Of the scass but does not some from the FOREIGN policy

We live in an increasingly unpredictable and volatile world regarding its geopolitical and geoeconomic movements. A world where the world's leading power communicates its political changes to us in minutes. We can almost say that we are moved by instant messages via social networks, with enormous difficulty in understanding the essence, the strategic content of these movements and then, either prepare to react and create our policies and tactical movements, or formulate a long-term foreign policy that protects us from almost insults not even from day to day, but from minute to minute.

On the one hand, China is an interesting example to be studied of how it can, with long-term goals, react or even not react in the short term. Brazil, with some variations, remained through the professionalism of its diplomacy, called by the palace that occupies the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Itamaraty, on the balance line, for decades. Although the so-called national interest is not well defined in Brazil, and is more of a tactical variable than a strategic definition, the country has done well in the defined rhythms of the past.

According to an article by an economist from the Petersen Institute, Monica de Bolle, the exception was the period of the previous government and especially in the environmental area. But, above all, she draws attention to the fact that the current dynamics of international politics are more intense and will necessarily make the agenda of future management. And ignoring this can bring huge losses to the country.

She is right and probably hopeful that candidates will read her article. As in Brazil candidates are guided by marketers, I have my doubts that someone will read. And neither do the journalists who prepare the debates, which will probably be more of the same. The two main candidates today carry known foreign policies that do not show any sign of definition of national interest or one of long-term vision. That is, at a time when external influences have a huge weight in the development or even survival of the country, the two candidates do not pay attention to the importance of this, despite the fact that the two have experience from abroad, at the point that the country needs to clearly define how it will behave in the future. Or how you're going to swim in a sea full of sharks being a whiting.

A suggestion would be that the business entities in their programs that present to the candidates and close their political agreements, clearly say what their interests are in this area. The destruction of Itamaraty, which we witnessed a little while ago, shows the danger we live. Sul Global's policy also left its sequelae in the economic area. Business diplomacy, which has proven very effective recently, should be more conceptual and allied to the diplomacy of the state. And both form the national interest.