In the first round of Brazil’s elections on Oct. 4, 2026, Flávio Bolsonaro, of the right wing Liberal Party (PL), came in first with 47.03% of the valid votes, compared with 45.16% for the current leftist president and Workers’ Party (PT) candidate, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The margin was just over 2.2 million votes, […]

The post JD Vance-founded, Korea-tied firm now influencing Brazil election appeared first on Asia Times.

• Today's tip to get better at work: Get better at handling disagreements at work.
• Jeff Bezos wrote about his '"disagree and commit" strategy in a 2016 Amazon shareholder letter.
• Make your case, but once a decision is made, commit to the decision, even if you disagree.

Get better at: Disagreements

Today's move

In an era where leaders want to move quickly, you don't want to be the one slowing everyone down.

Jeff Bezos, the billionaire founder of Amazon, wrote about the phrase "disagree and commit" in a 2016 Amazon shareholder letter under a section labeled "High-Velocity Decision Making," and it's been making a comeback.

While Bezos popularized the phrase, it echoes a management philosophy that goes back to the 1980s, when Andy Grove ran Intel. Richard S. Tedlow, Grove's biographer, previously told BI that the concept of disagreeing and committing "was the essence of how he felt you should comport yourself at Intel."

Why it works

The idea behind "disagree and commit" is to defend your argument and make a clear case. However, if the team rallies around a different decision, you have to commit to it too. Bezos argued that the use of "disagree and commit" could "save a lot of time."

"If you have conviction on a particular direction even though there's no consensus, it's helpful to say, 'Look, I know we disagree on this but will you gamble with me on it? Disagree and commit?'" Bezos wrote.

The former Amazon CEO has even used it himself, such as when his team green-lit an Amazon Studios project that he didn't think would succeed. Instead of continuing the back-and-forth, he disagreed but committed to the plan.

Try it today

The next time you disagree with a coworker, make the case for your idea and give it your all.

Once the decision is made, though, ask yourself if there's anything you can do to help it work better.

The bottom line

You don't need to agree with every decision at your job, but everyone benefits if there's an expectation that once a decision is made, everyone rallies behind it and tries to make it work.

Source

This insight is drawn from Business Insider's reporting about the origins of the "disagree and commit" phrase that Jeff Bezos popularized, and why it's making a comeback. Read the full story in Business Insider from Ana Altchek and Tim Paradis here.

Has this framework for disagreements worked for you? Tell us what you think of this advice in the comments below.

The European Parliament has demanded €225 billion for the European Union’s foreign policy and development programmes between 2028 and 2034, challenging proposals by member states to reduce spending under the bloc’s next long-term budget.

The Parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Development committees approved their negotiating position on the Global Europe Instrument on Monday, 19 October, by 63 votes to 27, with five abstentions. The proposed allocation represents an increase of €25 billion over the European Commission’s original €200 billion proposal.

The decision comes as negotiations over the wider 2028–2034 EU budget have become increasingly contentious, with Germany and several other net contributors opposing higher expenditure while Brussels faces mounting demands for defence, industrial investment, enlargement and support for Ukraine.

Parliament rejects proposed reductions

Under the position adopted by the parliamentary committees, at least €25 billion would be reserved for humanitarian assistance. MEPs also want dedicated funding for reconstruction in Gaza and financial support for countries seeking EU membership.

The committees are proposing that 20 per cent of official development assistance should be directed towards human development, alongside stronger provisions covering democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Global Europe is intended to consolidate several existing financing instruments into a single framework governing much of the Union’s external expenditure. The programme would finance activities ranging from development cooperation and humanitarian assistance to economic partnerships and support for countries preparing to join the EU.

The Commission introduced the original €200 billion proposal in July 2025. However, subsequent negotiations among member states have raised the prospect of substantial reductions.

Germany, the Netherlands and several Nordic countries have argued that the next budget must reflect the financial constraints facing national governments. Their objections have complicated efforts to accommodate additional spending on European security and economic competitiveness.

The European Parliament has taken a different position, maintaining that reducing external expenditure would restrict the Union’s ability to operate internationally when European security and economic interests increasingly depend on developments beyond its borders.

Ukraine and enlargement funding

The parliamentary proposal would preserve support for Ukraine while seeking to prevent assistance connected with Russia’s invasion from reducing resources available to other partner countries.

Ukraine’s reconstruction, institutional reforms and integration with European markets will require substantial financing over the coming years. However, the precise allocation will depend on negotiations over the wider budget and the financing arrangements eventually approved.

For candidate countries, MEPs want clearer incentives linking EU assistance to progress on political and economic reforms. The proposed framework would also provide Brussels with greater powers to suspend funding where democratic standards, human rights or judicial independence deteriorate.

A separate provision would permit the Commission to suspend payments where partner countries seriously fail to meet obligations concerning the readmission of their nationals.

That measure reflects the growing connection between the EU’s development policy and its migration objectives. Brussels has increasingly sought cooperation on returns and border management as part of agreements with countries receiving European assistance.

The committees have also called for stronger parliamentary supervision of Global Europe, including more detailed reporting by the Commission and regular discussions with the commissioners responsible for implementation.

Difficult negotiations ahead

The financial disagreement extends well beyond external policy. The overall seven-year budget remains contested, particularly over agricultural subsidies, regional development funds, defence investment and repayment of borrowing undertaken during the coronavirus pandemic.

As EU Today previously reported, a group of 17 member states has opposed reductions in agricultural and cohesion spending, adding further pressure to negotiations.

The Parliament’s proposed €225 billion allocation has not been agreed by governments and does not constitute an approved spending commitment.

The committees also approved a mandate for negotiations with the Council, although their position still requires endorsement by the full Parliament, provisionally expected in November.

Meanwhile, member states must settle their own negotiating position, including the financial ceilings governing the programme.

The eventual settlement will determine how much Brussels can spend on development cooperation, humanitarian operations and international partnerships after 2027, and how those commitments can be reconciled with the EU’s expanding domestic financial obligations.