Tensions have escalated between the United States and Brazil as the U.S. has indicated a potential for tariffs and sanctions against Brazil, directly linked to the ongoing trial of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt stated on Tuesday, September 9th, that President Donald Trump is prepared to use U.S. economic and military power to safeguard freedom of expression globally.
This U.S. stance has drawn varied interpretations. Professor Carlos Poggio of PUC-SP characterized the threat as "impetuous" and potentially lacking a clear strategic foundation, suggesting it might be typical of the current U.S. administration and possibly stem from a misunderstanding of Brazil's political landscape. Conversely, Camila Rocha, a Political Science Doctor from USP, advises caution, believing such statements are rarely made without underlying intent and that the rhetoric on freedom of expression could mask deeper U.S. economic and political interests in Brazil.
Lawyer Pierpaolo Cruz Bottini found the threat of military force "inexplicable" from a democratic nation and stressed the need for diplomatic solutions. Brazil's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Itamaraty, officially responded by repudiating the use of economic sanctions or military threats against its democracy, affirming that Brazil's institutions would not be intimidated and would defend national sovereignty.
Gabriel Sampaio of the NGO Conectas views the U.S. statement as a serious attempt to undermine Brazilian judicial independence and national sovereignty, potentially indicating foreign complicity in destabilizing actions. Paulo José Lara from NGO Article 19 perceives these actions as part of a pattern of authoritarian behavior by the Trump administration, aimed at destabilizing the international order, and questions the sincerity of the U.S. justification regarding freedom of expression, seeing it as a cover for political, economic, and ideological motives.
Further complicating the situation, the U.S. has imposed a 50% tariff on many Brazilian goods, with exceptions for sectors like Embraer airplanes and orange juice. Sanctions have also been placed on Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who is presiding over Bolsonaro's trial, raising concerns about U.S. political interference in Brazil's judicial processes. The U.S. administration's justification reportedly includes concerns about Brazil's prosecution of Bolsonaro, which Trump has described as a "witch hunt," and Brazil's regulation of social media platforms, particularly decisions impacting U.S. companies. These developments signal a significant period of diplomatic strain between Brazil and the United States, highlighting underlying disagreements on national sovereignty, judicial independence, and the conduct of international relations.