U.S. interference in Brazilian elections is 'alarming,' FGV professor says

Electoral gains from Lula’s defense of sovereignty are proving limited even as right adopts ‘submissive’ stance, Octavio Amorim Neto says

In recent weeks, the crisis between Brazil and the U.S., which began with Washington’s sweeping tariff hikes in 2025, has escalated amid criticism from the Lula administration over alleged attempts by U.S. President Donald Trump to interfere in Brazil’s elections. The concern, voiced by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva at the opening of the UN General Assembly last week, is also shared by political scientist Octavio Amorim Neto, a professor at Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV).

Analysis: Opposing worldviews make a Brazil-U.S. deal hard to imagine Analysis: At UN, Lula defends a legacy under threat of electoral defeat Sovereignty takes center stage in foreign policy electoral platforms

Analysis: Opposing worldviews make a Brazil-U.S. deal hard to imagine

Analysis: At UN, Lula defends a legacy under threat of electoral defeat

Sovereignty takes center stage in foreign policy electoral platforms

The expert has been closely monitoring what he describes as an “alarming” instance of U.S. interference in Brazil’s elections. In Amorim’s view, the Trump administration’s actions have been aimed from the outset at benefiting the candidacy of Flávio Bolsonaro (Liberal Party, PL).

“American interference in Brazil’s electoral process has been a reality since July 2025, when Trump imposed higher tariffs on Brazilian products,” Amorim Neto says. He continues: “It was not just a trade maneuver. It was a maneuver accompanied by a letter published on social media calling for Jair Bolsonaro to stop being ‘persecuted,’” he adds.

“American interference in Brazil’s electoral process has been a reality since July 2025, when Trump imposed higher tariffs on Brazilian products,” Amorim Neto says. He continues: “It was not just a trade maneuver. It was a maneuver accompanied by a letter published on social media calling for Jair Bolsonaro to stop being ‘persecuted,’” he adds.

The professor recalled that this initial act of U.S. interference prompted opposing reactions from Brazil’s political forces at the time. “Bolsonarism explicitly applauded it, while Brazil’s traditional right did not vigorously defend national sovereignty, saying that everything was Lula’s fault,” he recalls.

At the time, the defense of national sovereignty boosted Lula’s popularity, Amorim Neto says. He notes that both the general public and political elites praised the president for fulfilling his constitutional duty to defend national sovereignty.

However, since the election campaign effectively began in August this year, that boost in popularity has faded. Amorim says the Workers’ Party (PT) had hoped that the issue of sovereignty could become a campaign theme, bringing together political support, as happened with the election of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney .

So far, however, that scenario has failed to materialize. “I expected this issue to generate greater electoral dividends for Lula in this campaign, but it is not paying off. This is a sign of the enormous strength of Bolsonarism in Brazilian society. At the same time, it reveals mistakes in Lula’s campaign,” Amorim says.

The political scientist lists a series of U.S. actions that, like pieces of a puzzle, form what he considers to be the current threat to national sovereignty. In addition to trade tariffs and explicit support for the Bolsonaro family, he cites the suspension of U.S. entry visas for members of Brazil’s Supreme Court; an attempt to send State Department officials to raise suspicions Brazil’s voting system; former federal deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro’s activities in alignment with members of the U.S. administration; and the suspension of the visa of Brazil’s ambassador to the U.S., Maria Luiza Viotti .

“Revoking the Brazilian ambassador’s visa was the most aggressive move of all. There is no precedent for this in history,” he says. Another source of U.S. pressure cited by Amorim Neto is the formation of the Shield of the Americas, a coalition launched by the Trump administration that brings together governments ideologically aligned with the U.S. The alliance includes countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, and El Salvador.

Led by left-wing governments, Brazil and Mexico were not invited to join the coalition. The initiative aims to coordinate military operations and combat organized crime across the continent, in line with the Trump administration’s doctrine for the region. At Trump’s request, the group signed an agreement to designate Brazil’s criminal organizations First Capital Command (PCC) and Red Command (CV) as narco-terrorist organizations. According to the political scientist, this is dangerous because it creates an opening for U.S. military intervention in Brazil.

The issue also provides electoral ammunition for Flávio, he says. “Bolsonarism is updating the hard-line ‘the only good criminal is a dead criminal’ rhetoric by using this extremely dangerous U.S. classification that turns the PCC and CV into terrorist organizations. It is a complex issue, and it ends up benefiting Bolsonaro because the Brazilian population is desperate for answers on public security,” he says.

Flávio’s campaign did not respond to questions from Valor the issue.

Given the complexity of the subject, Amorim Neto believes Lula’s defense of national sovereignty in this case, although justified, has limited electoral impact because it is an issue that feels remote from people’s everyday lives. “Since the 1964 coup, there has been no recent precedent in Brazil’s collective memory of U.S. military intervention in the country. As a result, voters do not grasp what this means,” he explains.

A Datafolha poll released in August supports the analyst’s argument. The survey found that 50% of Brazilians believe some form of foreign interference in these elections is possible. However, only 32% say this would pose a problem for the country, while 18% say they do not see the issue as a threat.

In recent weeks, the analyst continues, other developments have emerged that illustrate the threat facing Brazil’s electoral system. In a report sent in late August to the Office of the President, the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) and the Ministry of Justice, the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (Abin) warned of the risk of U.S. interference in the elections, according to a report by Folha de S.Paulo.

According to the newspaper, Abin highlighted the role of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio , attributing to him ideological motivations aimed at influencing domestic politics in the region, with Brazil as a target.

Last week, the PT petitioned Justice Flávio Dino , requesting measures to investigate alleged actions by the Trump administration to benefit Flávio. In its filing, the party called for the Federal Police to open an investigation and for stricter rules against the enforcement of foreign requirements that have no legal basis in Brazil.

The PT’s action is based on suspicions of financial transfers from U.S. far-right organizations to Flávio’s campaign, support for social media content supplied to the PL’s campaign operation, and paid promotion by accounts based abroad. The objective would be to identify the funders, service providers and beneficiaries of these measures.

According to Amorim, it is still too early to know how far Trump’s influence could reach. The expert, however, criticizes what he considers the “submissive” stance adopted by the right in the face of this external threat. In his view, the Bolsonaro family has encouraged a subservience to the U.S. that does not stem organically from right-wing movements in Brazil.

“What is Bolsonarism? It is moral conservatism, support for economic liberalism, military interventionism, opposition to the PT, opposition to universities, opposition to science and opposition to the mainstream press,” Amorim says, adding: “However, he [Bolsonaro] also calls himself a patriot. How can a patriot support Brazil’s total alignment with the world’s greatest power at a time of blatant imperialism? This radical alignment with the United States is not a demand from the Bolsonarist electorate; it is a creation of the Bolsonaro family.”

“What is Bolsonarism? It is moral conservatism, support for economic liberalism, military interventionism, opposition to the PT, opposition to universities, opposition to science and opposition to the mainstream press,” Amorim says, adding: “However, he [Bolsonaro] also calls himself a patriot. How can a patriot support Brazil’s total alignment with the world’s greatest power at a time of blatant imperialism? This radical alignment with the United States is not a demand from the Bolsonarist electorate; it is a creation of the Bolsonaro family.”

This article was translated from Valor Econômico using an artificial intelligence tool under the supervision of the Valor International editorial team to ensure accuracy, clarity, and adherence to our editorial standards. Read our Editorial Principles.