At what stage do you find Argentina’s relations with Brazil and Mercosur?
The recent Mercosur Summit [last month in Buenos Aires] had positive results. The external negotiations with EFTA [European Free Trade Association, composed of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland] were concluded and advances made with the United Arab Emirates, with many [other] countries interested.
For Argentina, the most important aspect of Mercosur today are the commercial issues and over those we are in agreement. Brazil also has other priorities, which we’re going to develop under the Brazilian presidency.
Argentina is negotiating a trade agreement with the United States. Does that affect Mercosur?
Argentina is seeking agreements under Mercosur rules. That happens due to the decision taken at the Summit to add to the exceptions to the common [external]) tariff. We have no problems with that.
What do you expect from the links between Argentina and Brazil for the next few years and what is the commercial perspective?
In commercial terms there has been a slump. In 2011 we reached the peak of bilateral trade with around US$40 billion annually. That has gone down to US$22 billion; in recent years it has come close to US$30 billion. If we manage an agreement for Vaca Muerta gas to reach Brazil in competitive and stable terms, that could have an important impact on the balance of trade.
Which is favourable to Brazil…
If you look at commercial issues seeking surplus everywhere, it does not add up. International trade cannot only be surplus. What countries do is seek surplus with some partners and accept deficit with others. We’re interested in the gas of Vaca Muerta; if that has an impact on the balance of trade and we cease having a surplus, that is no problem.
Are Brazilian companies interested in investing in Argentina?
There is interest. Brazil’s private and productive sector is looking at Argentina, which is a natural market as a neighbour, partner and friend. But some macroeconomic questions remain pending before taking certain decisions.
When [Brazil President Luiz Inácio] Lula Da Silva visited Argentina, he went to visit [ex-president] Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. The reverse happened with Jair Bolsonaro and Javier Milei. How should those movements be read?
Things should be seen for what they are. President Lula always said that his visit to Cristina was private, to a friend who was going through a rough time. It was a display of solidarity with a person to whom he has been linked for a long time.
Does President Lula believe that Cristina’s situation [being jailed, served under house arrest, on corruption charges] is similar to his?
He never made that comparison. And that is very important because the President never passed judgement on a decision of Argentine courts, nor did he comment on the Argentine government’s role in all that. It was a private visit to a person having a rough time.
What’s it like working in Argentina with a government with such a different ideology, aligned with Israel and Donald Trump?
Different stances are normal between countries. It is quite clear that the governments of Brazil and Argentina take different stances. But in no way does that imply any contamination of the bilateral agenda, which continues to be fine.
Any chance of a bilateral meeting or a summit between Milei and Lula at any time?
I cannot rule out that happening in the future. But I believe holding the bilateral relationship hostage to whether there is that bilateral meeting or not to be a mistake. Nothing should be forced but the relationship does not depend on that.
Comments