Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – On the eve of the first round of the Brazilian presidential elections, the news that the United States suspended in-person service at its embassy and consulates in that Latin American nation, citing “security issues,” has once again fueled fears of interference from Washington. However, Donald Trump's Government did not establish a direct relationship between this measure and the elections. He also did not detail the nature of the threat that led to the suspension.

First modification: 02/10/2026 - 23:26Last modification: 03/10/2026 - 21:17

To display this YouTube content, you must allow advertising and audience measurement cookies.

An extension on your browser appears to be blocking the video player from loading. In order to view this content, you must disable it on this site.

This October 4, Brazilians go to the polls, with the current president, the leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and the far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro, as favorites. As part of the campaign, Lula da Silva's government has repeatedly accused the United States of exerting unprecedented pressure on Brazil. While Donald Trump claims to be following “closely” an election that he considers “very important.”

The issue took a leap this week, when the General Counsel of the Union asked the Federal Police and the Federal Public Ministry to investigate the alleged financing by the US Government of Brazilian groups that would act against the Supreme Federal Court.

The petition is based on a report from the British newspaper 'The Guardian'. According to this newspaper, the Trump Administration redirected more than $175 million from a State Department fund originally intended for Human Rights and democracy towards projects linked to conservative causes in different countries. Among them is a million-dollar program for Brazil, invested in financing initiatives that question the actions of the Brazilian Supreme Court and denounce alleged judicial abuses and cases of censorship.

The Union's attorney general, Jorge Messias, warned: “The information is especially serious in light of the Brazilian electoral process and recent episodes of external pressure on our institutions.”

He also denounced a risk of foreign interference and violation of national sovereignty. "The divergences between governments are typical of international relations. What cannot be admitted is that foreign political interests seek to interfere in the functioning of Brazilian institutions or influence, directly or indirectly, decisions that correspond exclusively to the Brazilian people," Messias wrote on his social networks.

According to Brazilian legislation and the Political Parties Law, the financing or subordination of political groups by foreign governments or entities is strictly prohibited.

There has never been so much talk about sovereignty in Brazil

Few words are repeated as much in Brazil's political debate as “sovereignty.” Since the US imposed tariffs on Brazilian exports, President Lula has resorted to this concept several times, which has even brought him a slight increase in popularity.

Recently, during the opening speech of the United Nations General Assembly in September, Lula stated that “Brazil does not fit in anyone's backyard.” Without directly mentioning Trump, he stressed that Brazilian democracy belongs to Brazilians and warned against the actions of “internal and external” enemies against the popular will.

Read alsoIn the midst of a clash with Trump, Lula defends Brazil at the UN: "It doesn't fit in anyone's backyard"

“US interference in Brazil's electoral course has been a reality since July 2025, when Trump imposed a tariff increase on Brazilian products,” says Amorim Neto, professor at the Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration at the Getulio Vargas Foundation. "It was not just a commercial maneuver; it was a maneuver accompanied by a letter published on social networks in which it was requested that former president Jair Bolsonaro - later convicted of a coup plot against Lula - stop being persecuted," adds this political scientist, who defines the current situation as "alarming."

The defense of sovereignty has become one of Lula's main flags. Their strategy summarizes their disagreement with tariffs, called “arbitrary”; the sanctions against judges of the Supreme Court of Brazil; the demands on the electoral process; criticism of the fight against organized crime; the contacts made by Washington with the Brazilian opposition; and now the possible US financing of organizations that question the highest court of the Latin American giant.

The Brazilian president's statements at the UN contrasted with Trump's speech, which also claimed sovereignty, but from a perspective focused on defending his country's interests. The dispute, in other words, is not only about who can decide within Brazil. It is also about what sovereignty means when an economic and military power uses commercial, diplomatic and financial instruments to safeguard its interests in another country.

Read alsoThe Brazilian Attorney General's Office asks to investigate an alleged US plan to finance far-right causes

The pressure started before the campaign

The tension between Washington and Brasilia began last year, but throughout this year the bilateral relationship progressively moved towards the political arena.

The first major front was the tariffs on Brazilian products, which Trump publicly linked to the judicial process against Jair Bolsonaro. The US Government denies that there is a strategy to interfere in the elections, but 31 Democratic congressmen denounced in September a “sustained and multifaceted campaign of interference and destabilization” and asked the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for guarantees of respect for the Brazilian electoral process.

Washington also changed its language to describe the electoral process. A document sent to Brazil during the 2025 trade negotiations called for the country to commit to ensuring the participation of “political dissidents” in the 2026 presidential elections.

The term is striking because Brazil does not usually use that category to refer to its political opponents. “Dissident” is an expression associated with authoritarian or single-party regimes and used by the US to describe opponents in Cuba and Venezuela, for example.

Read alsoForced labor in Brazil: a reality or Trump's "excuse" to impose more tariffs?

Another focus of possible US interference is the Supreme Federal Court. In 2025, Washington sanctioned Minister Alexandre de Moraes through the Magnitsky Law, a tool that allows restrictions to be imposed on foreign citizens accused of corruption or human rights violations. The sanctions were later withdrawn, but the conflict did not end.

The Bolsonaros have repeatedly turned to Washington to pressure Brazilian judges. In September, former federal representative Eduardo Bolsonaro met with members of the State Department and defended the adoption of new sanctions against judges Alexandre de Moraes, Flávio Dino and Gilmar Mendes. The actions of the former president's son are not an isolated episode. Eduardo Bolsonaro was convicted in Brazil of coercion in the course of the trial related to the coup plot. The prosecution's accusation maintained that Eduardo acted from the US to obtain measures against the Brazilian authorities.

In May, Flávio Bolsonaro was received by Trump at the White House. The senator acknowledged that he asked the US president to classify the First Capital Command (PCC) and the Red Command as terrorist organizations. The image of Flávio with Trump had an obvious electoral significance: the meeting took place in the midst of building his candidacy and a few months before the first round.

Read alsoSupremo sentences Eduardo Bolsonaro to four years in prison for instigating US sanctions on Brazil

The designation of Brazil's two main criminal factions as terrorist organizations opened another front between the two countries.

Last month, Trump sent the US Congress an annual report on countries relevant to drug trafficking and production. In the section dedicated to Brazil, he stated that the Brazilian Government had failed to confront the PCC and the Red Command. This issue favors Flávio Bolsonaro, who has made public security one of the axes of his campaign.

The discussion about sovereignty also reached the large digital platforms. Recently, Meta, owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, temporarily disabled ads on Lula's campaign profile. The account was restored on the same day and the company did not publicly explain the reason for the block, although it claimed that it is applying Brazilian electoral rules. The episode fueled accusations from Lula allies about the role of American technology companies in the campaign. To date, there is no evidence that the blocking of Lula's account was ordered by the United States Government.

Read alsoPCC and Comando Vermelho: the Brazilian crime "multinationals" that the US declared terrorists

A concern that goes beyond Lula's Government

The accusation of US interference is not limited to the Brazilian ruling party either.

German political scientist Peter Birle, from the Ibero-American Institute in Berlin, considers that Washington's actions constitute an attempt to directly influence the electoral process.

"Trump is trying to interfere in the Brazilian election. The worrying thing is that this type of external pressure often works," says the analyst.

The comparison with the Cold War inevitably appears in the Brazilian debate. In 1962, the United States financed operations aimed at favoring conservative sectors in Brazil before the legislative elections. In December of last year, Trump launched a new national security strategy with a focus on Latin America that, de facto, resurrects the Monroe doctrine (popularized as 'Donroe').

“After years of neglect, the United States will reaffirm and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere and protect our homeland and our access to key regions throughout the region,” the document reads.

Brazil reaches the polls at a crossroads: it is no longer just the election of a candidate from the left or the right that is discussed. The campaign has also become a scene of dispute over the margin of autonomy of the Latin American giant vis-à-vis Washington.

"The elections are very polarized. We have on one side President Lula, with all his democratic history, and, on the other side, the son of Jair Bolsonaro, a man without a biography who represents the coup, because his father tried to stage a coup," Octávio Costa, president of the Brazilian Press Association (ABI), tells France 24, an entity with 118 years of history that this year decided to break with its tradition of neutrality and for the first time declared its support for Lula's re-election.

"In the face of a coup threat, the ABI has to position itself. Brazil has to ensure democracy, freedom of expression, human rights and freedom of the press. This is a rocky clause for us: the defense of the democratic rule of law," he concludes.

Read alsoLula vs. Bolsonaro: the battle is reissued four years later... now with Flávio as a candidate

Related keywords

The content you requested does not exist or is no longer available.