By Pablo Jofré Leal on September 7, 2026.
foto: Hispan
The Brazilian political landscape, in the run-up to the October 2026 presidential elections, is not merely a domestic struggle for the executive office in the Planalto Palace; it is the epicenter of a low-intensity geopolitical war.
A contest that will decisively influence the balance of power in Latin America and play a significant role in the consolidation of the Global South as we look toward the coming decade. On the Brazilian political stage, under intense external pressure—with the United States actively participating by backing the far right represented by Flavio Bolsonaro—as a battering ram against the sovereignty of the South American giant.
This is not merely an electoral struggle between two opposing models, but the unfolding of an interventionist script orchestrated from Washington that seeks to undermine the strategic autonomy of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s government by openly promoting the Bolsonaro clan and its far-right operatives around the world.
The goal? To recolonize Latin America’s largest economy and give further momentum to the far-right governments that have taken hold across the continent. Washington, in its criminal political obstinacy, not only persists in its historic policy of treating Latin America as its backyard but has also intensified and diversified its tools of intervention through so-called hybrid warfare.
For the Brazilian progressive movement and its international allies, Lula’s victory is absolutely essential to safeguard national sovereignty and, at the same time, maintain hope for the left to reclaim ground on the continent and serve as a beacon for the Global South.
The Brazilian right has shown its disgraceful subservience to Washington, as evidenced by the red-carpet reception given to right-wing standard-bearer Flavio Bolsonaro in the Oval Office, where he sought Trump’s blessing and the coveted photograph that would attempt to salvage his candidacy; a move that lays bare the nature of this colonial pact. Vanity and megalomania are amplified in the media spotlight.
Washington seeks to exert control over the next Brazilian government, and to that end, it needs Flavio Bolsonaro. A figure molded in the image and likeness of Trump’s desires. For this reason, the political, intelligence, and media apparatus has designed and promoted the installation in power of a docile, servile candidate—a figure subordinate to the interests of transnational capital and U.S. hegemony—who will act as a dam against processes of regional and global integration.
While President Lula advocates for national industrialization, regional integration within the Global South, and a multipolar foreign policy through the BRICS, Bolsonarism turns to the White House to pay homage and offer the nation’s strategic resources in exchange for political oversight and support. After his meeting with Trump at the White House, Flavio Bolsonaro made a specific request—and it is precisely what Lula seeks to prevent:
“I went specifically to make that explicit request to Trump: the United States must designate Comando Vermelho and the PCC as terrorist organizations in Brazil,” Bolsonaro stated. A request considered a shameful display of subservience to a foreign power, but which essentially served as a distraction from the main offer: handing over Brazil’s wealth and its autonomy as a nation.
With this meeting, the right-wing senator sought to boost his candidacy following the leak involving Daniel Vorcaro, a banker imprisoned on suspicion of being behind the largest financial fraud in the country’s history—a scandal that has weighed down his support in the polls. Trump serves the far right by shielding corrupt figures—a testament to the moral character of this political sector, both in Brazil and in the rest of our countries.
Rare Earths at Bargain Prices
Flavio Bolsonaro’s candidacy and his supporters do not represent an isolated phenomenon. They embody the interests of predatory agribusiness, the ultra-conservative factions of the evangelical movement (Zionist Christianity closely linked to the Israeli regime), and the military sectors that yearn for a return to a state ruled by force.
A Bolsonaro government in alliance with Washington also has a material underpinning: control over critical minerals. In the midst of a hegemonic struggle against China, the United States seeks to address its vulnerability regarding these strategic supplies by imposing the plundering of mineral deposits around the world—including those in the South American giant.
Spokespersons and senators aligned with the hard-line faction in Washington argue for the need to secure a victory for the far right with Flavio Bolsonaro, as this candidate guarantees U.S. corporations priority and unconditional access to Brazil’s rare-earth reserves, sacrificing the industrial sovereignty and added value championed by Lula’s populist project.
The imperialist industry craves control over neodymium and praseodymium—elements essential for manufacturing high-power permanent magnets used in electric vehicle motors, wind turbines, and advanced robotics—as well as dysprosium and terbium, which ensure the thermal stability of magnets under demanding technological and military conditions. The same applies to niobium and lithium—strategic minerals of which Brazil possesses massive reserves—which are vital for aerospace alloys, defense, and energy storage.
Statements by U.S. officials bluntly confirm this interventionist doctrine. Trump himself often declares that the so-called Global South must realign itself with U.S. security and trade priorities. He has warned the BRICS—of which Brazil is a member—that its pursuit of alternative currencies or payment systems constitutes a direct attack on the U.S. economy.
On social media, Trump has directly threatened the South American nation, asserting that it is headed for economic disaster if it insists on challenging the dollar and aligning itself with “our global competitors,” singling out China as the main enemy.
In an interesting analysis from the heart of the empire, regarding Trump’s ambitions for dominance, it is noted that this strategy “establishes that the United States must control the Western Hemisphere in the political, economic, commercial, and military spheres.” A Trumpian corollary to the Monroe Doctrine—which paved the way for Washington’s hegemony until the end of the 20th century, only to be neglected over the past three decades (3)—has, under Trump, fully set out to revive that doctrine of domination.
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State and a key architect of the policy of strangulation against the region, makes his hostility toward Brazil’s sovereign project clear by asserting: “Lula’s leadership in Brazil represents a direct obstacle to U.S. strategic interests in the Western Hemisphere.” He added an explicit threat: “We will ensure that those governments that open the door to China’s influence over our critical resources face severe economic and diplomatic costs.” Rubio’s words sparked sharp criticism from Lula: “This Marco Rubio is the mortal enemy of several Latin American countries”.
Shadows over Brazilian democracy
Let’s return to the dilemma facing Brazil: A president like Lula—a leader for the Global South and capable of challenging U.S. hegemony—faces Flavio Bolsonaro in the upcoming presidential election. Bolsonaro’s photograph alongside the White House occupant in the Oval Office epitomizes not only the indignity of our continent’s far-right politicians but also one of the paradoxes of hemispheric geopolitics.
While the U.S. administration tightens tariffs—such as the 25% tax on thousands of Brazilian products—citing unfair trade practices, the Republican president lavishes praise on the Bolsonaro clan, describing Flavio, the candidate, as “a smart young man who loves his country very much.” It is the shadow of vanity, patting the weak on the back.
This is part of a calculated strategy of soft intervention on the eve of the elections. Lula’s government described the measure as a “regrettable milestone,” denouncing the Bolsonaro family’s complicity in punishing the national economy to gain electoral advantage. The White House’s explicit backing seeks to legitimize the far right, using economic pressure as a lever to weaken the ruling party.
How can anyone love their homeland when they hand over the keys to its wealth to a foreign master in exchange for an electoral pat on the back? This is imperial double standards and the subservient behavior of the far right. This is what Brazil is facing, a situation that demands a choice between dignity and sovereignty and a choice against subservient and vile capitulation.
Washington does not tolerate an independent, sovereign Brazil that leads the multipolar world. It is clear that this coming October will determine the outcome of two visions: One, of a Brazil where the far right is nothing more than a lackey willing to mortgage its people’s strategic resources to satisfy the empire’s hegemonic dictates. And the other vision is that of a Brazil with a leader endowed with a vision of dignity and hope—a vision that demands continued positive progress, as indicated by the election polls themselves, which show the current president with a 6- to 7-point lead.
The danger of the far-right wave concerns not only Brazil but all of Latin America and the balance of the Global South. The attempt to dismantle Brazilian sovereignty through these puppets, who are enamored with hegemony, seeks to reintroduce strategies of direct intervention via “soft coups,” as outlined in political scientist Gene Sharp’s manual. In the face of foreign blackmail and Bolsonarist subservience, the defense of the integrative, popular, and sovereign project led by Lula da Silva becomes the decisive battleground for the dignity of the entire continent.
Behind the facade of international harmony, the Bolsonaros’ political project navigates a minefield of legal uncertainties. The most paradigmatic case is that of Jair Bolsonaro, who was sentenced to prison for his participation in an attempted coup d’état. Added to this are investigations into disinformation networks, which involve Argentine consultant Fernando Cerimedo; his role as the architect of manipulation campaigns and digital disinformation highlights institutional vulnerability in the face of algorithmic interference. The legal ramifications demonstrate that the far right operates in a hybrid limbo, where digital agitation compensates for the political and moral decay of its leaders. It is the shadow of interventionism.
The alliance between the Bolsonaros and Trump exposes a contradiction as flagrant as it is dangerous: patriotic rhetoric is applauded while measures that undermine the political, social, and commercial stability of the South American giant are endorsed. With a stifling legal landscape and a propaganda apparatus under scrutiny, the right is relying on external validation to keep alive a polarization that threatens institutional democracy ahead of the October 4 election. The sovereignty of Brazil and the continent is at stake.