He also denounced attempts to influence upcoming Brazilian elections.

“Brazil does not fit into anyone’s backyard,” he said. “We need partners with a positive agenda that promotes development.”

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva speaks before the U.N. General Assembly, on September 22, 2026 (United Nations)

Full Speech by Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, in English.

My compliments to the President of the General Assembly, Ambassador Khalilur Rahman from Bangladesh.

I greet each of the Heads of State and Government and the delegates present. I address in particular the Secretary-General of the United Nations. During his two terms, António Guterres was a direct witness to the growing mismanagement of the superpower.

Mr. President, this is the tenth occasion in which I open the General Debate of this Assembly. Since I stood at this podium for the first time in 2003, this is the most critical moment of the United Nations. The feeling that moves me today is that of indignation.

The United Nations is failing in one of its highest missions, to free humanity from the fray of war. Its credibility has never been so low. Its ability to protect the most vulnerable, those who have no army or arsenals, has never been so small.

We are all victims of the immobility of a Security Council that does not fulfill its role. In 1946, already in the first session of this assembly, Brazil warned of the high price that the international community would pay for the right to veto. This vice, which gave rise to the U.N. Charter, conferred the great powers the privilege of insensitivity.

This original sin is now added to a profound crisis of leadership. The year 2025 recorded the highest number of armed conflicts since World War II. Trillions of dollars financed a new arms race.

Geopolitical tensions threaten to turn regional disputes into a conflict of global proportions. Those who hold the reins of crucial decisions must act responsibly and in a sense of urgency. The leaders of the countries that make up the Security Council must come together.

I know the realities of power, but the concessions to the law of the strongest have already crossed the limits. This is not idealism, it is pure realism. War is not the continuation of politics by other means, it is the total failure of politics.

In an interdependent world, to lead is to reconcile the interests of the homeland with that of humanity. This is the statement of someone who represents a nation that loves peace and freedom. Someone who fought against a military dictatorship and defended his country against a coup d’état.

It is the conviction of a factory worker, who was elected president three times and who won the fight against hunger in Brazil. This assembly has recently corrected historical distortions. It has recognized the trafficking of enslaved Africans as the most serious crime against humanity.

It has approved the most precise representation of the world map. Now we must debate about determining themes for the future of humanity. We are called to choose between multilateralism and unilateralism, democracy or extremism, sovereignty or subordination.

These choices demand courage, political will and clarity of objectives. This is what is expected of a statesman. Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin were statesmen.

They challenged the past to design a future of peace. They were defeated by hatred. Generations of Palestinians will carry the pain and trauma left by the genocide practiced by the Netanyahu government against women and children in Gaza.

Israeli civilians paid the price of radicalism and intolerance of the terrorist acts of Hamas. Pursuing the International Criminal Court and its members is an incentive for these crimes to be punished. The U.N. Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese cannot be silenced for telling the truth.

Illegal settlements in the West Bank are becoming less and less viable. The two-state solution is essential so that Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace. Threatening the extinction of a civilization will not bring stability to the Middle East.

The Strait of Hormuz became a trench of war when it should remain a vital passage for international trade. Families all over the world pay for the increase in the price of fuel, fertilizers and food.

The war between Russia and Ukraine has dragged on for five years in a humanitarian drama that continues to save lives.

We all know that there will be no winners on the battlefield. Diplomacy is the only option. Initiatives such as the Group of Friends of Peace, created by Brazil and China, reveal the strength of the international community willing to work for dialogue.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the geographical proximity to the world’s largest military power is inescapable, especially in the context of the worsening of hegemonic temptations. Brazil does not fit into anyone’s backyard. We need partners with a positive agenda that promotes development.

Ideological differences should not be an obstacle to greater integration between neighbors. Countries in the region have recognized the horrors of the regime of exception. We have come a long way to restore popular will.

Democracy is once again in check. We are once again witnessing foreign interference in electoral processes. The division of the world into areas of influence and neocolonial attacks for strategic resources constitute anachronistic gestures.

The Venezuelan people deserve to define their own destiny. Nicaragua will not solve its problems by preventing the opposition from running for office. The crisis in Haiti continues to test the limits of the indifference of the international community.

In Cuba, the world is suffering. The collective punishment imposed on 10 million people by an illegal economic embargo and energy blockade. Mr. President, Brazil does not underestimate the challenge posed by organized crime.

We are prepared to face criminal organizations that terrorize our communities. Workers are robbed, mothers lose their children, police officers do not return to home. People are tired of violence.

But we will not outsource the responsibility of defending our borders and guaranteeing the population the right to live without fear. We do not need aircraft carriers guarding our waters. We need cooperation to stop the flow of weapons and money that supplies organized crime.

This is the spirit of the proposal that I personally delivered to the president of the United States. We want to fight the money laundering carried out by Brazilian criminals abroad.

For a long time, Brazilian states have acted in their own way. Criminals took advantage of the lack of coordination. But this is changing. We created in Manaus, in the Amazon, the International Police Cooperation Center of the Amazon, bringing together the public security officials of the nine Amazon countries.

In 2025, we carried out the largest organized crime operation in the history of Brazil. We broke records in the seizure of drugs, goods and illicit resources. We are confronting all levels of organized crime, including crime magnates.

The Anti-Faction Law, which we have just passed, imposes on organized crime more severe penalties than those required for terrorism. Organized crime and corruption go hand in hand. The fight against corruption will continue to be relentless, no matter who may be hurt.

No one is above the law.

Ladies and gentlemen, the pillars of multilateralism are being corroded. The World Trade Organization is on life support. When governments capitulate in the face of those who use tariffs as a weapon of coercion and blackmail, the consequences are disastrous. In the age of disinformation, those who fight progress and knowledge resist the evidence of science. We will never forget the millions of lives lost by negligence in the fight against COVID-19.

Campaigns against vaccines are bringing back diseases that we considered eradicated. Weakening the World Health Organization makes everyone more vulnerable. Until recently, the response to climate change was consolidated in the center of the international agenda.

This year, the issue disappeared from the G7 debate and the G20 debate, forums that bring together the largest carbon emitters in the world. It is time to resume the offensive and impose a defeat to negationism. Nature reminds us every day that we have but one planet.

The Himalayan glaciers are melting. A super El Niño can cause torrential rains, droughts and forest fires in different parts of the globe. Its effects will impact, above all, the most vulnerable.

Brazil has been demonstrating that it is possible to combine economic growth with emission reduction. We have achieved our self-sufficiency in oil and we will continue to research the potential of new reserves such as the Equatorial Margin.

We will not renounce the environmental agenda. We will carry forward the roadmap for the decarbonization of the Brazilian economy. The Forever Tropical Forest Fund, launched at COP30 in Belém, shows that it is possible to change old paradigms. The forest is worth more standing than destroyed.

We will continue to reduce deforestation, which fell by half in the Amazon and reached the lowest level of deforestation in 11 years. We have the moral authority to reject protectionist measures disguised as embracing the environmental cause.

Brazil is a global leader in green energy. We have the critical minerals and rare earths that the world needs to carry out the energy transition. Our natural wealth belongs to the Brazilian people and it is for their benefit that they will be exploited. Access to our minerals will be a mandatory counterpart to the generation of value in our territory, the transfer of technology and the supply

of national strategic sectors.

Mr. President, we live in an unprecedented technological revolution, with great risks and opportunities. It would be an unforgivable historical omission not to face the challenge of regulating big tech and artificial intelligence. A handful of oligarchic technicians want to revive a version of digital neoliberalism without rules or transparency.

They are promoting a race without ethical restraints, beyond the backs of the U.N. and the Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence. As Pope Leo XIV warns, decisions on technology should never be separated from conscience and responsibility. Companies that know the risks of their products transfer to families the impossible task of facing algorithms.

The millionaire industry of betting apps turns addiction into profit. Its dizzying dissemination is indebting and destroying millions of homes. Brazil will not tolerate this business model.

We approved one of the most advanced legislations in the world to protect children, teenagers and women in the digital environment. We will ensure the joint remuneration of artists, musicians and audiovisual content creators. We will not give in to the pressure of multinationals who want to privatize our Pix, a public and free payment infrastructure that has made financial inclusion a reality for millions of Brazilians.

Ladies and gentlemen, sustainable development goals are the target of attacks from reactionary forces that want to naturalize injustice. Inequality and underdevelopment result from political choices. It is possible to put the poor in the budget and make the rich pay their share.

It is necessary to roll back privileges and invest in free, quality education and health.

There is a legitimate desire for change in the world. But changing is not going backwards.

Changing is not taking away rights.

It is not rehashing theories of racial supremacy or of female submission.

It is not recolonizing the Global South.

Changing is advancing to a future of more participation and more achievements. It is creating and sharing effective public solutions for the challenges of development through a democratic, strong, efficient and capable state. It is betting on the spirit of solidarity and cooperation with Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.

Initiatives such as the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty and the International Panel on Inequality are born from this political will. Brazil is in a hurry to become a developed and socially just nation. We have adopted an economic model that focuses on income distribution, creating jobs and wage increases.

We are betting on improving productivity, on increasing credit and on building a robust social protection network. Brazil has grown again in a sustainable way. We are the third largest destination for foreign foreign direct investment.

Despite the U.S. tariffs against our economy, this year we will hit a new record of exports. There is still a lot to be done. The labor market is transforming.

Older people want to remain active. Young people want to start a business. Workers need time to rest, to improve their skills and be with their families.

In Brazil, achieving this goal means ending the so-called 6x1 scale to guarantee workers two days off a week. This change is essential to alleviate the domestic overload that still falls on women.

We are building a Brazil where women don’t have to ask for permission to occupy positions of power or enter the labor market.

A country free of femicide where no woman, in or outside the home, lives under the threat of violence. This is a cause that the world needs to embrace.

Mr. President, upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. King said, “I believe that what self-centered men have torn down, other-centered men can build up.”

The UN was born under the symbol of hope. Over eight decades, it has contributed to decolonization, promoted human rights and supported sustainable development. It protected immigrants and refugees. It condemned racism, anti-Semitism and religious intolerance.

These were the achievements of leaders who stood at this podium, moved by indignation in the face of the injustices of their time. Men and women who refused to accept war as their destiny, colonialism as their right, apartheid as their legitimate system. This ability to say “no” to the inequalities gave birth to some of the greatest transformations that we have lived.

Faced with the paralysis of the United Nations, we need to rediscover the political will so that it can, again, be a temple of peace.

I want to conclude with a message about my country to all who listen to us.

On October 4, millions of Brazilians go to the polls to decide their destiny.

They will not just elect the President of the Republic, state governors and representatives of the legislative power. They will decide between democracy and negationism. If Brazil is going to move toward a future of more opportunities or return to a past of exclusion.

We will have a transparent and competitive election where candidates enjoy the broadest freedom of expression.

We know that some abuses of this freedom seem to be associated with the interests of foreigners, contrary to the country.

We do not underestimate the challenge of the disinformation network that intends to disrupt the public debate during the campaign.

But we have a modern and robust electoral system. Under the watchful eye of a plural citizenry and a free press, we will not allow the enemies of democracy, both internal and external, to attack the popular will.

Brazilian democracy belongs to Brazilians.

Brazil will continue to be a sovereign country.

No one, no one will take us away from this path.

May God bless us all. Thank you.

This speech was translated into English by Panamerican Dispatch. You can read the original in Portuguese, here. You can watch his speech, below.

Brasil de Fato

The two main speeches at the opening of the U.N. General Assembly were delivered by Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and U.S. President Donald Trump. The leaders addressed many of the same issues, but their speeches offered sharply contrasting visions of the global order.

Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva speaks before the UN General Assembly on September 22, 2026 (United Nations)

Sérgio Costa, a sociology professor at the Free University of Berlin, described Lula’s speech as important and forceful, not only for its defense of multilateralism, but also for the statesmanship Lula displayed in his address.

“I think Lula made this very clear: multilateralism is essential to global health, for example. Without multilateralism, we face vaccine shortages and the return of diseases that had been eradicated. Climate and the environment are multilateral issues. So is preventing wars, especially as we are living in a world experiencing a record number of conflicts. These are wars of territorial expansion, something we thought had been left behind in the 20th century, but which have returned with tremendous force,” Costa said during an interview on Conexão BdF, a program on Rádio Brasil de Fato.

Trump, by contrast, offered few surprises as he defended U.S. interests and sought to place his country at the center of the world. “These are the imperialist interests of a power that has lost ground in the world and wants to regain it,” Costa said.

The professor pointed to the document that guides U.S. national security policy, released at the end of last year. He said it explicitly lays out the goal of turning Latin America into a U.S. sphere of influence, with Brazil emerging as an obstacle to that effort.

Trump adopted a belligerent tone. He spoke of annihilating Iran, made direct threats against Cuba and offered no mea culpa regarding Venezuela, acknowledging that the primary interest had always been the oil.

“If we did not have leaders in different Latin American countries willing to hand over their wealth and national sovereignty to the United States, the strategy adopted by the U.S. would not work. It relies on elites that align themselves with this discourse of American hegemony, selling out their countries to build more power at home,” Costa said.

For Costa, one possibility for changing this situation would be for Trump to suffer a defeat in the midterm elections. That could open the way for nations to strengthen the multipolar order on the world stage.

“I believe it is possible to build multilateralism on the foundations that exist today,” said Costa. “In other words, even though these international organizations have been weakened, they have not disappeared.”

Watch Lula’s full UN Speech here.

This article was published by Brasil de Fato. You can read it in its original Portuguese, here.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva used part of his opening speech at the United Nations General Assembly this Tuesday to respond to pressure from the Donald Trump administration over Brazil and to defend national sovereignty.

Without directly naming the U.S. president in his speech, Lula asserted that Brazil does not accept external interference in its democracy and will not submit to the influence of any power.

Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva speaks before the U.N. General Assembly on September 22, 2026. (United Nations)

The remarks came amid threats and statements from the U.S. government about Brazilian politics and this year’s elections. The Lula administration has treated these as attempts at interfering in the country.

“In Latin America and the Caribbean, proximity to the world’s greatest power is inescapable. Brazil does not fit into anyone’s backyard,” Lula said, drawing applause from the U.N. General Assembly audience.

The president also criticized the return of international pressure on democratic processes and stated that the world is once again contending with practices he considers outdated.

“We have come a long way to restore the popular will. Democracy is once again under threat. We are witnessing a return of external interference in electoral processes and neocolonial drives for strategic resources. These are things of the past,” he said.

According to Lula, countries must choose between opposing paths in international relations.

“We are called upon to choose between multilateralism and unilateralism. Sovereignty or subordination,” he said.

Subscribe now

“We do not need aircraft carriers patrolling our waters”

Addressing the relationship between Latin America, the Caribbean, and the United States, Lula said that cooperation must replace the logic of pressure and confrontation.

“We need partners with a positive agenda that fosters development. Ideological differences should not be an obstacle to greater integration,” he said.

The Brazilian president further stated that Brazil does not need displays of military might, but rather collaboration to tackle concrete problems.

“We do not need aircraft carriers patrolling our waters. We need cooperation to stem the flow of weapons and money fueling organized crime,” he declared.

Lula said that this was the spirit of the documents he personally handed to the U.S. president earlier this week. Among them was a proposal to collaborate with the United States on combating organized crime.

Global crisis and the defense of diplomacy

During his speech, Lula said the world is experiencing a “profound crisis of leadership” and noted that 2025 saw the highest number of armed conflicts since World War II. In the Brazilian president’s view, the current scenario demands stronger action from multilateral bodies.

“The leaders of the Security Council nations need to meet. I am not unaware of the realities of power. War is not the continuation of politics by other means. It is the total failure of politics,” he said.

Commenting on the war between Russia and Ukraine, Lula said the conflict “has dragged on for five years as a humanitarian drama that continues to claim lives.”

“There will be no winners on the battlefield,” he said. “Diplomacy is the only solution.”

The Middle East and historical redress

Lula also mentioned the conflicts in the Middle East, stating that the Strait of Hormuz, which ought to be a corridor for international trade, has become a place of “trench warfare.”

Citing the peace agreements between Israelis and Palestinians, he noted that Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat were statesmen who “defied the past to envision a future of peace,” but who “were defeated by hatred.”

The president also highlighted a recent U.N. General Assembly decision that, according to him, corrected “historical distortions” by recognizing the trafficking of enslaved Africans as the “gravest crime against humanity.”

That statement was also met with applause.

Ivan Longo is a journalist and Politics Editor at Revista Fórum. This article was originally published in Portuguese at Revista Forum. You can read the original here.

As Brazil approaches high-stakes elections, Brazilian sociologist Marcelo Zero analyzes U.S. demands on Brazil and looks at how far-right presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro is a proxy for his father, Jair Bolsonaro and U.S. President Donald Trump. -PD

Flávio Bolsonaro is nothing but a proxy for his father, Jair Bolsonaro. Had he been born into a different family with a different surname, he would not even qualify as head of a street vendors’ association in one of Rio de Janeiro's favelas controlled by paramilitary militias. At the Kopenhagen chocolate store he allegedly used for money laundering while serving as Rio de Janeiro state lawmaker, he would be nothing more than a salesman. Because of his well-known intellectual, ethical and political shortcomings, this man is in no way fit to be president of Brazil.

Friendlier days: U.S. President Donald Trump and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva meet in 2025. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

If Flávio Bolsonaro wins Brazil's presidential election, it would mean the return to power of former President Jair Bolsonaro. He is a man convicted of attempting a coup, an admirer of dictatorships, an ally of the militias and the main person responsible for the deaths of 700,000 Brazilians during the pandemic. Essentially, it would mean re-electing the worst president in the country’s history.

Jair Bolsonaro only rose to prominence in national politics through the Lava Jato era and the wave of anti-politics, anti-Workers’ Party and anti-left sentiment that swept the country after the coup against President Dilma Rousseff. A coup that was backed by the American far right. Had that not occurred, Jair Bolsonaro's dim political shine would have remained, ad aeternum, confined to the corrupt inner workings of Congress’ lower ranks and to his dangerous ties with Rio de Janeiro’s militias. That is his real measure. The measure of a bad military man, as Brazilian Dictator Ernesto Geisel once defined it, and the tiny stature of the worst possible kind of politician.

But Jair himself, within the current political context, is merely a proxy for Trump. In other words, we have two proxies for the real candidate for power in Brazil: Donald Trump. One might call him a candidate for emperor, and his vision of that position is draconian and extremist. He is far removed from the moderation of someone like Brazilian emperor Dom Pedro II. Instead, his concept of empire seems more closely related to that of infamous figures from history like Nero or Caligula.

Revelations that recently came to light show the demands Trump made to the Brazilian government in October 2025. His goal was to negotiate an easing of the political tariffs unjustly imposed on the country at the Bolsonaro clan's suggestion. These revelations show the scope and depth of the agenda of vassalage that the aspiring emperor of Brazil intends to impose on the country.

In all, Trump made 21 demands to the Lula administration. They were promptly ignored before economic pressure forced him to lift the tariffs anyway. Today, they read like a blueprint for what we can expect if he gets his way to transform Brazil into a U.S. protectorate. Here is a brief look at 12 of those demands.

1. Brazil commits not to place or maintain any restrictions on imports of remanufactured goods.

This is simply an unbelievable demand. Brazilian regulation, in line with WTO rules, prohibits the import of remanufactured consumer goods. It only allows the import of some re-manufactured capital goods under certain conditions. It’s worth noting that about 25% of remanufactured goods by the United States go abroad, mainly to Canada and Mexico, under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). These goods include items such as auto parts, electronics and heavy machinery. Opening the Brazilian market to these cheaper U.S. remanufactured goods would obviously cause extensive damage to Brazilian industry.

2. Brazil shall eliminate tariffs on ethanol, chemical products, machinery, automotive products and high-technology goods from the United States.

This is another U.S. demand that, if met, would cause severe economic damage to Brazilian industry and to important sectors of agribusiness, such as ethanol. It should be noted that in the document that was leaked this month, the United States does not commit at any point to the principle of reciprocity. It only promises to reduce additional tariffs on Brazilian products yet to be specified.

3. The United States and Brazil agree that taxes on digital services are counterproductive to the transformative potential of digital trade, to deepening economic cooperation, to increasing competitiveness and to promoting economic growth in both economies. Brazil shall refrain from imposing taxes on digital services, or similar taxes that discriminate against U.S. companies. Brazil shall commit to recognizing the United States as a country or jurisdiction that provides adequate data protection under Brazilian law.

Brazil currently imposes taxes on so called e-commerce as well as on digital services. In the case of the latter, import taxes can reach 50%. The United States is highly competitive in exporting digital services, which account for about $700 billion of American exports. It is obviously in the interest of U.S. Big Tech companies for Brazil to open this market completely.

4. Brazil shall adhere to the principle of competitive neutrality regarding the role of its central bank, both as regulator and supervisor of payment arrangements and as operator of the domestic payment system.

This is, of course, Trump’s anti-Pix clause. Pix, Brazil’s tariff-free, government-managed electronic payment system, deeply displeases the major U.S. credit card companies and American digital payment systems, such as PayPal.

5. Brazil shall refrain from imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions, including electronically transmitted content, and shall support the multilateral adoption, immediately and without conditions, of a permanent moratorium on customs duties applicable to electronic transmissions at the World Trade Organization.

This demand moves in the same direction as demand 3, already discussed above. This time, however, Brazil is required to support specific U.S. interests at the multilateral level, at the WTO. It is a shamefully cynical demand, since the United States has practically destroyed the WTO and the multilateral rules of trade.

6. Brazil shall commit to a free and fair presidential election in 2026 and shall not arbitrarily detain, arrest or otherwise limit the participation of political dissidents in the electoral process.

This is a political demand meant to serve the interests of the Bolsonaro clan and it represents a serious affront to Brazil’s national sovereignty and its justice system. Brazil has no political dissidents. It has criminals, who were arrested for attacking the country’s democratic institutions. The Bolsonaro clan and its supporters nevertheless continue to demand that Trump define what is fair or not on our own territory.

7. Brazil shall not extraterritorially apply fines, impose asset freezes, detain, arrest or otherwise punish U.S. citizens, legal U.S. residents or U.S. companies for conduct protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

This is, again, a political demand with a clear target. It aims to shield members of the Bolsonaro coalition currently residing as fugitives of justice in the United States, who keep acting against national sovereignty while the U.S. ignores their extradition orders. As Eduardo Bolsonaro was sentenced to 4 years and 2 months in prison this June, for lobbying against national economic interests with a foreign government, it could be called the Eduardo Bolsonaro clause.

8. Brazil shall inform the United States in advance of potential asset transfers before a sale in the critical minerals and mining sector and shall provide U.S. companies the opportunity to participate in a fair bidding process before granting Brazilian regulatory approval.

This demand, along with demand number 9 which follows it, clearly aims to give the United States free access to rare earth minerals, of which Brazil holds the world’s second largest reserves. This demand also aims to block access to these strategic resources by companies from so-called countries of concern, meaning places like China and Russia. Note that under the Mercosur-EU agreement, Brazil committed to developing a technological partnership on this matter with countries from that bloc. In addition, it has already developed its own policy on critical and rare earth minerals that places appropriate emphasis on domestic processing and on their use for the development of national industry.

9. Brazil shall adopt effective measures to limit investments by foreign entities considered to be of concern in its mining sector and in other industrial sectors.

See the previous comment.

10. Brazil shall commit to providing U.S. digital service providers with adequate advance notice and the opportunity to comment on, or appeal proposed or final decisions, penalties or fines related to social media posts, as well as to developing clear rules for content removal and civil liability.

This demand reinforces the absurd idea that U.S. legal standards should prevail over Brazil’s own national laws regarding the essential regulation of social media.

11. Brazilian airlines must commit to purchasing U.S.-made commercial aircraft, including announcing their intention to buy Boeing planes.

This demand applies to both commercial and executive jets manufactured by Boeing. Trump and Bolsonaro want Brazilian airlines to buy only jets from the American company Boeing, which has been in serious crisis since the disasters involving the Boeing 737 MAX and recurring problems with its currently poor product quality control. Gol is the only Brazilian airline that currently relies primarily on Boeing aircraft. Latam prefers Airbus. Azul uses Embraer jets for domestic and Airbus international flights. Obviously, the Brazilian government cannot force private companies to purchase Boeing aircraft.

12. Brazil will align with international standards in relevant sectors to facilitate trade. It will also allow U.S. goods to enter the country without additional conformity assessment requirements, as long as those goods meet applicable U.S. or international standards, technical regulations or conformity assessment procedures.

This is yet another unreasonable demand meant to impose the technical, sanitary and phytosanitary standards prevalent in the U.S. at the expense of the rules in force in Brazil. Our country would thus have to accept certificates issued in the U.S. without subjecting American made products and goods to national, sovereign oversight. This would effectively nullify Brazil’s technical trade defenses which would incur serious danger.

The Lula government rejected these U.S. demands because they undermined national sovereignty, both politically and economically. Furthermore, the Lula administration persisted in defending national interests even after some of these outlandish demands were softened.

After all, there is no such thing as half sovereignty. Either a country is sovereign or it isn’t.

There is no doubt about it: Trump and Marco Rubio want to turn Brazil into the geopolitical target of the moment, with the eager and obsequious assistance of the Bolsonaro clan and its allies, spread across the media, other political parties and sectors of the submissive traditional oligarchies.

They want to turn Brazil into a vassal state, a kind of protectorate. They know that the country’s geopolitical submission is vital for the United States to impose the so-called Donroe Doctrine across the entire continent. Our country carries great weight in this neo-imperial strategy.

Even Brazil’s intelligence agency, ABIN, already knows that Emperor Trump is intervening in the Brazilian electoral process in order to benefit his proxies, Jair and Flávio Bolsonaro.

Is there anyone left anywhere who doesn’t doubt it?

Trump has the NSA, the CIA and the major Big Tech companies at his disposal. It is a political and communications arsenal of extreme power, already tested on numerous occasions around the world in regime-change operations.

Was the recent political shift of almost all of South America toward the right and toward geopolitical vassalage really spontaneous? Did it happen solely because of internal factors?

Did the recent crisis in our Supreme Court, so convenient for certain electoral interests, happen automatically and naturally, like mushrooms growing after the rain?

Was the decision to bring sophisticated attack drones to South America intended solely for the innocent purpose of fighting criminals?

Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want, but no one has the right, at a crucial moment like this, to be stupid or naive.

Everyone has a duty to protect Brazil, its sovereignty, its democracy and its people.

Sometimes it is not the economy, or perceptions of the economy, or poor communication, or a supposed lack of proposals.

The real problem may lie elsewhere. It’s geopolitics, stupid!

Marcelo Zero is a Brazilian sociologist.

This article was submitted directly to Panamerican Dispatch (among other news outlets), in Portuguese. It can be read in its original form here.

Senator Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ) allocated $40,800 (200,000 Brazilian reais) in congressional funding to a sports project on Rio de Janeiro’s militia-ridden West Side. The allocation was made following a request from Robson “the Fish” Calixto Fonseca. Fonseca was convicted and is currently serving a 9-year prison sentence for belonging to an organized crime group run by brothers Domingos and Chiquinho Brazão. This information was revealed to the public on Monday, September 21, in an article by investigative journalist Breno Pires in piauí magazine.

Family ties: Flavio Bolsonaro on the campaign trail with convicted Marielle Franco murderer Chiquinho Brazão. (photo: X)

According to Pires, the Federal Police have found five months worth of messages exchanged between the Fonseca and Maria de Fátima Bezerra Castro, a congressional aide in Flávio Bolsonaro’s Brasília office. These conversations primarily focused on an ongoing request for funds for a community association for help with a youth soccer project in Taquara, a lower-middle class neighborhood in Jacarepagua on Rio’s West side.

“Amiga, see if you can help us with our Senator,” Fonseca wrote in a message sent October 24, 2023. Four minutes later, the aide replied that he should submit the request by email or formal letter.

Two days later, the aide asked whether Fonseca was still working with federal deputy Chiquinho Brazão. He confirmed he was. She invited him to a ceremony in Flávio Bolsonaro’s Rio de Janeiro office, asked him bring Brazão with him and to make the request in person.

According to piauí, the Federal Police investigation report highlights this exchange of messages. It also highlights the instruction for Peixe to use the event to press for the funding.

Marielle Franco and driver Anderson Gomes were murdered in March 2018 in downtown Rio de Janeiro. In a 2026 trial before the Federal Supreme Court, brothers Domingos Brazão and Chiquinho Brazão were convicted as masterminds of the killing. Ronnie Lessa, the gunman, said in a plea bargain deal that Fonseca introduced him to the Brazão brothers. Lessa also said that Fonseca supplied the machine gun used in the assassinations.

$40,800 allocated for “soccer project”

Fonseca pressed the aide again on November 6, 2023, this time about funds for the José Carlos Procópio Vocational Training Institute (IFOP), which ran a soccer program called Players of the Future.

“Good morning, amiga, don’t forget about IFOP. See if the Senator can help us out so our project doesn’t end,” he wrote. The reply came back: “Consider it done.”

The institute received $40,800 on November 29 that year through Congressional Earmark No. 92190012-2023, authored by Flávio Bolsonaro. The payment was part of a larger $117,000 disbursement, of which $78,000 went to the Barra do Piraí municipal government.

Audit court found irregularities

The federal police report also reveals that Brazil’s federal audit court, the TCU, identified irregularities in how the institute spent the money.

Among the problems: IFOP hired a law firm to manage the books for the sports project whose director, José Rômulo Oliveira Alves, was also the institute’s president. He signed the contract on behalf of both parties.

The TCU flagged a possible conflict of interest, since the nonprofit’s director was managing public funds while also indirectly benefiting from the contract.

Auditors also found problems with the price quotes obtained for the project. There was no real public bidding process, as only one company placed a bid, despite having no experience in the contracted service.

IFOP told piauí that hiring outside staff is allowed under the regulatory framework for civil society organizations, and said it would contest the TCU’s findings.

Fonseca’s organized crime conviction

Robson “the Fish” Calixto Fonseca was a central figure in the murder investigation of socialist city councilwoman Marielle Franco (PSOL) and her driver, Anderson Gomes, in March 2018.

Ronnie Lessa, the gunman, testified under a plea deal that Fonseca introduced him to the Brazão brothers, who were convicted of ordering the murders. He also said that Fonseca gave him the submachine gun used in the killings. Fonseca has denied the accusations.

Fonseca was sentenced to nine years in prison in February 2026, for serving as an operational enforcer for the Brazão brothers’ armed criminal organization, alongside Edmilson da Silva Oliveira, known as Macalé. He also lost his pension as a retired military police officer.

During the trial, public prosecutors showed that Fonseca worked as a go-between for the Brazão brothers and paramilitary militias in the Jacarepaguá region.

Breno Pires suggests that the IFOP funding was not an isolated case. Citing an earlier federal police investigation reported by O Globo, he writes that Fonseca brokered congressional funding for an entire network of community organizations tied to the Brazão organized crime group.

piauí sought comment from Flávio Bolsonaro, Robson “the Fish” Calixto Fonseca and Maria de Fátima Bezerra Castro. None responded. IFOP said it never had direct contact with the senator, and that its advisers had pitched projects to multiple congressional offices.

This article first ran in TVT News, and can be read in its original Portuguese here.

The Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN) has raised the risk of external influence and interference by the United States in Brazil’s 2026 elections to a “critical level.” The confidential report was sent to the Presidency, the Supreme Electoral Court, and the Ministry of Justice. In it, the agency points to escalating pressure from the administration of Donald Trump on Brazil. It ties Washington’s actions to a broader strategy to politically reorient Latin America.

A giant Donald Trump figure and U.S. flags appear among demonstrators during a pro-Bolsonaro rally on September 7, 2026, on Avenida Paulista in São Paulo. (Lucas Salum/Brasil de Fato)

The document is titled, “Threats to the 2026 electoral process.” It was forwarded to authorities in late August, and its contents were revealed this Saturday, Sept. 19, by journalist Mônica Bergamo’s column in the Folha de S.Paulo newspaper.

According to the report, there is a “trend of escalating pressure on Brazil” and a “selective intensification and reconfiguration of the pressure exerted by the United States,” albeit within a historic pattern of U.S. influence over the region.

The report’s assessment does not mention ballot tampering or altering the election results. The intelligence agency’s warning addresses the possibility that political, economic and diplomatic pressures could interfere with the institutional environment and with public debate during the electoral process.

The agency places these actions within the strategy adopted by the second Trump administration to reaffirm U.S. hegemony in Latin America.

According to the analysis, strategic documents released by the U.S. government between November 2025 and May of this year point to its objectives as reducing the influence of powers considered rivals and preventing their access to the region’s “strategic assets, natural resources and infrastructure.”

ABIN identifies China as one of the primary targets of this policy. In the agency’s assessment, Washington seeks to expand its direct or indirect control over these resources, whether through the U.S. government or the country’s private investment.

Support for conservative governments

The report pays special attention to the actions of U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio. According to ABIN, his policy toward Latin America has an ideological bent and he seeks to “influence and reorient the foreign policy of countries in the region.”

According to the document, this strategy involves steering Latin American countries away from China and promoting a domestic political shift “by supporting the rise of conservative governments.”

The agency cites a U.S. Senate hearing held in June, during which Rubio linked the restoration of U.S. hegemony in Latin America to the presence of governments aligned with Washington.

At the time, Rubio stated that the region had come to rely on several governments “friendly” to the United States during Trump’s second term. He singled out Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela as exceptions.

The document also noted statements in which Rubio held Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva responsible for U.S. tariffs on Brazilian products, alleging that Brazil had not negotiated “in good faith.”

In ABIN’s view, this approach personalizes the pressure exerted on the country and has the potential to impact public debate in Brazil during the electoral period.

Brazil targeted for defending autonomy, says ABIN

The intelligence agency assessed that Brazil holds a unique position in U.S. strategy, because it has a government with “greater political will and the means to defend its strategic autonomy” in the face of Washington’s pressure for concessions and geopolitical realignment.

The report states that, despite periods of easing tensions between Lula and Trump, actions taken by the United States since May indicate a trend of increasing pressure.

Among the actions cited is the U.S. designation of Brazilian criminal organizations as terrorist groups and sanctions announced in July against two Brazilians and companies based in Brazil and Portugal. The U.S. government accused them of ties to money-laundering networks linked to the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) drug gang. For ABIN, these sanctions represented a “transition” because they caused U.S. pressure to have concrete effects on Brazilian individuals and companies.

“As a result, U.S. external interference now directly impacts financial relationships, corporate reputation, access to the dollar, international operations, and the exposure of third parties to the risk of secondary sanctions,” states an excerpt from the report released by Folha de S. Paulo.

According to the analysis, the U.S. strategy is happening in a “gradual, combined and adaptive” manner, linking Brazilian organizations to threats against U.S. national security. This is then followed by measures capable of affecting the country’s companies, banks and other institutions.

The Brazilian Intelligence Agency warns that these types of sanctions could prompt Brazilian and foreign economic actors to alter their decisions out of fear of losing access to the U.S. financial system or being impacted by secondary sanctions.

U.S. Makes Demands Over Brazilian Election

The report has also emerged amid tensions between Brasília and Washington directly related to the 2026 elections.

During negotiations held in 2025, the Trump administration presented Brazil with a draft joint statement that outlined a Brazilian commitment to not “arbitrarily” detain, arrest or limit the participation of “political dissidents” in the electoral process. The proposal stated that Brazil should commit to holding “free and fair” elections and ensure the participation of such individuals in the vote.

On Thursday. Sept. 17, Lula stated in an interview with Rádio Itatiaia that the proposal had become a “dead issue” for the Brazilian government. The president also rejected the possibility of granting the United States preferential access to the country’s mineral resources.

The confidential agency report delves deeper into the concerns previously raised in public analyses by the Brazilian Intelligence Agency. In a document released this year regarding intelligence challenges for 2026, the agency identified foreign interference as a threat to sovereignty. It warned that a combination of technological dependence, disinformation, espionage, and coercion could enable foreign actors to influence public debate and decision-making processes in Brazil.

Edited by Geisa Marques. This article was originally published by Brasil de Fato. It can be read in its original form, in Portuguese, here.

The 1964 coup gave us a 21-year dictatorship, harmful as every dictatorship is. It had been planned for years and first failed in 1954, when it was thwarted only by the suicide of President Getúlio Vargas. The military then took power but kept up appearances. They swore in Vice President Café Filho, who earned the job by betraying the president who had elected him. He was a president in name only, not unlike the figure the United States recently installed to run a Venezuela that has been reduced to a protectorate.

Brazilian army tanks arrive at Guanabara Palace, on April 1, 1964, during the military coup that led to the overthrow of President João Goulart. (AFP via Getty Images)

The military took control of the country in August 1954. By November 1955, they were already plotting a new coup, this one meant to block Juscelino Kubitschek from taking office. Kubitschek had won the October election. Critics claimed he had communist backing. Worse still, in their eyes, his vice president would be João Goulart, heir to Vargas and to the labor movement.

That coup fell apart. Brazilian history is full of such twists, and this one turned on the dissent of the Minister of War, Henrique Teixeira Lott. Lott led a coup of his own, a counter-coup if you like, to restore legality. Congress blessed it. On Jan. 1, 1956, Kubitschek and Goulart were sworn in at Catete Palace. History remembers the operation that blocked the coup as “The Eleventh of November.” The coup had failed, but the appetite for coups had not. Kubitschek served out his full term, but not without cost. He faced a hostile Congress, a hostile press (the same press we see today), endless impeachment attempts and two military uprisings, in Aragarças and Jacareacanga.

In 1961, Brazil saw a new cycle play out: a coup attempt, a parliamentary counter-coup, a military uprising, popular resistance and finally a parliamentary coup.

President Jânio Quadros resigned in a maneuver aimed to facilitate a military coup. The majority of the national deputies executed a counter-coup by accepting his resignation and swearing in the leader of Congress as acting president (as Vice President João Goulart was on a diplomatic visit to China). This was followed by an attempted military coup, which was vetoed by Goulart’s three Military chiefs of staff. There was a popular uprising in support of the president initiated by Rio Grande do Sul governor Leonel Brizola and finally, a parliamentary coup. In a matter of hours, Congress transformed the political system from the presidentialism, under which Goulart took power, into a kind of dysfunctional parliamentarism. Under the circumstances, however, this no longer mattered. The coup was negotiated between the military conspirators and Congress. Its real aim was to block Goulart’s inauguration. But when the popular reaction made that impossible, the goal was to reduce his powers.

The cycle that began in 1954 was still underway. One task remained: removing a president who championed basic reforms, who had mobilized the country around a national literacy campaign for adults and who, worst of all in his critics’ eyes, defended agrarian reform.

His ouster brought a dictatorship with it. Supreme Court justices were forced into retirement. Congress was shut down. Elected officials lost their mandates. Public servants were fired. The courts came under direct interference. The constitutional order itself was revoked. Kidnappings, imprisonments, torture, exile and killings followed. To this day, no one knows the full body count. This was the military coup of April 1, 1964. It had the open support of the mainstream press, the conservative forces and, of course, the United States. The U.S. stationed warships off the Brazilian coast. Washington called it Operation Brother Sam.

I revisit these familiar facts to show the engineering behind the process. Nothing here happened by accident. A careful observer should never be caught off guard.

The 1930 uprising was born of necessity: the First Republic, flawed from the start, had reached exhaustion. Brazil’s Estado Novo (New State), which ran from 1937 to 1945, followed the collapse of the 1934 constitution, much as the fall of the Weimar Republic in Germany cleared the way for Hitler’s rise in 1933. Even before Hitler, fascism had already taken hold in Europe. Benito Mussolini seized power in Italy in 1922. The continent, still reeling from World War I, then endured the Great Depression of 1929. Dictatorships spread well beyond Italy and Germany: to Hungary, Spain (first under Primo de Rivera, then Franco), Albania, Poland, Portugal, Lithuania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Latvia and Romania.

Latin America followed the same authoritarian drift. Brazil and Argentina led a list of 16 dictatorships that also included Bolivia, Chile, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela.

That was the world on the eve of World War II. The Cold War followed and ended in 1991 with the suicide of the Soviet Union. The United States, having defeated its great rival without firing a shot, became the world’s uncontested superpower. That lasted until the rise of Eurasia under Chinese leadership restored a balance of power and opened what might be called a New Cold War.

One thing has changed, and it matters. In World War II, the United States led a world that dreamed of the freedoms that fascism was trying to smother. Even through the Cold War, Washington claimed the mantle of defender of democracy. Today, it makes no such claim. Without disguise, the United States now leads something closer to a neofascist international, radiating out from the White House. It still commands enormous economic and military power, and it uses all of it: open warfare, hybrid warfare, the threat of invasion, kidnapping, plunder and punishing tariffs. It has joined with Zionism in the genocide of Palestinians and in aggression against Iran. It has floated annexing Canada and Greenland outright and revived old claims on Cuba. In its shadow, right-wing governments are gaining ground across Europe. Neo-Nazism just won a striking victory at the polls in Germany. NATO members, joined by a long submissive Japan, are following Washington’s lead and doubling their military budgets. This, we should remember, is exactly how the world looked just before World War II.

The rise of the far right concerns Brazil directly. One of its clearest goals, nearly achieved already, is total control of South America. So far, most of that control has come through elections. Brazil and Uruguay remain the only two democracies on the continent not yet under far-right rule. Venezuela, reduced to a protectorate and stripped for its resources, will not be the last casualty. Brazil is different: its territory, its stockpiles of strategic minerals, its population and its level of development make it the last real point of resistance, the one that has to be removed. That is why Brazil’s immediate future rests, quite literally, on the next presidential election.

Today’s threat echoes the years before 1964, when Washington leaned hard on the Brazilian government. But the two moments are not identical. Back then, the labor movement was strong. Popular forces had real organization and turned out in force. The student movement was a genuine mass movement. Congress leaned progressive, so much so that the dictatorship later had to destroy and rebuild it. The armed forces had nationalist and progressive factions within their own ranks, so much so that hundreds of officers were later purged. Ordinary Brazilians defended basic reforms and democracy itself in the streets, at rallies and in marches. That resistance is precisely why the dictatorship needed a coup to take hold at all.

Today, the threat can advance through the ballot box instead. The signs are already there.

Fascism rose this way in Italy. Nazism rose this way in Germany. Democracies across our continent are eroding this way right now. In Brazil, the setback could arrive without an open break in legality, paved instead by institutions already in crisis: a judiciary that has been weakened and compromised, not immune to foreign interference, and a Congress that has grown reactionary and detached from the national interest.

We need to act now, and without hesitation.

Roberto Amaral, 86, is a journalist. He is the former President of the Socialist Party of Brazil and former Brazilian Minister of Science and Technology.

This article was translated from Portuguese and can be read in its original form at Brasil 247, here.

Edson Fachin’s unilateral decision to strip Justice Alexandre de Moraes of his role overseeing inquiry 4781 (the “fake news” investigation) is a grave attack on democracy.

The move guts the main legal tool used to resist the ongoing coup actions against the rule of law pushed by Bolsonarismo and its allies in the mainstream media.

By removing Moraes from the inquiry, Fachin hands a victory to Jair Bolsonaro and the other convicted coup plotters. That includes those convicted of plotting to assassinate President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Vice President Geraldo Alckmin, and Moraes himself.

Supreme Court Justice Edson Fachin, during a plenary session of the court, on September 16, 2026. (Alejandro Zambrana/STF)

After seven years of conflict, the enemies of democracy have finally pulled off their most successful coup yet. They got Moraes removed from the inquiry that was investigating efforts to discredit the judiciary, threaten judges during proceedings, and sabotage the reputations of judges and courts. The path is now clear.

In defending democracy, Moraes and his wife faced sanctions from the Trump administration. Fachin should have defended his colleague. He should have protected Brazilian judicial sovereignty under attack. Instead, he chose to align himself with the reviled president of the threatening foreign power. He did the work of weakening not just Moraes, but the judiciary itself. Fachin, the institutional guardian of the Supreme Court, has become an instrument of its destruction. This is how democracies die. Fachin belongs to them, as disgraced former Lava Jato task force leader Deltan Dallagnol once said.

The inquiry wasn’t kept open for seven years out of whim or authoritarianism. It stayed open because the coup, the reason for its existence, never stopped unfolding.

Leading the inquiry gave Moraes the means to fight back against formidable forces.

The case now passes into Fachin’s hands.

The Moraes who once had the power to enforce laws defending democracy no longer exists.

What exists now is a Moraes who has been sanctioned, neutered, humiliated by Fachin. The golden dreams of fascism’s beasts, held in check until now by the historic January 8th convictions, are becoming real.

Punishing Moraes is a reward for the enemies of freedom and their allies, who have tirelessly slandered him. The inquiry is being buried. But the coup actions meant to sabotage democracy, the very reason it existed, keep showing themselves to anyone willing to look. The poison remains. Only now, there’s no antidote.

The winners are the ones who always wanted Moraes’s head. Flavio Bolsonaro sees the one banner of his campaign against President Lula gaining ground. Gone is the main barrier standing against the coup’s return.

When the author falls, his work falls with him. The rulings Moraes led now face possible annulment. With his removal, impunity for Jair Bolsonaro grows more solid.

Truth alone isn’t enough to prevail. Truth needs force behind it. It needs support.

Fachin is not the angel of balance, republican morality, and sound judgment he wants people to believe he is. He himself deserved scrutiny in the now-buried fake news inquiry. Yesterday made plain what everyone already knew: Fachin belongs to them.

Mario Vitor Santos has been a journalist for 42 years. He served as director of Folha de São Paulo’s Brasília bureau during the 1988 Constituent Assembly. He then headed Folha's newsroom at the paper's headquarters in São Paulo, before moving on to become a Knight fellow for professional journalists at Stanford University. Upon his return, he served as Folha's ombudsman for two terms, and directed Casa do Saber from 2003 to 2021. He holds a master's degree in ancient drama and society from the University of Exeter in England and a doctorate in classical literature from the University of São Paulo. He is currently an editor at Brasil 247.

This article was originally published by Brazil 247. It can be read in its original Portuguese here.

Eduardo Bolsonaro is the politician son of the former far-right president Jair Bolsonaro, who is currently under house arrest. Last year, the Supreme Court convicted the former president of plotting to carry out a coup to overturn the results of the 2022 election. Alexandre de Moraes is a member of the Brazilian Supreme Court, who led the trial, which convicted Jair Bolsonaro.

Eduardo’s brother, Flavio Bolsonaro, is a senator from Rio da Janeiro, and the leading right-wing candidate in this year’s presidential election.

Eduardo Bolsonaro is a former member of the Brazilian Congress. He stepped down last year and fled to the United States after he came under investigation for his actions in the U.S. to intimidate the Brazilian judiciary amid the trial against his father. In June 2026, the Supreme Court unanimously convicted Eduardo Bolsonaro of coercion during a judicial proceeding, and sentenced him to four years in prison. He currently lives in the United States, where he has lobbied the Trump administration in defense of his father and against president Lula. The Bolsonaro family are long-time allies of U.S. president Donald Trump. -PD Editor's Note

Flávio Bolsonaro, Paulo Figueiredo and Eduardo Bolsonaro meet with Donald Trump. (Divulgação / Flávio Bolsonaro)

The administration of U.S. president Donald Trump has once again attacked Brazil, labeling the country a “global cocaine distribution hub,” less than 20 days before the presidential election. This comes just a day after Eduardo Bolsonaro announced he would be in Washington to speak with officials about seeking new sanctions against the country.

In the U.S. “Presidential Determination on Major Drug Transit or Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries for Fiscal Year 2027,” signed by Donald Trump himself, the White House states that “the Government of Brazil has failed to confront the designated foreign terrorist organizations Primeiro Comando da Capital and Comando Vermelho, which have transformed Brazil into a hub for global cocaine flows”.

Trump’s determination aligns with the rhetoric of Flávio Bolsonaro, who, unlike president Lula, says he would accept a U.S. designation of Brazilian criminal factions as terrorist organizations, thereby opening the door for armed intervention by Washington in the country.

“These Brazilian terrorist organizations are a growing threat to peace and security around the world, and Brazil’s government urgently must take aggressive measures to confront and defeat them before they spread and grow,” reads the text published this Wednesday, September 16, on the U.S. State Department website—an agency led by Marco Rubio, who has close ties to the Bolsonaro clan.

Heading to Washington

Eduardo Bolsonaro announced on Friday, September 11, that he was on his way to Washington to speak with U.S. officials regarding new sanctions against Brazil.

“Next week I’m going to Washington D.C. to talk to some very interesting people about reviving and bringing back the possibility of getting a Magnitsky [sanction] against Moraes,” he stated during a livestream on a YouTube channel within the Bolsonaro ecosystem.

On Tuesday, September 15, Eduardo Bolsonaro met in Miami with right-wing Brazilian blogger Allan dos Santos, who posted on X, “before his trip to Washington.” “The conversation was very good. Bottom line: go for it, @SecRubio,” the blogger wrote, tagging the profile of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Monday, September 14, Eduardo Bolsonaro reiterated that he was en route to Washington but had stopped in Miami to meet with a far-right Polish lawmaker who would facilitate discussions regarding sanctions against Brazil.

“En route to Washington DC, a stop in Miami to talk with 🇵🇱 Polish MP @D_Tarczynski, who introduced a resolution to sanction Moraes via the European Union,” he wrote in a post featuring a photo with Dominik Tarczyński.

This article was originally published in Brazil by Revista Forum. You can read the original, in Portuguese, here.

Former Congressman Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL SP) said he plans to present authorities in the United States with information about Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court (STF) hearing on Tuesday, September 15th. He claims that the material could be used to support new measures by the U.S. government against Brazilian authorities.

Eduardo Bolsonaro, the brother of presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro. (Photo: Lula Marques/Agência Brasil)

His statements were posted on social media during the Supreme Court session. Eduardo said he intends to bring the transcript of the hearing to contacts in Washington and indicated he expects a new round of sanctions. The former congressman, who fled to the United States before being sentenced to 4 years and 2 months in prison for lobbying against national interests with a foreign government, also criticized Supreme Court Justices Alexandre de Moraes, Gilmar Mendes and Flávio Dino.

Session ended without a final decision

The Supreme Court hearing addressed a procedural question related to the possibility of opening an investigation involving Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The case originated from information obtained by the Federal Police from data found on the cellphone of Daniel Vorcaro, the former owner of Banco Master, who has been in prison since March.

Among the elements analyzed were chat messages attributed to Moraes and exchanged with Vorcaro. The discussion at the Supreme Court, however, did not conclude that the justice had committed any wrongdoing. Under review was whether to deepen the investigation for possible evidence based on the evidence presented.

During the session, Justice Flávio Dino requested more time to review the case, suspending the proceedings. As a result, the court did not reach a final conclusion on whether to open an investigation.

Former congressman pushes for sanctions in the U.S.

Eduardo Bolsonaro is in the United States and has been advocating for the Trump administration to use pressure measures against members of Brazil’s judiciary. These foreign activities were cited in the investigation that led to his conviction by the Supreme Court.

In June, the court’s First Panel sentenced the former congressman to four years and two months in prison for coercion during legal proceedings. According to the Attorney General’s Office (PGR), he sought support from U.S. authorities to adopt coercive measures against Supreme Court justices and the government of Brazil.

Prosecutors argued that these actions were intended to pressure Brazilian institutions during the trial involving his father, former President Jair Bolsonaro. Eduardo’s defense team disputes the conviction and has filed appeals.

Moraes was previously targeted by U.S. measures

The strategy backed by Eduardo comes after Alexandre de Moraes was placed on the list of individuals sanctioned by the United States in 2025, under the Global Magnitsky Act.

The measures initially targeted the justice and later also his wife, Viviane Barci de Moraes, and the Lex Institute. The sanctions were eventually lifted by the U.S. government, but the possibility of new measures has returned to the debate amid disputes between Brazilian and U.S. authorities.

Eduardo said he plans to use the content of the Supreme Court hearing as an argument to try to convince U.S. authorities to adopt new sanctions. Whether such measures are actually applied, though, depends solely on decisions by the U.S. government.

TVT News is a television and radio news network and online news portal operated by the ABC Metalworkers Union in partnership with the Bank Tellers and Finance Workers Union of Greater S. Paulo and Osasco.

This article can be read in its original Portuguese here.

During the September 15 hearing on whether to open an investigation against Minister Alexandre de Moraes, Brazil’s Supreme Court spent a day airing dirty laundry as two groups split the court down the middle, hurling insults at each other. In the hours following the hearing, media pundits announced the death of the judiciary and complained of a supposed complete loss of credibility with society.

(Brazil's Supreme Court. Credit: Brian Mier)

These are falsehoods, regardless of whether they were made in bad faith. Beating up on institutions and portraying them as destitute always helps the right. But the Supreme Court, as Justice Flavio Dino said, “is greater than any single member who sits on it.” I would add that it is greater than the sum of its members. But the Supreme Court we have known since 1988, designated by the Constituent Assembly as guardian of the promise of a more democratic and just country enshrined in the Constitution, may be living out its final cycle. Just yesterday, President Lula promised to work toward a deep reform of the judiciary.

For nearly four decades, the Supreme Court has honored its promise and rendered enormous service to our democracy, safeguarding the Constitution and its implementation. More recently, it confronted threats of democratic rupture and setback during the Bolsonaro coalition’s failed coup attempt. Ironically, in this most recent case, its great and courageous protagonist was precisely the justice who is now at the center of the internal conflict, Alexandre de Moraes.

We must thank the Supreme Court for progress on many issues that Congress avoided legislating, including the recognition of same sex unions, the criminalization of homophobia and transphobia, permission for abortion in cases of anencephaly, stem cell research, the decriminalization of marijuana for personal use, and the prohibition of nepotism in public service. For this, too, it has faced the wrath of the legislature, accusations of overstepping its authority, the hatred of the far right and, finally, threats of impeachment against justices along with a flood of proposals aimed at reducing the court’s role.

But exhaustion with the Supreme Court’s old format has set in. For some time now, we have watched the political system created by the New Republic break down, a system born of the fight against the dictatorship and shaped by Brazil's own negotiated transition to democracy. Important milestones include the arrival of Jair Bolsonaro and the far right to government in 2018. This weakened the executive branch even as congressional power grew, continually absorbing the federal budget and presidential prerogatives. One highly symbolic moment came with the recent rejection of Jorge Messias’s nomination to the Supreme Court. It was the Senate's first rejection of a Supreme Court nomination in 132 years.

For a time, the Brazilian Supreme Court stood in its corner of Brasilia’s Three Powers Plaza as guardian of that promise. Some even attributed to it a kind of republican “moderating power.” But “perdition”, a word Justice Carmen Lucia borrowed from Clarice Lispector to describe her sadness (“I did not lose myself, but I experienced perdition”), has been creeping into the Supreme Court’s conduct for some time now.

Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment in 2016 lacked a legal basis. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court legitimized it, approving the procedure and presiding over the process in the Senate. Shortly before, Rousseff was barred from appointing Lula as a minister in her last attempt to save the mandate she had won at the ballot box. Later, the Supreme Court denied Lula habeas corpus, keeping him in prison before he was given his final sentence. The Superior Electoral Court disqualified Lula as a candidate in 2018. That move handed the presidency over to Bolsonaro. Then came the indulgences toward Operation Car Wash before the acts of contrition: the annulment of the cases against Lula and the declaration that Judge Sergio Moro had acted with bias.

As president, Bolsonaro declared war on the Supreme Court. He unleashed his violent base against it, and that base vomited its fury in the attack on January 8, 2023. Through four years of constant threats to democracy, no one can forget that it was the Supreme Court that took the bull by the horns and set limits on Bolsonaro.

But where and when did the Supreme Court lose its way? I don’t have that answer. I suspect it happened gradually. I side with those who believe Bolsonaro’s two appointments to the court fed the mill of internal division. Many may have acted, at certain moments, with political or electoral bias. But never with the shamelessness of Justice Andre Mendonça.

In fact, I find myself using that word because I was struck by Supreme Court Justice Gilmar Mendes’s remark about Mendonça: “This man’s shamelessness is astonishing.” After yesterday’s session, coexistence there truly will not be easy. The white-glove Supreme Court sessions of old will be a thing of the past

Every crisis brings a chance for renewal. The internal conflict on the court, its members’ inability to keep it from reaching this point, and the lack of tools to handle certain situations (such as the investigation of one of its own members) may be signaling that it is time for change and reform.

It was no coincidence that, shortly after the session ended, President Lula gave an interview to TV Record. He pledged to propose a deep reform of the judiciary, not just the Supreme Court, if reelected. He pointed to several measures: setting term limits for judges, changing the way they are selected, and establishing strict rules of conduct. “People cannot serve in the judiciary while having a son practicing law, a wife practicing law, a father practicing law. In other words, there needs to be a standard for cleaning up Brazil’s judiciary within the Supreme Court itself .”

It was a jab at Alexandre de Moraes, without a doubt. But he also took one at Mendonça. “Let everything be investigated with full rigor. Let everyone’s phone records be unsealed. What Andre Mendonça kept as a state secret, releasing only what suited him, now needs to be opened to all of society, so people can see who was lying about it,” he said.

Some say Lula stands to lose more than Flavio Bolsonaro from yesterday’s uproar in the Supreme Court. But it is Flavio, not Lula, who has a $12 million gift from Daniel Vorcaro hanging over his head. Lula’s campaign needs to continually remind voters of this, and replay the audio of that conversation in which they refer to each other as “brothers”.

*Due to her role in the Liga Operaria democratic resistance group during the national student strikes of 1977, Tereza Cruvinel spent years underground in Rio’s Baixada Fluminense. As the US-backed dictatorship came to an end, she embarked on a career as a journalist, writing the Panorama Politico column on page two of Brazil’s largest daily newspaper, O Globo, for 21 years. Later, she became the founder and first director of Brazil’s national public broadcast network, EBC/TV Brasil. She currently works as a political analyst and writer for Brasil 247.

Read this article in its original Portuguese here.

There is a coup underway in Brazil. It is not a traditional coup involving tanks in the streets, nor does it resemble the bizarre invasion and destruction of the National Congress, the Supreme Federal Court, and the presidential palace by supporters of Jair Bolsonaro in January 2023.

The Brazilian flag flies in Brasilia on January 10, 2023. (CARL DE SOUZA/AFP via Getty Images)

It is, however, a highly orchestrated coup carried out through questionable, yet effective judicial means, with broad media support. Perhaps most concerning is the fact that, even if these maneuvers are fully thwarted, the harmful impact of such actions on the presidential elections in early October will have already occurred.

Here’s a recap of what’s been happening.

André Mendonça is one of the two Supreme Court justices appointed by Jair Bolsonaro. Until recently he was the official overseeing investigations into Banco Master.

Banco Master is a Brazilian financial institution that was shut down and placed into liquidation amid a huge bank fraud investigation.

The ex-president of Banco Master, Daniel Vorcaro, is currently in jail. He has long maintained strong ties with the Bolsonaro family, including financing a film about the life of the former president Jair Bolsonaro.

Last week, Mendonça lifted the classified status of the Federal Police reports about Banco Master. These reports contain messages exchanged between former banker Daniel Vorcaro and Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, the lead judge in the trials of those responsible for the January 2023 attack.

Mendonça also removed the head of the Federal Police, claiming he had been subjected to an illegal investigation by the agency.

These actions have triggered a crisis unprecedented in the court’s recent history. All indications suggest this goes beyond mere legal technicalities. Instead, it appears to be a well-orchestrated plan to cast suspicion on the relations of government allies. The apparent goal: to shift focus away from investigations into the proven links between Vorcaro and Flávio Bolsonaro, the current presidential candidate running against Lula.

Mendonça has attacked Alexandre de Moraes, a central figure at the Supreme Court in the fight against fake news. That fight has been a key instrument in the rise of Bolsonarism. Mendonça also removed the Federal Police chief appointed by Lula, just weeks ahead of the October elections. Together, these moves amount to weaponizing the judiciary amid the electoral landscape. They also downplay the gravity of the Bolsonaros’ shady dealings with Vorcaro.

In doing so, he boosts the perceived legitimacy of Flavio Bolsonaro’s campaign, and thus his electoral appeal.

Many legal experts believe André Mendonça’s maneuvers lack a legal basis. Instead they appear aimed at ensuring that future Supreme Court appointments go to individuals closely aligned with the far-right ideology of Bolsonarism. This will happen if Flávio Bolsonaro takes the presidency, because several Supreme Court seats are set to be filled in the coming term.

The actions currently underway in Brazil are legally spurious and part of a political coup that is underway. They aim not only to undermine the integrity of the elections (which is characteristic of anti-democratic political movements like the one led by the Bolsonaro family), weakening the institutional framework of Brazilian democracy, but also to permanently co-opt the country’s highest judicial bodies.

Tragically, recent polls suggest that these actions, even if likely to be reversed, have had a significant and probably lasting impact on the ongoing electoral process.

To understand how this came about, it is worth noting that Brazilian society has long been increasingly influenced by neoliberal logic, wherein collectivist political projects have been suppressed and replaced by the narrative of the “self-made man” and unbridled entrepreneurship.

The country’s religious landscape has significantly propelled this sociological shift. Thirty years ago, evangelicals made up less than 5% of the population. Roughly a third of Brazilians are now evangelical.

Like the Christian Right in the United States, which played a crucial role in the expansion of evangelical churches in Brazil, such denominations tend to hold a conservative worldview. Politics is seen through a prism of individual morality, exercised by applying value judgments with a fundamentalist bent, or even through the profession of faith itself.

In recent years, we have witnessed the progressive hollowing out of the public sphere and the accompanying privatization of politics. So it is hardly surprising that many voters form their judgments and engage in political action driven by individual indignation rooted in a selective moralism of us versus them.

In other words, if corruption is widespread and everyone had illicit ties to the disgraced banker, then my candidate’s crimes seem to lose their significance. And since a collective vision for the country no longer matters, the vote boils down to the candidate’s (alleged and manufactured) ideological alignment with the voter.

It is worth noting that Supreme Court Justice Mendonça is a conservative evangelical pastor whose nomination to the Supreme Court was widely hailed by the evangelical community. It would be naive to think that Mendonça acts without considering, directly or indirectly, the interests of this group.

Many have rightly warned of the risk that external actors might influence Brazil’s upcoming elections. The most obvious scenario involves pressure from the U.S. government to sway the vote or to refuse to recognize a potentially unwanted election outcome. This concern is justified, especially given recent coup-oriented actions by Brazilian actors. But we also run the risk that such external interventions might not even be necessary. After all, national elites have never hesitated to suppress democracy in Brazil, just as long as their rentier interests remain protected.

Today, at least for now, coup-mongering appears to unfold without the use of overt military violence. In other words, without tanks. Instead, it relies on manipulating the existing legal apparatus — Lawfare. Much like during Operation Car Wash, this strategy currently seems to enjoy broad support rooted in the selective moralism of the middle classes, as well as among growing segments of the working class. Both are sectors of the population that are becoming increasingly conservative.

What is at stake in the current election is the very defense of democracy. And without broad mobilization in its defense, this new form of coup-plotting might well succeed in destroying it.

Rafael R. Ioris is a professor of Latin American history at the University of Denver.

This article was originally published in Portuguese at A Terra é Redonda. You can read the original version, here.