Brazil opts for broad cooperation. It opens up to partners from Latin America to the BRICS and beyond. For nations in general, diversifying partnerships and technological autonomy is essential. Furthermore, engaging multilateral institutions preserves existing norms.

Respect for sovereignty and non-intervention persist as principles. We learn from history. Military intervention does not solve challenges. Peaceful dialogue prioritizes solutions.

Brazil bets on peace and integration

Brazil enshrines peace in its Constitution. Nuclear energy serves only peaceful purposes. Controversies are resolved without violence. Regional integration guides the way. Even adversity doesn’t change that.

Mercosur-European Union Agreement gains prominence. Celso Amorim and Durão Barroso dreamed of it 30 years ago. Imperfect result, but proof: respectful negotiations work. Mercosur signs pacts with Singapore and the European Free Trade Association.

Reform of international institutions is urgent. Global South needs representation. Global balance requires authentic voices. Europe, China and others contribute to positive multipolarity. Brazil collaborates with them. Together, they prevent violence and anarchy.

Celso Amorim advises Lula internationally. He served as Foreign Minister in 1993-1994 and 2003-2010. Defense came in 2011-2014.

Full text of Celso Amorim’s article in The Economist:

“How can we live in a world without rules?

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle has reached geopolitics, writes Celso Amorim, Brazilian presidential advisor

While explosions echoed in Caracas, capital of Venezuela, in the early hours of January 3, something else was shattered: the certainty that South America is, and will continue to be, a continent of peace. The sight of flames and military aircraft over a South American capital was both unprecedented and tragically surreal.

The images of the forced kidnapping of a sitting president are more reminiscent of the capture of Saddam Hussein, the late leader of Iraq, than the coups d’état of the 1960s and 1970s in Latin America. Even the death of President Salvador Allende during the bloody coup d’état in Chile in 1973 was enveloped in an aura of heroism, totally absent in the present case.

For most people in the region, foreign military intervention seemed like a thing of the past. Between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, powers outside South America sometimes resorted to naval blockades or threats of force to protect private interests. This occurred before the major developments in international law in the 20th century. Such interventions were only possible — or so we thought — before the consolidation of legal instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, arbitration mechanisms and, of course, the United Nations Charter, which is based on the principle of sovereign equality of States and prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State.

Even during the Cold War, disputes over the limits of so-called spheres of influence in South America did not lead to flagrant violations of national borders. This restraint, however, did not prevent covert interventions by foreign intelligence agencies, including support for the overthrow of elected governments under the pretext of combating communism. Nevertheless, at the end of the 20th century, the region laid the foundations for economic integration, finally channeling decades of peace into development. That confidence, however, dissipated.

The intervention in Venezuela raises a broader question that increasingly defines international politics: how can we live in a world without rules? Pillars of international law designed to regulate collective security, discipline global trade and promote human rights are being undermined simultaneously. Erosion, once started, is difficult to reverse. As many have said, we are heading back towards a Hobbesian state, where military force is the main determinant of a country’s de facto independence and in which war is once again seen as a legitimate means of change.

When there are no laws regulating relations between countries, unpredictability itself becomes a formidable source of power and intimidation. The “uncertainty principle”, developed within the scope of quantum physics, seems to have found an echo in international relations. Formulated by Werner Heisenberg, a German physicist, this theory states that the position and momentum of a particle cannot be known simultaneously with precision. We can now say the same about the behavior of States: anything can happen at any time.

We live in a time when countries around the world are rethinking their national strategies. The current geopolitical scenario reinforces Brazil’s choice to open up to cooperation with a wide range of partners, from Latin America to the BRICS and beyond. For most countries, investing in the diversification of partnerships and technological autonomy will continue to be the best path. The same applies to continued engagement with existing multilateral institutions, preserving what can still be maintained of established norms and principles.

Respect for sovereignty and non-intervention must not be abandoned. We must learn from history. Even in the most challenging circumstances, foreign intervention — especially military intervention — is not the answer. The search for peaceful solutions through dialogue must remain the priority.

Brazil made an existential bet on peace. The use of nuclear energy exclusively for peaceful purposes is enshrined in our Constitution, as is the peaceful resolution of disputes and the search for regional integration. This is the path that Brazil has chosen and intends to follow even in adverse circumstances.

The signing of the long-awaited trade agreement between Mercosur and the European Union — an agreement that my good friend Durão Barroso (then Portuguese Minister of Foreign Affairs) and I began dreaming about some 30 years ago — takes on even greater significance in this context. The result may not fully satisfy all 31 countries involved. However, it demonstrates that respectful negotiations, even if long and arduous, are still the best path. Mercosur also recently finalized trade agreements with Singapore and the European Free Trade Association (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland).

We must continue to work for reform of international institutions, in particular to address the relative lack of representation of the Global South. International balance depends on all actors, including Europe, having an authentic and independent voice on the world stage and contributing to positive and open multipolarity. Brazil will continue to work with Europe, China and other countries committed to multilateral institutions and the primacy of international law. Let us hope that, together, we can avoid a further descent into violence and anarchy.

Celso Amorim is the main international advisor to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil. He was the country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs from 1993 to 1994 and from 2003 to 2010, and Minister of Defense from 2011 to 2014.”