Chess and Politics are not mere coincidences
Can you govern without God? Without God I can, but not without the bishops.
Napoleon Bonaparte
In chess and in politics, foreseeing future moves is the basis of victory. In chess, the pieces that make up the chessboard have differentiated value by their greater ability to attack. In politics, some positions have more value than others, due to their political influence, or their robust budget. Therefore, more is always expected from these high-value pieces. In both cases, the sacrifice of pieces is used as a strategy, being in chess to take a piece of greater value from the opponent and in politics for party compositions.
Politics and chess require intelligence and patience. They move according to the movement of their adversary in search of loopholes. Attentive to these loopholes, congressmen are always trying to maximize their political-electoral capital. The secret budget, for example, was born as a way for the general rapporteur to make small adjustments in the budget execution, but once the loophole is discovered, it has become a real blank check. It is a ballet of advance and defense, with demonstrations of power aiming at checkmate, or, in the case of politics, seeking greater power to define who dictates the rules of governability.
Lula has been using his main attack piece in a prudent and balanced way. The Finance Minister has given frequent and important demonstrations of surgical attack capability, articulating well with Congress, but at the same time not exposing himself too much. To the nostalgic ones, it reminds us of the game strategy of the famous Bob Fisher, the greatest North American chess player who defeated the legendary Soviet chess player Boris Spassky, with surprising use of the Queen's gambit and the English opening.
The international - including here the environmental - and the economic agendas have been the main successful moves of this government, even with a few blunders on the Ukraine war issue and in defense of the non-existent Venezuelan democracy. In these two cases, much attention was given by the press to smaller-scale problems. Pions have been lost with these moves, but nothing to harm the political game.
Sacrificing pawns can be part of the strategy. But valuable pieces must be preserved.
Even with these casualties, Lula has been received by the international community with much affection and respect. This is not only because of his merits, which are many, but also because these agendas under the previous government were devastated. Thus, aiming to mediate the war in Ukraine and start a trade dispute with the U.S. government and the European community are useless moves. They erode rather than add value. Even because, on the international agenda, he has already managed, in a short period of time, to rescue the country's image. It is important that Lula does not resemble Bob Fisher, whose career was damaged by excessive vanity.
On the other hand, on the offensive line, Fernando Haddad managed to pass the Transition PEC, the fiscal framework and should approve the tax reform with the support of the governor of São Paulo articulating well with the opposition. To better understand the importance of this last move, tax reform has been on the agenda of Congress for three decades. On two occasions the governors of São Paulo were mainly responsible for blocking earlier reforms; Mario Covas in the Fernando Henrique Cardoso administration and José Serra in the Lula administration. In other words, Lula has taken a rook and a bishop in political chess and so far has lost only two pawns. He has a clear advantage.
Despite the advantage, Lula needs to be alert and keep his concentration on the political game. The Ministries of the Civil House, Communication and Institutional Relations (the government's towers) are exposed and subject to attack. These are very important pieces on the political chessboard, but they are moving badly. Losing them changes the game, because they are not pieces that are normally used for sacrifice. But not using them properly to defend the king weakens the government. If at this point they are not performing as expected, Lula should consider changing them, but only and exclusively by his own choice and not under pressure from members of Congress, as happened during the stressful approval of the MP for the restructuring of the ministries, when the government was forced to sacrifice important pieces with changes in the attributions of the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Indigenous Peoples. The Minister of Tourism has already been sacrificed in favor of a closer relationship with the President of the Chamber of Deputies. Other sacrifices are still to come in this first year of government.
Now it is crucial to take advantage of the favorable moment.
In chess and politics one plays with perfect timing. Tancredo Neves was not a great administrator, nor was he among the best orators in the National Congress, but he had perfect political timing and as a consequence, he occupied almost every political position except that of President of the Republic, because this time divine timing prevailed.
The moment is favorable to the government and must be taken advantage of. The market already foresees a drop in interest rates in August, the dollar remains low, and the stock market is optimistic. Even with the good signs, the government needs to prepare for the battles to come. It needs support so that the economic agenda is not boycotted by the Central Bank, and to dive headlong into the political articulations of the approval of the tax reform in the Federal Senate, because that is where the dialog with the states takes place. Their towers must be activated and this time they must act with the competence that is expected.
The spectacular Soviet chess player Garry Kasparov referred to Bob Fisher as genius, because he started dictating the terms of the game off the board and then went on to dictate them on the board as well. If Lula doesn't do the same, the congressmen will take the reins of governability and dictate the rules of the game, just as they did in the previous government.
The similarities of chess and the political game are not mere coincidences. There are unprepared players, with no intelligence, no ability to predict moves, no knowledge of the rules of the game and no political history. They are mere pawns who arrogantly set themselves up as political leaders and, forgetting their low value, try to become kings. Sergio Moro is a clear example. But they will never become mere pawns, because this is the law of political chess.
