Understanding Brazil: Twenty, or more, Lessons for Diplomacy (Part I of II)
Introduction
Over the next two installments, this column will feature an in-depth conversation with Dr. Clarita Costa Maia, a Brazilian legal scholar, international affairs specialist, and senior legislative advisor whose career bridges academia, diplomacy, and public policymaking.
Drawing on more than two decades of experience within the Brazilian Federal Senate, Dr. Maia offers a rare insider’s perspective on the institutions, political culture, and decision-making processes that shape Brazil’s domestic and foreign policy. Throughout this series, she explores the informal rules, cultural nuances, and institutional dynamics that foreign diplomats, particularly those serving in Brazil for the first time, often overlook.
Her central argument is straightforward: many diplomatic misunderstandings do not arise from conflicting interests, but from differing political cultures and contrasting expectations regarding institutions, personal relationships, and the exercise of public authority. Understanding these subtleties is essential for building durable bilateral partnerships.
The interview is intended not only for diplomats, but also for policymakers, scholars, journalists, and anyone interested in understanding how Latin America’s largest democracy actually functions beyond its constitutional framework.
About Dr. Clarita Costa Maia
Dr. Clarita Costa Maia serves as Legislative Consultant to the Federal Senate of Brazil, having specialized in International Relations and National Defense (2003–2015) and, since 2017, in Economic and Regulatory Law, Business Law, and Consumer Protection.
She has also served for three consecutive terms as Chair of the International Relations Committee of the Brazilian Bar Association, Federal District Chapter (OAB-DF), one of Brazil’s leading institutional forums for dialogue on international legal affairs.
Dr. Maia holds a Ph.D. in International Law (summa cum laude) from the University of São Paulo (USP) and an M.A. in the History of International Relations from the University of Brasília (UnB). She also earned an LL.M. from Berkeley Law (University of California, Berkeley), with Certificates in Law and Technology and Business Law.
Her postgraduate studies include specializations in International Humanitarian Law (University of Brasília and Ruhr University Bochum, Germany), the Multilateral Trading System (University of Buenos Aires), Foreign Exchange and International Trade (Getulio Vargas Foundation), and Constitutional Law (Brasiliense Institute of Public Law).
Throughout her career, Dr. Maia has combined academic research with public service, participating in national and international institutions dedicated to international law, strategic studies, international relations, and humanitarian law. Her work focuses on international security, foreign policy, defense, international humanitarian law, counterterrorism, constitutional law, and global governance.
Why This Conversation Matters
Brazil and Israel share decades of diplomatic cooperation and important historical ties. Yet misunderstandings frequently arise, sometimes not because of conflicting national interests, but because of different political cultures and institutional traditions.
Foreign diplomats often arrive in Brazil expecting institutions to operate according to familiar models. Instead, they encounter a political system in which formal constitutional structures coexist with powerful informal practices, personal networks, coalition-building, and distinctive cultural norms governing trust and negotiation.
One of the most common misconceptions concerns Brazilian interpersonal communication. Brazilians are generally warm, welcoming, and highly expressive. Terms such as “my friend,” “count on me,” or “let’s have dinner” are frequently used as expressions of courtesy rather than indicators of deep personal trust or political commitment. Diplomats unfamiliar with these cultural conventions may mistakenly interpret cordiality as strategic alignment or institutional support.
Likewise, understanding Brazilian foreign policy requires looking beyond the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The National Congress, the Supreme Federal Court, state governors, business leaders, universities, religious communities, civil society organizations, and the media all play increasingly influential roles in shaping Brazil’s international posture.
This interview series seeks to provide what many foreign observers lack: a practical guide to understanding the political culture, institutional architecture, and unwritten rules that influence decision-making in Brazil. Rather than focusing solely on constitutional provisions, it explores how Brazilian politics actually works, and what that means for diplomacy in practice.
Ultimately, this interview series seeks to bridge two worlds that are often understood separately: the subtle codes of everyday Brazilian social behavior and the deeper institutional logic that shapes the country’s political decision-making. By combining practical observations about interpersonal communication with a sophisticated analysis of Brazil’s constitutional architecture, legislative dynamics, and diplomatic culture, these conversations offer readers a more complete understanding of how Brazil functions in practice.
The premise is simple: effective diplomacy depends not only on knowing a country’s laws and institutions, but also on understanding its unwritten cultural norms. Together, these insights provide a practical framework for strengthening dialogue, reducing misunderstandings, and fostering more effective and enduring relations between Brazil and Israel.
Over twenty questions, Dr. Clarita Costa Maia offers reflections designed to help diplomats of all countries better understand their Brazilian counterparts, avoid common misinterpretations, and build stronger, more resilient institutional relationships between the two countries.
Silas- Clarita, thank you for accepting to participate in this interview
First of all, Silas, thank you very much for inviting me to participate in this interview. I sincerely hope our conversation will prove useful not only to Israeli diplomats, but also to diplomats from many other countries who seek a deeper understanding of Brazil and its political and cultural landscape.
Silas, this interview is particularly timely and significant, especially for Israel. At a moment when Israel’s diplomatic mission in Brazil is operating without an ambassador, the appointment of Rasha Athamini as Chargée d’Affaires offers an unexpected but valuable opportunity.
Her biography has been extremely well received by Brazilian audiences, who saw in her story a concrete and compelling example of Israel’s diversity. In that sense, her presence as the Embassy’s leading diplomatic voice may help reframe certain stereotypes about Israel and open a more nuanced conversation with Brazilian society.
Rasha Athmani is, as far as one can observe, highly respected and warmly regarded within the diplomatic and political communities in Brazil, which makes this moment especially promising for a more sophisticated and constructive engagement.
I perceive the Brazilian Jewish community as operating in an increasingly challenging political and social environment. In recent years, it has faced a noticeable rise in antisemitism, alongside growing efforts in parts of the public discourse to delegitimize both Israel and the Jewish community through narratives that often blur the distinction between legitimate political criticism and prejudice. This environment demands not only resilience but also strategic judgment.
For that reason, prudent conduct that minimizes unnecessary risks while maximizing opportunities for constructive engagement is essential.
This applies equally to community leaders, diplomatic personnel, and all those who, formally or informally, represent Israel or engage with issues related to Israel in Brazil.
Every public interaction, institutional partnership, and personal association has the potential to strengthen, or inadvertently undermine, the credibility of that broader effort. In such a context, professionalism, discretion, and careful assessment of reputational risks become indispensable components of effective public diplomacy.
I have had the privilege of serving for many years as a Legislative Consultant to the Federal Senate of Brazil, having been the youngest person in my generation to pass the Senate’s highly competitive entrance examination. Throughout my career, I have also been regularly consulted by members of diplomatic and consular missions on precisely the kinds of issues we will discuss here.
For that reason, I would like to make one point clear from the outset: nothing in this interview is directed specifically at the Israeli diplomatic missions.
The observations I share reflect concerns that have repeatedly emerged in my interactions with diplomats from a wide range of countries.
My answers are based on recurring questions and practical challenges that foreign missions have brought to me over the years, both in my capacity as a Legislative Consultant to the Federal Senate and as President of the International Relations Committee of the Brazilian Bar Association, Federal District Chapter (OAB-DF).
They are intended as practical reflections on diplomatic engagement in Brazil, rather than commentary on any country or mission.
What is the most basic mistake diplomats make when they arrive in Brazil?
The most fundamental mistake is failing to study the country before arriving. Ideally, foreign ministries should provide diplomats with at least a foundational course on both Brazil’s political system and its cultural nuances before posting them here.
In the absence of such preparation, diplomats would benefit greatly from identifying highly capable political advisers within the host country—individuals with the analytical skills and local knowledge necessary to navigate Brazil’s institutional and cultural complexities. These advisers are not always the locally hired staff. In fact, local employees often perform important administrative functions but may not possess the strategic insight or high-level analytical profile required to guide diplomatic decision-making.
Another common mistake is selecting advisers based on personal affinity rather than objective professional criteria. Trust built on personal chemistry alone can be misleading, particularly in an unfamiliar cultural environment.
How can Brazilian hospitality confuse diplomats from more direct cultures?
Brazilians are exceptionally welcoming toward foreigners. They are naturally curious, warm, and eager to make visitors feel at ease. This hospitality can be particularly confusing for diplomats from cultures that tend to communicate more directly and with greater emotional reserve, such as Israel or Germany. Israelis and Germans, for example, may mistakenly interpret Brazilian warmth as a sign of deeper friendship, personal loyalty, or long-term trust than is actually the case. It is an understandable misunderstanding—but also one of the most common and consequential mistakes foreign diplomats make in Brazil.
Do the foreign missions generate particular attention in Brasília and how can it be misleading?
Brasília is not only Brazil’s political capital but also a major hub for business and institutional relations. As a result, anyone serving on the staff of a foreign embassy naturally becomes an object of curiosity. Law firms, companies, consultants, and countless organizations will seek introductions, hoping to establish contacts that may eventually lead to contracts, partnerships, or business opportunities. Diplomats often find themselves surrounded by a certain degree of attention and deference.
This attention has its limits and its premises. It should not be mistaken for genuine personal esteem or enduring influence. Quite often, diplomats overestimate the significance of the attention they receive. They may fall into the trap of believing that they have acquired greater personal standing than they actually possess, or that they are building deep personal relationships when, in reality, they are not.
Aren’t the warmth and openness of Brazilians actually an advantage for foreign diplomats?
Brazilians employ the word “friend”, “best friend” and even “I love you, my friend” very generously. In many contexts, what is literally translated as friend simply means someone they know, someone with whom they have a cordial relationship.
A diplomat may therefore come to believe that he has become a close personal friend of influential figures—perhaps because he has visited their homes or hosted them at their own—when, from the Brazilian perspective, the relationship remains one of cordial acquaintance rather than genuine intimacy.
This subtle but important difference in cultural codes is particularly difficult to convey to Israelis. Israeli society generally draws much sharper distinctions between acquaintances, colleagues, and true friends.
In Brazil, those boundaries are considerably more fluid, and failing to recognize that distinction can lead diplomats to misread both the depth of their relationships and the extent of their actual influence.
Some individuals may present themselves as close friends or trusted confidants of highly influential public figures. However, those very figures would often neither describe the relationship in similar terms nor recognize the level of intimacy being claimed.
This asymmetry can create a significant reputational vulnerability. Before foreign diplomats realize what is happening, they may find themselves as individuals whose actual credibility, access, or influence is far more limited than initially portrayed.
Careful due diligence and parsimony about their own supposed credentials is therefore indispensable if credibility is a pursuit.
Why is proximity to power not the same as political competence?
Confusing bureaucratic competence, or even expertise in other fields of knowledge, with political competence is very common mistake.
I often illustrate this with a simple analogy: someone who dines at a five-star Michelin restaurant three times a week does not become a chef. At most, they learn to distinguish an exceptional dish from a mediocre or a poor one. They may develop refined taste, but they do not acquire the skills required to create the cuisine itself.
The same principle applies to politics. Merely circulating within the circles of mid-level or even high politics does not make someone a political actor, nor does it confer political judgment or strategic instinct.
Yet diplomats can sometimes fall into this trap. Exposure to influential figures may foster an illusion of political mastery, occasionally reinforced by a degree of vanity or fascination with proximity to power.
This misconception can be fatal. A diplomat may believe they are shaping politics when, in reality, they are simply part of someone else’s carefully orchestrated political theatre.
They may think they are influencing the dinner conversation, when in fact they are the one being served at the table.
What are the specific mistakes an Israeli diplomat may make upon arriving in Brazil?
One of the most common mistakes is to assume that Brazil’s evangelical community is politically, socially, or theologically homogeneous. It is not. Just as Israel has groups such as Neturei Karta, whose views represent a very particular segment of Israeli society and cannot reasonably be taken as representative of the country as a whole, Brazil’s evangelical world is extraordinarily diverse.
Attempting to understand it through the perspective of a single denomination, pastor, or religious leader is likely to produce serious analytical errors and, ultimately, an inefficient and costly diplomatic strategy.
Different evangelical communities possess different forms of influence. Some are led by individuals of considerable economic means who require no external support to engage internationally or to engage in missions to Israel. Others may have fewer financial resources but possess remarkable credibility within their communities, significant persuasive power, and extensive social reach. Understanding these distinctions is essential.
Another widespread mistake, one that extends well beyond diplomacy, is confusing social media visibility with genuine political influence. In Brazil, a large online following is not necessarily an indicator of real-world political capital. We have seen candidates for the Federal Chamber of Deputies with more than two million social media followers who nevertheless failed to secure even 15,000 votes. Followers are not necessarily supporters. They may simply be observers, critics, or individuals who are curious about a public figure. Digital visibility should therefore never be used as a substitute for a careful assessment of a person’s actual capacity to influence institutions, mobilize constituencies, or shape public policy.
Why is engagement with the Executive Branch alone insufficient?
Brazilian Constitution entrusts the conduct of foreign policy to the President of the Republic, but Brazil’s institutional ecosystem is far broader and far more complex. Congress, the judiciary, civil society organizations, professional associations, universities, and policy institutes all play meaningful roles in shaping public debate and, in many cases, public policy.
For that reason, mapping Brazil’s ecosystem of influence is a strategic necessity. Diplomatic missions should identify the country’s leading think tanks, major civil society organizations, influential parliamentary committees, and professional institutions, and follow their activities closely.
This mapping cannot be informal, anecdotal, or based on hearsay, personal impressions, or the recommendations of individual acquaintances. It must be conducted through a systematic, evidence-based, and professional methodology, continuously updated to reflect the evolving dynamics of Brazil’s political, institutional, and social landscape.
Why should the Brazilian Bar Association be included in a professional influence map?
The Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) enjoys a unique constitutional status and has historically played an important role in defending the rule of law, constitutional order, and democratic institutions.
The most professional missions devote great attention to OAB, yet some others, less professional, devote little attention to engaging with it. More broadly, this illustrates that many foreign missions still possess only a partial if any understanding of Brazil’s constitutional architecture and of where influence is actually exercised.
Effective diplomacy in Brazil requires a sophisticated map of the country’s formal and informal centers of power.
What is the first strategic risk of misreading Brazilian cultural codes?
The first risk is that they may be misled on matters of genuine importance to the interests of their own state. A diplomat may mistake cordiality for loyalty and assume that certain individuals are acting in good faith when, in reality, they are pursuing their own personal, or even hidden, agendas. Effective diplomacy depends not only on gathering information but also on accurately assessing motivations.
Why is identifying potential adversaries difficult in Brazil?
In Brazil, disagreement or even opposition is not always expressed directly. Individuals may remain exceptionally courteous and outwardly supportive while privately working against a diplomat’s objectives. Those who are accustomed to more direct forms of communication can easily overlook these dynamics.
How can reputational risk distort diplomatic reporting?
Diplomats may come to believe—or even present to their own governments—that they enjoy close personal relationships or privileged access to influential figures when, in reality, those relationships are far more superficial. Decisions based on an inflated perception of one’s network or influence can distort reporting, undermine credibility, and ultimately weaken the quality of diplomatic engagement.
Why is Brasília’s small social environment especially sensitive?
Brasília’s society is really small. Despite being the capital of one of the world’s largest democracies, Brasília functions much like a close-knit village: information travels quickly, reputations are built over years, and they can be damaged overnight.
For that reason, even what may appear to be a minor misunderstanding, an indiscreet remark, or a seemingly insignificant personal controversy can spread rapidly through political and diplomatic circles, leaving lasting consequences for a diplomat’s credibility and effectiveness. In Brasília, reputation is one of a diplomat’s most valuable assets. It must be cultivated patiently and protected carefully, because once trust is compromised, the effects tend to outlast the incident itself.
