Even though just two days ago the Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva He had asked him to stop saying “nonsense” and to “apologize” for the insults against him and his country, Javier Milei insisted and reloaded with grievances that leave Argentina closer to a new diplomatic conflict. He once again described his partner as “corrupt” and “communist”, and in a shot by elevation he called him “a lefty” with “an inflamed ego.”
“What are the problems? I told him he was ‘corrupt’? Wasn’t he imprisoned for being corrupt? I told him he was a ‘communist’? Isn’t he one?”the President launched as if ignoring that issue and in advance of the next Mercosur Summit where both will meet face to face.
“The things I said above are true”he reinforced in case it was not clear and recharged the tension with a sharper expression: “The interests of Argentines and Brazilians are more important than the inflamed ego of some lefty”.
The counterpoint with the president of Argentina’s main trading partner was born during the electoral campaign when, upset by Lula’s support for Sergio Massathe then candidate Milei accused him of “corrupt” for having been imprisoned for a crime that could never be reliably provenand that was linked to the Lava Jato political operation.
Also He called him a “communist” but in the McCarthyist sense of the termdue to his left-wing political affiliation.
Political relations between Brazil and Argentina cooled when Milei took office and there were enormous efforts to maintain trade ties. Even so, there is no relationship between the two leaders.
Last Tuesday, during an interview with UOL, Lula was asked about the Argentine president and his political ties to Bolsonarism. Milei “has to apologize to Brazil and to me. He said a lot of nonsense. I just want you to apologize.”said the Brazilian president.
“Argentina is important for Brazil and Brazil is very important for Argentina” and no president “will create trouble” between both countries because “the Brazilian people and the Argentine people are more important than the presidents,” he defined.
“Inflamed ego”
Far from building bridges, Milei not only did not apologize (until now) but he added an additive to the terms that for Lula were an offense. During an interview on LN+ he said:
“The truth is that it is such a small discussion. It sounds like a discussion between pre-adolescent children. The same mechanism of (Gustavo) Petro, of (Pedro) Sánchez”, his counterparts from Colombia and Spain, respectively, whom he insulted and promoted a diplomatic fracture that remains exposed.
He then continued: “Do you think that Lula did not do similar things? Petro and Lula did similar things, actively interfering in our campaign,” he said, referring to the support that both had given to the former candidate of Unión por la Patria (UxP) in the 2023 presidential elections.
“The things I said above are true. What are the problems, that I told you corrupt? Wasn’t he arrested for corruption? “What did I say to him as a communist? Isn’t he one?” He shot back and refused to apologize that Lula suggested.
“Since when do you have to apologize for telling the truth? Or are we so sick of political correctness that we can’t tell the left the truth?
For Milei, “those who lied demand an apology for having told the truth. Come on!” We must rise above these trivialities because the interests of Argentines and Brazilians are more important than the inflated ego of some leftist.“.
With the Pope it shrunk
After lashing out at his Latin American counterpart, Milei acknowledged that it was a “mistake” to have insulted Pope Francis. Before being elected president, the leader of La Libertad Avanza (LLA) had also described him as a “communist” and “representative of evil on earth.”
“I was wrong because I was telling him something because I thought differently or because I had a reading of the sacred scriptures that I don’t have.”was the strange argument that the president used to refer to the issue.
He then indicated that The Supreme Pontiff “has a vision of things that is directly opposite” to what he hasbut acknowledged that this “did not merit his using the qualifiers” that he used.
“You don’t have to buy my argument from Samuel 8 or St. Luke”he said without further ado and assigned the Pope’s questions with “a Jesuit’s perspective” in which it is formed.
And I add: “I fell into the trap of believing that it was a question of why he is a Peronist. That’s why I answered the way I did, but when I began to understand the subject of the Holy Scriptures, I understood it.” “We have the same vision on some things and not on others,” he concluded.
