31ª edição da Revista Sapientia

E aí, cacdistas, como vocês estão após a 1ª fase? Agora que a prova objetiva e o prazo de recursos já passaram, é hora de retomar o ritmo de estudos. Independente da sua nota (se é suficiente para a próxima fase ou não), é importante recalcular a rota! Se você quer saber mais sobre como dar o próximo passo, a Priscila Zillo promoveu um encontro ao vivo ontem na plataforma Quero Ser Diplomata para falar sobre como continuar a sua jornada. A gravação da aula especial está disponível na plataforma e o cadastro é rápido, fácil, seguro e gratuito. E um recado especial para aqueles que ficaram acima da projeção de nota de corte (btw, parabéns!): os cursos Maratona 2ª Fase (Português e Inglês) e Maratona 3ª Fase já estão com matrículas abertas. São poucas semanas até as próximas provas, então não há tempo a perder!

Mas o post de hoje não é para falar somente sobre os próximos passos. Também é para divulgar a já conhecida (e querida) Revista Sapientia! Quem fez a prova da 1ª Fase deve ter recebido ou, pelo menos, visto a revista em mãos já que foram distribuídos exemplares nos locais de prova de todo o Brasil. Mas, se você não recebeu uma, não fique triste: a 31ª edição está disponível para download! Basta clicar na imagem abaixo para garantir a sua – e veja como vale a pena!

  • corpo-do-texto-revista-sapientia-edicao-31-lilia.pngEntrevista de capa com Lilia Moritz Schwarcz, referência para o estudo de História do Brasil no CACD;
  • Artigo do professor Ivo Yonamine sobre a a representação da cidade de São Paulo nas obras de Mário de Andrade e Oswald de Andrade;
  • Opinião crítica do professor José Luiz Pimenta Jr sobre o Brasil e os acordos preferenciais de comércio;
  • Análise do professor Guilherme Casarões sobre a guerra civil síria;
  • Entrevista com o jornalista e mestre em Políticas de Integração da América Latina, Marco Piva, sobre os rumos da integração latino-americana;
  • Depoimento da diplomata Marianna Brück Goulart sobre sua trajetória até a aprovação no CACD 2016.

Baixe gratuitamente a revista e leve no seu bolso uma fonte rica de conteúdo sobre o CACD e os bastidores da carreira diplomática.

Gabarito preliminar e plataforma Quero Ser Diplomata

Não adianta: todo dia de liberação de gabarito é dia de tensão para os cacdistas. Temos certeza que candidatos de todo Brasil apertaram insistentemente o botão F5 do computador, esperando que o gabarito preliminar fosse disponibilizado. E depois de muita espera (e vários alguns chocolates para segurar a ansiedade), finalmente foi divulgado o gabarito preliminar da 1ª fase do CACD 2017!

giphy1
– Se você ainda não conferiu, pode acessar diretamente na página do Cespe.

Agora começa a emoção: conferir respostas, somar pontos, ver o que cabe recurso, tentar descobrir a nota de corte, …

giphy

É muita coisa junto! Mas calma que o Sapientia vai te ajudar 😉

Pensando nisso tudo, a equipe do curso Sapientia desenvolveu a plataforma Quero Ser Diplomata para auxiliar na preparação dos candidatos ao CACD. A plataforma conta com várias funções para facilitar a vida do cacdista:

  • Cálculo preciso da nota do candidato (quem nunca errou na hora do +/- 0.25, né mesmo?)
  • Previsão da nota de corte (ai meu ❤️)
  • Professores especialistas na preparação corrigindo as provas e comentando o gabarito preliminar (porque fazer recurso é de lei)
  • Conteúdos gratuitos em vídeo e em texto (free content = life)
  • Orientação para todos os níveis de preparação e muito mais!

 

Além de todas as funcionalidades citadas, dentro do Quero Ser Diplomata você poderá acompanhar a Semana de Correções Comentadas. Serão 8 dias seguidos com os professores do Curso Sapientia corrigindo manualmente todas as disciplinas cobradas na 1ª Fase.

É a sua oportunidade de entender exatamente o motivo dos erros e acertos durante todo o TPS!

Para conhecer a plataforma e fazer o cadastro, basta clicar na imagem abaixo. É fácil, rápido, gratuito e seguro! Suas informações estarão protegidas no nosso sistema e não serão compartilhadas em hipótese nenhuma (cadastro 100% sigiloso). Acesse agora e deixe que o “Quero ser diplomata” ajude a tornar o seu querer em realidade muito mais rápido.

sinal alertaLembrete! Não custa nada relembrar o cronograma daqui em diante né? Se você ainda não viu, o blog Sapi fez um post com todas as informações essenciais para o concurso de 2017, inclusive as datas. Nesse momento, é importante lembrar que o candidato pode interpor recursos entre os dias 16 e 17 de agosto e o resultado final da 1ª Fase estará disponível na data provável de 31 de agosto.

sistema-quero-ser-diplomata-cacd-itamaraty.png

 

Todd’s Challenge: Answer Key

Hello, hello! We’re back with the answer key for our pre-TPS Mock Exam.
(If you missed the challenge, you can see the test here)

Text I:

Sequencing presents a second problem. Mr Barnier insists on settling the bill and other divorce terms before substantial talks on the much bigger matter of a post-Brexit settlement, including a trade deal, can begin. But British officials want to negotiate in parallel, and perhaps to link the departure sum to the degree of access Britain will enjoy to the EU’s single market after it leaves. The law lends Britain half a hand: Article 50 says that a departing country’s withdrawal agreement shall take account of “the framework for its future relationship” with the EU. But hardliners like France insist on keeping the two issues apart. And with only two years to conclude an Article 50 deal, Britain cannot waste time talking about talks.

Some British officials note that the other EU governments can tweak Mr Barnier’s negotiating guidelines if they find his line too tough. Britain might seek to exploit this by offering sweeteners: defence co-operation with the Baltics, perhaps, or infrastructure grants to Poland. The trouble is that reducing Britain’s bill means cuts to the overall budget, which would irk countries that do well from it, or extra payments from the wealthier governments to make up the shortfall. That creates an unusual alignment of interests among the 27. “If there’s one thing net payers and net recipients agree on, it’s to make the bill for Britain as high as possible,” says an EU official.

Most governments do not rule out a compromise. German officials, for example, will consider opening trade talks before the divorce is settled, so long as Britain accepts the principle that it has obligations that extend beyond its departure. As for the figure itself, like all EU budgetary negotiations it will be resolved via late-night Brussels summitry. “It’s like buying a carpet in Morocco,” says Jean-Claude Piris, a former head of the EU Council’s legal service. “The figures are always negotiable.”

But there are reasons to fear a breakdown. Theresa May, the prime minister, has done little to prepare voters for this debate. Neither her speeches nor the government’s white paper on Brexit have said anything about an exit payment. A whopping financial demand will therefore inflame Britain’s tabloids, limiting her room for manoeuvre. More worryingly, both sides believe they hold the whip hand. British officials think the hole Brexit blows in the EU’s budget will force the Europeans into compromise for fear of getting nothing if the talks derail. EU officials, for their part, are convinced that the prospect of no withdrawal agreement, and therefore no trade deal, will terrify Britain into submission. “They’ll be begging on their knees at the WTO,” says one.

The EU is skilled at brokering compromise on budgets. Perhaps that will prove true for the Article 50 talks, too. But two things set the upcoming negotiation aside. First, there is no precedent. Second, goodwill towards Britain has largely evaporated; it will be negotiating with the EU as a third country, not a partner. Informal meetings between British and European officials have already witnessed blazing rows. About the only thing the sides agree on is that they may be heading for deadlock.

Source: “From Brussels with love: The multi-billion-euro exit charge that could sink Brexit talks”, The Economist Print Edition, Feb 10, 2017

1) Determine if the following statements can be inferred from the above text.

  1. The expression “The law lends Britain half a hand” (p.1) implies that Article 50 shall grant Britain partial trade access to the EU’s single market upon its departure.FALSE
  2. By the expression “seek to exploit this by offering sweeteners” (p.2), one can assume that negotiation parameters with other EU nations may well occur through the offering of luring bribes and concessions. – FALSE
  3. The expression “It’s like buying a carpet in Morocco” suggests that bargaining will figure prominently within the forthcoming Britain-EU compromise. – TRUE
  4. It can be inferred that the long-term partnership between the EU and Britain is quickly fading due to a lack of a prior precedent on which to base the final decision on Article 50. – FALSE

2) Determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. The expression a whopping financial demand can be substituted by a massive pecuniary burden without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence. – TRUE
  2. The expression hold the whip hand bears a metaphorical relationship with the act of a slave’s torture. FALSE
  3. The expression blazing rows can be replaced by explosive quarrels without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence. TRUE
  4. The expression heading for deadlock can be replaced by on route to a debacle without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence. – FALSE

3) According to the above text, determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. AS the EU is adept at negotiating budgetary settlements, it may well prove adroit in negotiating the provisions of Article 50 as well. – TRUE

The EU is skilled at brokering compromise on budgets. Perhaps that will prove true for the Article 50 talks, too.

2. Failure in Article 50 talks are looming due to May’s ill-prepared actions to achieve a smooth Brexit without having to pay a heavy exit payment. – FALSE

But there are reasons to fear a breakdown. Theresa May, the prime minister, has done little to prepare voters for this debate. Neither her speeches nor the government’s white paper on Brexit have said anything about an exit payment.

3. Germany appears willing to negotiate trade with Britain provided that Britain fulfills its pre-departure responsibilities. – TRUE

Most governments do not rule out a compromise. German officials, for example, will consider opening trade talks before the divorce is settled, so long as Britain accepts the principle that it has obligations that extend beyond its departure.

4. Should the Article 50 talks fall by the wayside, Brexit’s financial burden upon the EU budget will sway the EU into accepting Britain’s international trade demands. – FALSE (this is what British officials think)

A whopping financial demand will therefore inflame Britain’s tabloids, limiting her room for manoeuvre. More worryingly, both sides believe they hold the whip hand. British officials think the hole Brexit blows in the EU’s budget will force the Europeans into compromise for fear of getting nothing if the talks derail. EU officials, for their part, are convinced that the prospect of no withdrawal agreement, and therefore no trade deal, will terrify Britain into submission. “They’ll be begging on their knees at the WTO,” says one.

——————————————————————————————————

Text II:

IT WAS a tableau to sum up an age. Leaders of the world’s 20 main industrial powers, plus a dusting of international institutions and secondary powers, posed for a photo at the Hamburg Congress Centre. In the middle, among the testosteroid ranks of Putins and Trumps, Erdogans and Xis, was Angela Merkel; calm and composed, her fingers bridged in their distinctive rhombus. Look back over the past years of global turmoil—terror, wars, financial crises, political upheavals—and that rhombus is one of the few constants. A sturdy pinnacle in an uncertain age; a bridge in more senses than one.

The photo taken, the G20 leaders spilled into the conference room. Mrs Merkel bustled through the throng, talking first with Vladimir Putin, then with Emmanuel Macron and Donald Trump, then with Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk. She called the company to order and opened the discussion, stressing that Hamburg (where she was born) is a maritime city, a symbol of the “networked world” at stake in the coming talks. She explained the symbolic value of the summit’s icon, the reef knot: “The more strain on its ends, the tighter it becomes.”

Surveying the scene it was tempting to conclude that a unilateralist America, a withdrawing Britain, a still-recovering France, a revisionist Russia and a not-yet-dominant China make Mrs Merkel not just the chair of this particular summit, but something more: the new leader of the free world. Recent pieces in the Washington Post, the Los Angeles TimesNewsweek, the IndependentUSA Today and Politico have all floated or even endorsed the designation. When Barack Obama paid a final presidential visit to Berlin in November, it was said that he was unofficially anointing Mrs Merkel his successor as guardian of the global order.

My piece in this week’s issue of The Economist challenges the label, for which Berlin has neither the appetite nor the means. For one thing, even booming Germany lacks America’s economic weight. That its welcome “Marshall Plan for Africa” is so modest compared with both the scale of the task and the original Marshall Plan makes that much clear. Moreover, the country is still hamstrung by its history. As Jan Techau of the American Academy in Berlin puts it to me: the Nazi past still causes Germans to “lack faith in their own good intentions”. Partly for this reason, the country remains relatively allergic to military force; it spends just 1.2% of it GDP on defence (as Mr Trump likes to complain) and so cannot undergird its diplomatic positions with hard power.

The G20 summit dramatises these realities. The final statement is likely to be vague. It may carry asterisks exempting America from environmental passages. There is even a chance that Mr Trump will not sign it at all. Whether other rich countries will commit meaningfully to Mrs Merkel’s plan for Africa is still uncertain. Unlike the chancellor, most still see turbulence on that continent primarily as a security rather than a development issue.

Most significant will be the bilateral meetings. Will Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping find common ground on their border disputes and China’s contentious “One Belt One Road” trade plan? Will Turkey and Saudi Arabia make any progress on Syria? Will Theresa May reach new understandings with her EU counterparts on Brexit? Will Mr Trump’s first meeting with Mr Putin prompt a deal on Ukraine? Progress on such questions—unlikely to feature among the concluding annoucements here in Hamburg tomorrow—matters so much because we are in what the political scientist Ian Bremmer calls a “G-Zero” world; one in which no country or bloc can shape or direct global events. The era of the cacophony is upon us.

Source: “The postmodern power: Angela Merkel, the G-Zero chancellor”, by J.C., The Economist.com, Jul 7th, 2017.

4) Which of the following statements can be inferred from the above text?

  1. The opening expression of “IT WAS a tableau to sum up an age,” (p.1) is a clear criticism of the raunchy depiction provided by international tabloids to the most recent G-20 summit. – FALSE

IT WAS a tableau to sum up an age. Leaders of the world’s 20 main industrial powers, plus a dusting of international institutions and secondary powers, posed for a photo at the Hamburg Congress Centre.

2. The reference to the “G-Zero” world (p.6) is used to exemplify the jangling discord within the present-day reality and the lack of any prominent world leader to shape the global world order. – TRUE

Progress on such questions—unlikely to feature among the concluding annoucements here in Hamburg tomorrow—matters so much because we are in what the political scientist Ian Bremmer calls a “G-Zero” world; one in which no country or bloc can shape or direct global events. The era of the cacophony is upon us.

3. The reference to a “reef knot” (p.2) is a blatant slight on the author’s part to show Angela Merkel’s incapacity to assume the role of the leader of a “networked world”. – FALSE

She called the company to order and opened the discussion, stressing that Hamburg (where she was born) is a maritime city, a symbol of the “networked world” at stake in the coming talks. She explained the symbolic value of the summit’s icon, the reef knot: “The more strain on its ends, the tighter it becomes.”

4. The reference made to Merkels’s “rhombus” (p.1) portrays a poised and unruffled leader amongst a motley crew of male haughtiness and superiority. – TRUE

In the middle, among the testosteroid ranks of Putins and Trumps, Erdogans and Xis, was Angela Merkel; calm and composed, her fingers bridged in their distinctive rhombus. Look back over the past years of global turmoil—terror, wars, financial crises, political upheavals—and that rhombus is one of the few constants. A sturdy pinnacle in an uncertain age; a bridge in more senses than one.

5) Determine of the following statements are true or false.

  1. The expression sturdy pinnacle (p.1) bears the same contextual meaning as a rugged apex. – TRUE
  2. The expression spilled into (p.2) bears a meaning that is semantically opposite to trickled into. – TRUE
  3. The expression bustled through the throng (p.2) can be replaced by trudged through the swaths without changing the semantic or grammatical meaning of the sentence. – FALSE
  4. The expression hamstrung (p.4) can be replaced by stymied without changing the semantic or grammatical structure of the sentence. – TRUE

6) According to the author’s point of view, determine if the following statements about Merkel’s AND Germany’s capacity as “the new leader of the free world” are true or false.

  1. The horrific past of Nazi Germany still lingers in the minds of the German people, causing them to distrust their leader’s decision-making and objectives.TRUE (annulled)
  2. Germany lacks both the economic power and military armament to combat the major international issues of the new free world. – TRUE
  3. Germany must succumb to America’s weight and might regardless of Merkel’s flawless capabilities as an international leader. – FALSE (not mentioned in the text)
  4. Germany’s version of the Marshall Plan is blatantly unprepared to deal with daunting complexities of the African continent. – TRUE (annulled)

My piece in this week’s issue of The Economist challenges the label, for which Berlin has neither the appetite nor the means. For one thing, even booming Germany lacks America’s economic weight. (6b) That its welcome “Marshall Plan for Africa” is so modest compared with both the scale of the task and the original Marshall Plan makes that much clear. (6d) Moreover, the country is still hamstrung by its history. As Jan Techau of the American Academy in Berlin puts it to me: the Nazi past still causes Germans to “lack faith in their own good intentions”. (6a) Partly for this reason, the country remains relatively allergic to military force; it spends just 1.2% of it GDP on defence (as Mr Trump likes to complain) and so cannot undergird its diplomatic positions with hard power. (6b)

—————————————————————————————————-

Text III:

To be sure, the Anglosphere rests on fragile foundations. First, there is a problem of leadership. Washington would be the most obvious leader, but the other members of the Anglosphere would risk being swallowed up by a nation representing 70 percent of the population and economy of the new political community. Not surprisingly, some prominent Brexiteers such as the writer James Bennet and Andrew Roberts, a visiting professor at King’s College, favor CANZUK, which brings together Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, as the first post-Brexit option. However, given its small proportion of the Anglosphere population, this association of states would be globally irrelevant.

Second, it will be hard to agree on a common strategy when it comes to China. Washington will play tough with Beijing, while London, which joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, will presumably be softer. Australia, Canada, and New Zealand will follow suit. Although the rationale of the Anglosphere is to preserve national sovereignty, China is too big a challenge for the members to act in an uncoordinated manner.

Third, the United Kingdom will oppose Washington’s potentially accommodating stance toward Russia. And finally, Trump himself represents a mixed blessing for such a project. Without the United States, the Anglosphere loses meaning, but should Trump antagonize allies in Europe and Asia with overly aggressive policies, he would become a burden.

If the Anglosphere comes together as a political project, it could signal the emergence of a new model of globalization, centered on cultural homogeneity, with regional clusters converging around common cultural factors, and without a rigid underlying institutional structure like the European Union. Even now, according to the Economisttwo countries that share a common language trade 42 percent more with each other than those that don’t. Meanwhile, two countries that once shared imperial ties trade a massive 188 percent more. Gone would be the idea of a flat world. Goods, knowledge, and people would move smoothly within culturally similar areas. Outside of them, a variety of barriers, from walls to suffocating regulations, would inhibit the flow. With fewer trade exchanges and less specialization in production, productivity would further slow down and innovation would stagnate. But governments would enjoy more freedom to protect the weak within their borders from external forces.

Given the complex interaction of historical, political, and economic factors, it is hard to predict how countries will pool together. The World Values ​​Survey, which explores the values ​​and beliefs of nations, identifies eight culturally defined macro-regions. One of them is the Anglosphere. Europe is split along Catholic-Protestant lines. Russia, for its part, could exploit historical and cultural affinities with the former Soviet bloc to create a Eurasian free-trade zone. In Asia, the Confucian tradition brings together China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, though it is hard to believe that the conditions for such a macro-region will exist any time soon. Other potential groupings include South America and Africa.

Depending on circumstances, the coming together of culturally homogeneous zones might be spontaneous (Europe and Anglosphere) or coercive (Russia and Asia), and the interactions between regions could be characterized by either conflict or peace. Nostalgic nationalism will likely reinforce tensions and frictions between regions that are culturally distant, especially when standards of living differ greatly. But it can bring culturally similar countries closer together. Indeed, nostalgic nationalism is already reshaping the global order, but it will not necessarily lead to outright isolationism or conflict. There is room for new forms of cooperation to flourish.

Source: “A Future of the English-Speaking Peoples: Lie Back and Think of the Anglosphere”, by Edoardo Campanella and Marte Dassù,
Foreign Affairs, February 21, 2017,

7) Regarding the concept of the Anglosphere as a political project, determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. The principle of the Anglosphere suggests the formulation of a culturally heterogeneous grouping of regional powers centered around cultural commonalities but without strict institutional guidelines. – FALSE
  2. According to the author of this text, countries with common languages, as well as those that formerly shared imperial bonds, are highly likely to trade with one another. – FALSE
  3. The Anglosphere would provide a framework within which countries could safeguard their vulnerable population from outside powers. – TRUE
  4. Within the realms of the Anglosphere, immigration and trade could take place fairly effortlessly, whereas outside of the Anglosphere, regulations and barriers would hamper their movement. – TRUE

If the Anglosphere comes together as a political project, it could signal the emergence of a new model of globalization, centered on cultural homogeneity, with regional clusters converging around common cultural factors, and without a rigid underlying institutional structure like the European Union. (7a) Even now, according to the Economist, two countries that share a common language trade 42 percent more with each other than those that don’t. Meanwhile, two countries that once shared imperial ties trade a massive 188 percent more. (7b) Gone would be the idea of a flat world. Goods, knowledge, and people would move smoothly within culturally similar areas. Outside of them, a variety of barriers, from walls to suffocating regulations, would inhibit the flow. (7d) With fewer trade exchanges and less specialization in production, productivity would further slow down and innovation would stagnate. But governments would enjoy more freedom to protect the weak within their borders from external forces. (7c)

8) Determine of the following statements are true or false.

  1. The unification of the countries into the group CANZUK would offer a viable economic option within the larger framework of the Angloshpere. – FALSE

Not surprisingly, some prominent Brexiteers such as the writer James Bennet and Andrew Roberts, a visiting professor at King’s College, favor CANZUK, which brings together Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, as the first post-Brexit option. However, given its small proportion of the Anglosphere population, this association of states would be globally irrelevant.

2. Washington represents the most feasible leader of the new Anglosphere due to its massive economic weight and military might. – FALSE

First, there is a problem of leadership. Washington would be the most obvious leader, but the other members of the Anglosphere would risk being swallowed up by a nation representing 70 percent of the population and economy of the new political community.

3. It can be inferred that Australia, Canada, and New Zealand will side with The United States on issues dealing with international relations with China. – FALSE

Second, it will be hard to agree on a common strategy when it comes to China. Washington will play tough with Beijing, while London, which joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, will presumably be softer. Australia, Canada, and New Zealand will follow suit. Although the rationale of the Anglosphere is to preserve national sovereignty, China is too big a challenge for the members to act in an uncoordinated manner.

4. According to the text, President Trump should implement foreign policies that will serve to provoke both Europe and Asia to take direct economic and military actions. – FALSE

Without the United States, the Anglosphere loses meaning, but should Trump antagonize allies in Europe and Asia with overly aggressive policies, he would become a burden.

9) Determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. A Catholic-Protestant unification would be beneficial for the formulation of the Angloshpere on the European continent. – FALSE (no clear link in ideas)

The World Values ​​Survey, which explores the values ​​and beliefs of nations, identifies eight culturally defined macro-regions. One of them is the Anglosphere. Europe is split along Catholic-Protestant lines.

2. Taking into account the historical and cultural similarities amongst the former Soviet bloc nations, a Eurasian free-trade zone could be taken advantage of by Russian interests. – TRUE

Russia, for its part, could exploit historical and cultural affinities with the former Soviet bloc to create a Eurasian free-trade zone.

3. The current sense of “nostalgic nationalism” suggests that the new world order will be guided by leaders who advocate blatant political divides. – FALSE

Indeed, nostalgic nationalism is already reshaping the global order, but it will not necessarily lead to outright isolationism or conflict.

4. According to the text, the principle of “culturally homogeneous zones” can occur either in an impromptu fashion or through bullying, with either clashing or pacific interactions. – TRUE

Depending on circumstances, the coming together of culturally homogeneous zones might be spontaneous (Europe and Anglosphere) or coercive (Russia and Asia), and the interactions between regions could be characterized by either conflict or peace.

Todd’s Challenge: Mock Exam

Hello, hello! Como vocês estão às vésperas da 1ª Fase do CACD 2017? Lembrem de todo o esforço que vocês já fizeram até agora e confiem na preparação de vocês. Tranquilidade é muito importante para o dia da prova!

Para aproveitar ao máximo os dias que restam de estudos, o professor Todd Marshall fez um desafio especial pré-TPS: um simulado completo de Inglês! Praticar é fundamental, então aproveite! As respostas estarão disponíveis amanhã. Best of luck!

——————————————————————————————————

Text I:

Sequencing presents a second problem. Mr Barnier insists on settling the bill and other divorce terms before substantial talks on the much bigger matter of a post-Brexit settlement, including a trade deal, can begin. But British officials want to negotiate in parallel, and perhaps to link the departure sum to the degree of access Britain will enjoy to the EU’s single market after it leaves. The law lends Britain half a hand: Article 50 says that a departing country’s withdrawal agreement shall take account of “the framework for its future relationship” with the EU. But hardliners like France insist on keeping the two issues apart. And with only two years to conclude an Article 50 deal, Britain cannot waste time talking about talks.

Some British officials note that the other EU governments can tweak Mr Barnier’s negotiating guidelines if they find his line too tough. Britain might seek to exploit this by offering sweeteners: defence co-operation with the Baltics, perhaps, or infrastructure grants to Poland. The trouble is that reducing Britain’s bill means cuts to the overall budget, which would irk countries that do well from it, or extra payments from the wealthier governments to make up the shortfall. That creates an unusual alignment of interests among the 27. “If there’s one thing net payers and net recipients agree on, it’s to make the bill for Britain as high as possible,” says an EU official.

Most governments do not rule out a compromise. German officials, for example, will consider opening trade talks before the divorce is settled, so long as Britain accepts the principle that it has obligations that extend beyond its departure. As for the figure itself, like all EU budgetary negotiations it will be resolved via late-night Brussels summitry. “It’s like buying a carpet in Morocco,” says Jean-Claude Piris, a former head of the EU Council’s legal service. “The figures are always negotiable.”

But there are reasons to fear a breakdown. Theresa May, the prime minister, has done little to prepare voters for this debate. Neither her speeches nor the government’s white paper on Brexit have said anything about an exit payment. A whopping financial demand will therefore inflame Britain’s tabloids, limiting her room for manoeuvre. More worryingly, both sides believe they hold the whip hand. British officials think the hole Brexit blows in the EU’s budget will force the Europeans into compromise for fear of getting nothing if the talks derail. EU officials, for their part, are convinced that the prospect of no withdrawal agreement, and therefore no trade deal, will terrify Britain into submission. “They’ll be begging on their knees at the WTO,” says one.

The EU is skilled at brokering compromise on budgets. Perhaps that will prove true for the Article 50 talks, too. But two things set the upcoming negotiation aside. First, there is no precedent. Second, goodwill towards Britain has largely evaporated; it will be negotiating with the EU as a third country, not a partner. Informal meetings between British and European officials have already witnessed blazing rows. About the only thing the sides agree on is that they may be heading for deadlock.

Source: “From Brussels with love: The multi-billion-euro exit charge that could sink Brexit talks”, The Economist Print Edition, Feb 10, 2017

1) Determine if the following statements can be inferred from the above text.

  1. The expression “The law lends Britain half a hand” (p.1) implies that Article 50 shall grant Britain partial trade access to the EU’s single market upon its departure.
  2. By the expression “seek to exploit this by offering sweeteners” (p.2), one can assume that negotiation parameters with other EU nations may well occur through the offering of luring bribes and concessions.
  3. The expression “It’s like buying a carpet in Morocco” suggests that bargaining will figure prominently within the forthcoming Britain-EU compromise.
  4. It can be inferred that the long-term partnership between the EU and Britain is quickly fading due to a lack of a prior precedent on which to base the final decision on Article 50.

2) Determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. The expression a whopping financial demand can be substituted by a massive pecuniary burden without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence.
  2. The expression hold the whip hand bears a metaphorical relationship with the act of a slave’s torture
  3. The expression blazing rows can be replaced by explosive quarrels without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence
  4. The expression heading for deadlock can be replaced by on route to a debacle without changing the overall semantic structure of the sentence.

3) According to the above text, determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. AS the EU is adept at negotiating budgetary settlements, it may well prove adroit in negotiating the provisions of Article 50 as well.
  2. Failure in Article 50 talks are looming due to May’s ill-prepared actions to achieve a smooth Brexit without having to pay a heavy exit payment.
  3. Germany appears willing to negotiate trade with Britain provided that Britain fulfills its pre-departure responsibilities.
  4. Should the Article 50 talks fall by the wayside, Brexit’s financial burden upon the EU budget will sway the EU into accepting Britain’s international trade demands.

——————————————————————————————————

Text II:

IT WAS a tableau to sum up an age. Leaders of the world’s 20 main industrial powers, plus a dusting of international institutions and secondary powers, posed for a photo at the Hamburg Congress Centre. In the middle, among the testosteroid ranks of Putins and Trumps, Erdogans and Xis, was Angela Merkel; calm and composed, her fingers bridged in their distinctive rhombus. Look back over the past years of global turmoil—terror, wars, financial crises, political upheavals—and that rhombus is one of the few constants. A sturdy pinnacle in an uncertain age; a bridge in more senses than one.

The photo taken, the G20 leaders spilled into the conference room. Mrs Merkel bustled through the throng, talking first with Vladimir Putin, then with Emmanuel Macron and Donald Trump, then with Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk. She called the company to order and opened the discussion, stressing that Hamburg (where she was born) is a maritime city, a symbol of the “networked world” at stake in the coming talks. She explained the symbolic value of the summit’s icon, the reef knot: “The more strain on its ends, the tighter it becomes.”

Surveying the scene it was tempting to conclude that a unilateralist America, a withdrawing Britain, a still-recovering France, a revisionist Russia and a not-yet-dominant China make Mrs Merkel not just the chair of this particular summit, but something more: the new leader of the free world. Recent pieces in the Washington Post, the Los Angeles TimesNewsweek, the IndependentUSA Today and Politico have all floated or even endorsed the designation. When Barack Obama paid a final presidential visit to Berlin in November, it was said that he was unofficially anointing Mrs Merkel his successor as guardian of the global order.

My piece in this week’s issue of The Economist challenges the label, for which Berlin has neither the appetite nor the means. For one thing, even booming Germany lacks America’s economic weight. That its welcome “Marshall Plan for Africa” is so modest compared with both the scale of the task and the original Marshall Plan makes that much clear. Moreover, the country is still hamstrung by its history. As Jan Techau of the American Academy in Berlin puts it to me: the Nazi past still causes Germans to “lack faith in their own good intentions”. Partly for this reason, the country remains relatively allergic to military force; it spends just 1.2% of it GDP on defence (as Mr Trump likes to complain) and so cannot undergird its diplomatic positions with hard power.

The G20 summit dramatises these realities. The final statement is likely to be vague. It may carry asterisks exempting America from environmental passages. There is even a chance that Mr Trump will not sign it at all. Whether other rich countries will commit meaningfully to Mrs Merkel’s plan for Africa is still uncertain. Unlike the chancellor, most still see turbulence on that continent primarily as a security rather than a development issue.

Most significant will be the bilateral meetings. Will Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping find common ground on their border disputes and China’s contentious “One Belt One Road” trade plan? Will Turkey and Saudi Arabia make any progress on Syria? Will Theresa May reach new understandings with her EU counterparts on Brexit? Will Mr Trump’s first meeting with Mr Putin prompt a deal on Ukraine? Progress on such questions—unlikely to feature among the concluding annoucements here in Hamburg tomorrow—matters so much because we are in what the political scientist Ian Bremmer calls a “G-Zero” world; one in which no country or bloc can shape or direct global events. The era of the cacophony is upon us.

Source: “The postmodern power: Angela Merkel, the G-Zero chancellor”, by J.C.,
The Economist.com, Jul 7th, 2017.

4) Which of the following statements can be inferred from the above text?

  1. The opening expression of “It was a tableau to sum up an age,” (p.1) is a clear criticism of the raunchy depiction provided by international tabloids to the most recent G-20 summit.
  2. The reference to the “G-Zero” world (p.6) is used to exemplify the jangling discord within the present-day reality and the lack of any prominent world leader to shape the global world order.
  3. The reference to a “reef knot” (p.2) is a blatant slight on the author’s part to show Angela Merkel’s incapacity to assume the role of the leader of a “networked world”.
  4. The reference made to Merkels’s “rhombus” (p.1) portrays a poised and unruffled leader amongst a motley crew of male haughtiness and superiority.

5) Determine of the following statements are true or false.

  1. The expression sturdy pinnacle (p.1) bears the same contextual meaning as a rugged apex.
  2. The expression spilled into (p.2) bears a meaning that is semantically opposite to trickled into.
  3. The expression bustled through the throng (p.2) can be replaced by trudged through the swaths without changing the semantic or grammatical meaning of the sentence.
  4. The expression hamstrung (p.4) can be replaced by stymied without changing the semantic or grammatical structure of the sentence.

6) According to the author’s point of view, determine if the following statements about Merkel’s AND Germany’s capacity as “the new leader of the free world” are true or false.

  1. The horrific past of Nazi Germany still lingers in the minds of the German people, causing them to distrust their leader’s decision-making and objectives.
  2. Germany lacks both the economic power and military armament to combat the major international issues of the new free world.
  3. Germany must succumb to America’s weight and might regardless of Merkel’s flawless capabilities as an international leader.
  4. Germany’s version of the Marshall Plan is blatantly unprepared to deal with daunting complexities of the African continent.

—————————————————————————————————-

Text III:

To be sure, the Anglosphere rests on fragile foundations. First, there is a problem of leadership. Washington would be the most obvious leader, but the other members of the Anglosphere would risk being swallowed up by a nation representing 70 percent of the population and economy of the new political community. Not surprisingly, some prominent Brexiteers such as the writer James Bennet and Andrew Roberts, a visiting professor at King’s College, favor CANZUK, which brings together Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, as the first post-Brexit option. However, given its small proportion of the Anglosphere population, this association of states would be globally irrelevant.

Second, it will be hard to agree on a common strategy when it comes to China. Washington will play tough with Beijing, while London, which joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, will presumably be softer. Australia, Canada, and New Zealand will follow suit. Although the rationale of the Anglosphere is to preserve national sovereignty, China is too big a challenge for the members to act in an uncoordinated manner.

Third, the United Kingdom will oppose Washington’s potentially accommodating stance toward Russia. And finally, Trump himself represents a mixed blessing for such a project. Without the United States, the Anglosphere loses meaning, but should Trump antagonize allies in Europe and Asia with overly aggressive policies, he would become a burden.

If the Anglosphere comes together as a political project, it could signal the emergence of a new model of globalization, centered on cultural homogeneity, with regional clusters converging around common cultural factors, and without a rigid underlying institutional structure like the European Union. Even now, according to the Economisttwo countries that share a common language trade 42 percent more with each other than those that don’t. Meanwhile, two countries that once shared imperial ties trade a massive 188 percent more. Gone would be the idea of a flat world. Goods, knowledge, and people would move smoothly within culturally similar areas. Outside of them, a variety of barriers, from walls to suffocating regulations, would inhibit the flow. With fewer trade exchanges and less specialization in production, productivity would further slow down and innovation would stagnate. But governments would enjoy more freedom to protect the weak within their borders from external forces.

Given the complex interaction of historical, political, and economic factors, it is hard to predict how countries will pool together. The World Values ​​Survey, which explores the values ​​and beliefs of nations, identifies eight culturally defined macro-regions. One of them is the Anglosphere. Europe is split along Catholic-Protestant lines. Russia, for its part, could exploit historical and cultural affinities with the former Soviet bloc to create a Eurasian free-trade zone. In Asia, the Confucian tradition brings together China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, though it is hard to believe that the conditions for such a macro-region will exist any time soon. Other potential groupings include South America and Africa.

Depending on circumstances, the coming together of culturally homogeneous zones might be spontaneous (Europe and Anglosphere) or coercive (Russia and Asia), and the interactions between regions could be characterized by either conflict or peace. Nostalgic nationalism will likely reinforce tensions and frictions between regions that are culturally distant, especially when standards of living differ greatly. But it can bring culturally similar countries closer together. Indeed, nostalgic nationalism is already reshaping the global order, but it will not necessarily lead to outright isolationism or conflict. There is room for new forms of cooperation to flourish.

Source: “A Future of the English-Speaking Peoples: Lie Back and Think of the Anglosphere”, by Edoardo Campanella and Marte Dassù,
Foreign Affairs
, February 21, 2017.

7) Regarding the concept of the Anglosphere as a political project, determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. The principle of the Anglosphere suggests the formulation of a culturally heterogeneous grouping of regional powers centered around cultural commonalities but without strict institutional guidelines.
  2. According to the author of this text, countries with common languages, as well as those that formerly shared imperial bonds, are highly likely to trade with one another.
  3. The Anglosphere would provide a framework within which countries could safeguard their vulnerable population from outside powers.
  4. Within the realms of the Anglosphere, immigration and trade could take place fairly effortlessly, whereas outside of the Anglosphere, regulations and barriers would hamper their movement.

8) Determine of the following statements are true or false.

  1. The unification of the countries into the group CANZUK would offer a viable economic option within the larger framework of the Angloshpere.
  2. Washington represents the most feasible leader of the new Anglosphere due to its massive economic weight and military might.
  3. It can be inferred that Australia, Canada, and New Zealand will side with The United States on issues dealing with international relations with China.
  4. According to the text, President Trump should implement foreign policies that will serve to provoke both Europe and Asia to take direct economic and military actions.

9) Determine if the following statements are true or false.

  1. A Catholic-Protestant unification would be beneficial for the formulation of the Angloshpere on the European continent.
  2. Taking into account the historical and cultural similarities amongst the former Soviet bloc nations, a Eurasian free-trade zone could be taken advantage of by Russian interests.
  3. The current sense of “nostalgic nationalism” suggests that the new world order will be guided by leaders who advocate blatant political divides.
  4. According to the text, the principle of “culturally homogeneous zones” can occur either in an impromptu fashion or through bullying, with either clashing or pacific interactions.

 

 

Claudia Comenta: Aspectos Verbais

Com a 1ª fase do CACD 2017 chegando, os candidatos estão a mil com revisões e exercícios. E para ajudar vocês nessa reta final, o blog Sapi adiantou um presentinho: um vídeo inédito da professora Claudia Simionato!

Nesse vídeo, a professora Claudia mostra algumas maneiras que a banca pode cobrar questões relativas a aspectos verbais, seja em relação a tempos verbais, seja em relação a complementos. Confira!
(Os textos e as questões estão disponíveis abaixo do vídeo)

 

Instituto Rio Branco – 2014

AV01.png

Acerca das ideias desenvolvidas no texto acima, julgue (C ou E) os itens subsequentes.

No trecho que inicia o terceiro parágrafo, mesmo que presente o advérbio “talvez” (l.15), que exigiria o emprego do modo subjuntivo, o autor do texto optou pelo emprego da forma verbal no indicativo (“gira”), privilegiando, assim, a assertividade de seu discurso, conforme descrito na gramática normativa a respeito desse modo verbal.

 

Gabarito: ERRADO

Instituto Rio Branco – 2014

AV02

Com relação aos aspectos morfossintáticos do texto, julgue (C ou E) os seguintes itens.

O emprego de “concebera” (l.8), no pretérito mais-que-perfeito do indicativo, justifica-se, no texto, como traço estilístico da linguagem culta formal, visto que, em normas estritamente gramaticais, não há respaldo para esse uso.

 

Gabarito: ERRADO

Instituto Rio Branco – 2014

AV03

Ainda em relação ao texto, julgue (C ou E) os itens subsequentes.

As formas verbais “imagina” (l.1), “atribuir” (l.4) e “servir” (l.8) foram utilizadas como verbos transitivos indiretos.

 

Gabarito: ERRADO

Instituto Rio Branco – 2012

AV04

Considerando os aspectos linguísticos e estilísticos do texto, bem como a argumentação nele desenvolvida, julgue (C ou E) os próximos itens.

No segundo e no quarto parágrafos do texto, emprega-se o presente do indicativo com a mesma finalidade: a de realçar fatos ocorridos no passado.

 

Gabarito: ERRADO

Instituto Rio Branco – 2011

 AV05

Considerando as relações morfossintáticas no texto bem como os recursos estilísticos nele empregados, julgue (C ou E) os itens subsequentes.

No texto, as formas verbais “encontra” (l.21), “falavam” (l.39) e “prende” (l.49) são intransitivas.

 

Gabarito: ERRADO

 

Controle de Constitucionalidade

O controle de constitucionalidade é um dos mecanismos de freios e contrapesos existentes no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro para garantir a independência e harmonia entre os poderes públicos. Por meio desse controle, verifica-se a compatibilidade dos atos normativos em relação à Constituição Federal, de forma a afirmar sua unidade e supremacia. A Constituição Federal constitui o fundamento de validade das normas infraconstitucionais, logo, um ato normativo que a desobedeça, formal ou materialmente, será considerado inválido.

O controle de constitucionalidade pode ser aplicado tanto para leis quanto para atos executivos e é, tradicionalmente, exercido pelo Poder Judiciário, no chamado controle a posterior ou repressivo. Há, entretanto, a possibilidade de controle constitucional prévio ou preventivo, realizado pelo Poder Legislativo, por meio da Comissão de Constituição e Justiça, ou pelo Poder Executivo, por meio do veto presidencial. Hipóteses excepcionais de controle são o controle repressivo pelo Poder Legislativo sobre atos do Executivo e o controle preventivo do Poder Judiciário, que pode declarar inconstitucionalidade de projeto de lei em trânsito quando provocado.

A inconstitucionalidade de uma norma afeta o plano da validade da mesma, não da existência ou da eficácia. Isso ocorre devido ao princípio da presunção de constitucionalidade. Qualquer norma legislada pelos entes responsáveis para tal, como identificados pela própria Constituição, desfruta desse princípio, que age de forma a garantir a estabilidade do direito. Por causa disso, ocorre a chamada validade especial da norma inconstitucional: assim que sancionada, a norma existe e produz efeitos jurídicos até que seja afastada do ordenamento jurídico devido à sua inconstitucionalidade. Há, contudo, a possibilidade de requerer a tutela antecipada ao Poder Judiciário quando ingressando com uma ação de inconstitucionalidade de forma a suspender os efeitos do ato normativo até que o mérito seja julgado.

Diferente das normas válidas superadas por legislação posterior, cujos efeitos continuam válidos, para as normas consideradas inválidas por meio de processo especial do Poder Judiciário, os efeitos são, em tese, retroativos (ex tunc) e universais (erga omnes). Isso ocorre pois a inconstitucionalidade da norma tem caráter declaratório, ou seja, apenas reconhece a situação de invalidade já existente na norma desde sua formação, logo não poderia ter gerado efeitos. As exceções para a retroatividade dos efeitos, contudo, incluem a impossibilidade física ou material de retroagir ou a possibilidade de criar profunda instabilidade jurídica ou institucional, podendo ser modulada para evitar prejuízos ao ordenamento jurídico ou. A retroatividade dos efeitos é decidida pelo próprio ente que determinar a inconstitucionalidade.

Há dois tipos de inconstitucionalidade: a formal, que decorre de um vício no processo legislativo (procedimental), e a material, que decorre de um vício de conteúdo (incompatibilidade substancial entre norma e Constituição). No caso de inconstitucionalidade material, ela pode ser tanto por ação, quando há a inserção de provisões contrárias ao texto constitucional na norma, ou por omissão, quando o legislador não cria normas expressamente demandas pela Constituição Federal.

O controle repressivo por via direta ou principal tem como objeto principal da ação o próprio questionamento da constitucionalidade na norma, sendo concentrado no STF e gerando efeitos erga omnes e vinculantes para terceiros. Nesse caso, a norma é analisada em abstrato, ou seja, não necessita ter sido aplicada em caso concreto, podendo ser analisada apenas à luz da Constituição. Somente atores específicos (legitimados) podem entrar com ações desse tipo, entre eles, o Presidente, a Mesa do Senado e/ou Câmara dos Deputados, as Assembleias Legislativas, o Procurador-Geral da República, entre outros (art. 103 CF/88). Em caso de controle por via de ação, há ações próprias para provocar o STF: ação direta de inconstitucionalidade (ADIN), para leis federais ou estaduais (leis complementares em caso de omissão); ação declaratória de constitucionalidade (ADC), espelho da anterior, usada para eliminar incertezas sobre atos federais; arguição de descumprimento de preceito fundamental (ADPF), usada para leis federais, estaduais e municipais (inclusive anteriores à Constituição) de forma subsidiária para analisar se contrariam a essência da CF/88 (paradigmas/preceitos fundamentais); representação interventiva, por descumprimento de legislação federal, somente exercida pelo Procurador-Geral/Presidência.

Já no caso de controle por via incidental ou de exceção, a análise de constitucionalidade é questão prejudicial de uma ação judicial específica (e não o objeto principal da ação) e realizada de forma difusa (outros órgãos judiciais podem analisar, porém exige maioria absoluta dos votos), com efeitos inter-partes e sem efeito vinculante para terceiros. Em caso de reiteradas decisões de mesmo teor, o STF pode editar súmulas vinculantes para obrigar instâncias inferiores a seguir o entendimento do Supremo, apesar de originalmente inter-partes. A possibilidade de edição de súmulas vinculantes pelo STF foi incluída no ordenamento jurídico nacional por meio da Emenda Constitucional nº 45, de 2004, e exigem aprovação por maioria absoluta em votação em pleno (11 Ministros).

Défi de Français: les réponses

Pour ceux qui on fait le dernier défi, voici les réponses. À la prochaine !

ce qui  sujet (sujet de est)  Il a réussi son examen, ce qui est surprenant.
ce que  COD (complément de craignais)  Il a raté son examen, ce que je craignais.
ce dont  après la préposition ‘de’  Il a raté son examen, ce dont je me doutais (je me doutais de..)
quoi  après les autres prépositions  Sais-tu ce à quoi il pense? (il pense à…)

1. Paul est tombé de sa bicyclette sans se faire mal, ce qui est surprenant.

2. Ce à quoi ils ne pensent pas beaucoup à cet âge, c’est à leur avenir.

3. Ce que je ne comprends pas, c’est pourquoi les terriens n’ont que deux yeux.

4. La voiture est en panne. J’ai dû aller au bureau à pied, ce dont je me serais bien passée.

5. Ce qu’il dit, c’est très important. Ecoutez-le attentivement.

6. Où vont-ils tous en courant ? Je me demande ce qui se passe.

7. Sais-tu ce que Paul a fait ? Il est parti au Groenland, vivre dans un igloo.

8. Ce avec quoi joue Marc, c’est bien une fronde ? Il faut la lui enlever, il va tuer des oiseaux.

9. Ce dont je me souviens, c’est que ce jour là il y avait un très gros orage.

10. Je ne sais pas ce qu’elle prépare, mais ce doit être une potion.

Défi de Français: Ce que, ce dont…

Bonjour à toutes et à tous! Complétez les exercices suivants avec: ce que, ce qui, ce avec quoi, ce dont, ce à quoi.

 

Bonne chance !

1. Paul est tombé de sa bicyclette sans se faire mal, _____________________________ est surprenant.

2. _____________________________ ils ne pensent pas beaucoup à cet âge, c’est à leur avenir.

3. _____________________________ je ne comprends pas, c’est pourquoi les terriens n’ont que deux yeux.

4. La voiture est en panne. J’ai dû aller au bureau à pied, _____________________________ je me serais bien passée.

5. _____________________________ il dit, c’est très important. Ecoutez-le attentivement.

6. Où vont-ils tous en courant ? Je me demande _____________________________ se passe.

7. Sais-tu _____________________________ Paul a fait ? Il est parti au Groenland, vivre dans un igloo.

8. _____________________________ joue Marc, c’est bien une fronde ? Il faut la lui enlever, il va tuer des oiseaux.

9. _____________________________ je me souviens, c’est que ce jour là il y avait un très gros orage.

10. Je ne sais pas _____________________________ elle prépare, mais ce doit être une potion.

 

Sugestão de leitura: relatório World Population Prospects 2017

Um dos tópicos recorrentes da prova de Geografia do CACD é a chamada geografia da população. É importante que o candidato conheça bem as principais tendências e projeções sobre esse tema e, por isso, o blog Sapi traz sempre conteúdo relacionado a isso, como, por exemplo, a sugestão de leitura sobre o relatório Tendências Globais 2016 da ACNUR sobre refugiados. A sugestão de leitura de hoje também é relacionada a esse tópico do edital: foi publicado o World Population Prospects: the 2017 Revision,  relatório com as principais projeções de crescimento e variação da população mundial. Formulado pelo Departamento das Nações Unidas para Assuntos Econômicos e Sociais da ONU, esse relatório é uma das fontes mais completas de informação sobre a situação demográfica atual do mundo e suas projeções de crescimento.

Com a 1ª Fase do CACD 2017 chegando, é compreensível que o candidato não tenha muito tempo para leituras de relatórios longos, então fica a dica do Sapi! Junto com o relatório, foi divulgado um resumo das principais conclusões desse relatório, que contém informações como:

  • Nigéria é o país que mais cresce no mundo atualmente, podendo passar de 7º país mais populoso (hoje) para 3º lugar antes de 2050;
  • até 2050, é esperado que aproximadamente metade do crescimento demográfico mundial seja concentrado em apenas 9 países; Índia, Nigéria, República Democrática do Congo, Paquistão, Etiópia, Tanzânia, Estados Unidos, Uganda e Indonésia;
  • a taxa de fertilidade tem caído em praticamente todas as regiões do mundo, inclusive na África, passando de 5.1 nascimentos por mulher em 2000-2005 para 4.7 em 2010-2015;
  • o processo de envelhecimento da população está cada vez mais acelerado: em comparação a 2017, espera-se que o número de pessoas acima de 60 anos mais que duplique até 2050 e mais que triplique até 2100;
  • apesar da manutenção das discrepâncias na expectativa de vida entre homens e mulheres e entre países, globalmente houve melhora nesse indicador, que passou de 65 anos para homens e 69 anos para mulheres em 2000-2005 para 69 anos para homens e 73 anos para mulheres em 2010-2015;

Outras informações relevantes podem ser encontradas nesse resumo disponibilizado pela ONU, uma ótima ferramenta para quem está com pouco tempo. world population prospects

Outra dica Sapi é que, mesmo quem não tiver tempo para ler todo o relatório com as principais projeções (são 53 páginas), dê uma olhada nos gráficos e tabelas apresentados. A representação visual muitas vezes ajuda a compreender melhor as informações, além de facilitar a memorização.

 

Mecanismo de Revisão Periódica Universal (RPU)

No último mês de maio, o Brasil passou pela sabatina do Mecanismo de Revisão Periódica Universal (RPU) do Conselho de Direitos Humanos (CDH) da ONU. O RPU foi criado junto com o próprio CDH, em 2006 (quando substituiu a Comissão de Direitos Humanos) e é um mecanismo inovador do novo órgão das Nações Unidas, pois estabelece que todos os Estados membros sejam submetidos a um processo de revisão com vistas a avaliar o cumprimento das obrigações e dos compromissos internacionais assumidos em matéria de direitos humanos.

Um aspecto importante a ser notado é que o RPU é um exercício entre pares, no qual há a primazia do respeito aos princípios da igualdade entre as nações, respeito à soberania e não-seletividade no tratamento. Dessa forma, o diálogo entre o Estado sob exame e os demais é parte fundamental do processo de formulação de recomendações e considerações a serem implementadas pelo Estado. Apesar do sistema de revisão não ter a capacidade de impor sanções para o descumprimento das recomendações, elas continuam sendo importantes instrumentos para a cooperação internacional em matéria de direitos humanos e para o avanço da proteção nessa temática ao expor as falhas e contradições da implementação dos direitos humanos nos Estados. E não só de críticas vive o RPU: o mecanismo também reconhece e elogia os avanços promovidos pelos Estados analisados.

Por fazer parte do primeiro grupo de países do ciclo, em 2017, o Brasil está passando pelo seu terceiro ciclo de avaliações do RPU, já tendo sido objeto de análise em 2007 e 2012. O processo da revisão periódica tem quatro fases principais:

Fase 1: Elaboração de relatórios
Fase 2: Diálogo Interativo
Fase 3: Adoção do relatório final (recomendações)
Fase 4: Implementação das recomendações

São três os relatórios produzidos para a revisão do CDH: um relatório nacional, enviado pelo próprio Estado sob revisão; um relatório técnico, desenvolvido por meio de procedimentos especiais do CDH (grupos de trabalho, peritos e especialistas independentes, etc); e uma compilação das contribuições da sociedade civil e instituições nacionais de direitos humanos. Durante o Diálogo Interativo, que ocorre na CDH em Genebra, os dados desses relatórios são apresentados e os Estados-membros do Conselho podem fazer indagar ao Estado sob revisão e fazer recomendações. O país tem um prazo para analisar as recomendações e aceitar ou rejeitar as mesmas. Após isso, um relatório final é adotado e o Estado sob exame passa a implementar essas recomendações.

No último ciclo de revisões, em 2012, o Brasil recebeu 170 recomendações, das quais rejeitou somente uma (proferida pela Dinamarca sobre a desmilitarização da Polícia Militar) com argumento de ter previsão constitucional. Durante a revisão atual, a delegação brasileira, liderada pela Ministra de Direitos Humanos, Luislinda Valois, declarou que cerca de 60% das recomendações do último ciclo de revisão já haviam sido implementadas, apesar dessa porcentagem ser difícil de ser mensurada com precisão. Entre os elogios recebidos pelos Brasil em relação aos avanços desde a última revisão foram destacados: a redução de desigualdades sociais; a nova Lei de Migrações; a lei do feminicídio; implementação de programas de ação afirmativa; Bolsa-Família e Minha Casa, Minha Vida; combate ao trabalho escravo; criação do Ministério de Direitos Humanos; e a aprovação da Lei de Inclusão da Pessoa com Deficiência.

A preparação do relatório de 2017 contou com a participação de outros ministérios além do de Direitos Humanos, como de Relações Exteriores e da Educação. O Ministério da Justiça, entretanto, não participou desse processo, apesar de ser o órgão responsável por diversos dos temas que sofreram críticas durante o diálogo interativo em maio (como a questão carcerária e temas indígenas). Os Estados relatores foram Quirguistão, El Salvador e Botswana e, ao fim do diálogo interativo, foram feitas 246 recomendações por 103 países. O Brasil terá até setembro para responder às recomendações e indicar sua aceitação. Após isso, poderá ser adotado o relatório final.

Os principais temas das recomendações foram:

– Violência de gênero (mulher/LGBT): recomendações incluem a implementação de medidas contra discriminação e violência por conta de orientação sexual/gênero; fortalecimento de políticas locais para populações LGBT; responsabilização dos autores das violências; necessidade de aplicação da legislação específica vigente. Também instam maior atuação do Estado em relação à violência doméstica contra mulheres, à prostituição infantil e à proteção de mulheres vítimas de abuso.

– Educação: reconhecimento da importância do Plano Nacional de Educação e a necessidade de sua implementação; necessidade de mais investimento e críticas a políticas de austeridade nesse tema específico; inclusão de todas as crianças e adolescentes nas escolas; promover a melhoria da qualidade da educação nacional; crítica à exclusão do foco da atuação contra discriminação por orientação sexual e identidade de gênero.

Temas indígenas: diversas recomendações sobre esse tema, em geral relacionadas à necessidade de proteger a população indígena, promover a demarcação de terras e colocar em prática as demarcações já delimitadas em lei.

Desigualdade racial: promover a redução de homicídios de jovens negros e a garantia de liberdade de religião; garantir educação de qualidade para população afro-brasileira; promoção e garantia de direitos para mulheres mulher negra.

– Sistema prisional e tortura: recomendações focadas nas mortes extrajudiciais (necessidade de repressão e punição desses casos), além de críticas ao sistema prisional problemático.

– Polícia: necessidade de maior capacitação das forças policiais (inclusive para lidar com crimes de ódio); estabelecimento de investigação imparcial para mortes pela polícia; citação nominal sobre a Polícia Militar como exemplo de violência policial (apesar de não reiterar a recomendação de sua extinção); e necessidade de treinamento em matéria de direitos humanos.

– Migração: Elogios à expansão dos direitos dos migrantes com a nova Lei de Migração.

– Ambiental: tratado de forma abstrata, porém também incluiu recomendação sobre punição dos responsáveis pelo desastre de Mariana/MG.

sinal alertaOBS: no ano passado, o Conselho de Direitos Humanos completou 10 anos e a Revista Sapientia entrevistou o então presidente do Conselho, o Embaixador sul-coreano Choi Kyong-lim, sobre a importância do Conselho e do mecanismo de revisão periódica. Você pode acessar essa entrevista na edição 28 da Revista Sapientia clicando aqui.

Referências:
Site do Itamaraty sobre o Mecanismo de Revisão Periódica Universal
Conectas Direitos Humanos
Podcast Xadrez Verbal – Episódio “Prorrogação #02”
Comitê Brasileiro de Direitos Humanos e Política Externa