The election of the Republican Donald Trump as President of the United States marks a shift in the international order. Although his presidency introduces new dynamics into global politics, analysts suggest that significant changes in the bilateral relations between the United States and Brazil are unlikely.
Brazil has traditionally maintained a pragmatic and diversified foreign policy, and this approach is expected to continue regardless of changes in U.S. leadership. The two nations share long-standing economic, cultural, and diplomatic ties, which provide a foundation for stability in their bilateral relationship. However, areas such as trade, environmental policies, and multilateral cooperation may undergo adjustments as the Trump administration prioritizes "America First" policies, potentially adopting a more transactional approach to international affairs.
Factors such as potential changes in U.S. tariffs, shifts in global commodity markets, and fluctuations in foreign direct investment could present challenges or opportunities for Brazil, depending on how these policies are implemented and negotiated. Additionally, Trump's close ties with Bolsonaro add an extra layer of complexity for Lula, who must navigate a domestic landscape marked by deep political polarization.
Trump's victory and Bolsonaro
Trump's victory had significant repercussions on the political landscape, energizing not only his supporters but also resonating deeply among right-wing groups globally. Among those celebrating are the supporters of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, who view Trump's return to power as a symbolic triumph for conservative movements worldwide. For Bolsonaro's base, Trump's victory represents more than an ideological alignment: it has rekindled hopes that Bolsonaro's political and legal situation may change, potentially paving the way for his return to Brazilian politics (Prazeres, 2024).
In 2023, Jair Bolsonaro was declared ineligible to run for office until 2030, following two convictions by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE). The first conviction involved abuse of political power after Bolsonaro held a controversial meeting with foreign ambassadors in which he cast doubt on the integrity of Brazil's electronic voting system, a cornerstone of the country's democracy. The second conviction was for abuse of economic power. As a result of these decisions, Bolsonaro's passport was confiscated, restricting his international mobility.
Despite his legal troubles, Bolsonaro and his supporters remain defiant. His legal team maintains that he is innocent, asserting that the cases against him are politically motivated. For Bolsonaro’s base, optimism that his ineligibility might be overturned before the 2026 elections is rooted in a broader narrative that frames both Trump and Bolsonaro as victims of political persecution by left-leaning establishments.
Jair Bolsonaro described Trump's victory as a significant boost for the global right, stating that it would not only strengthen conservative movements in the United States but also inspire similar movements in countries like Brazil. The former Brazilian president also claimed to have received an invitation to Trump's inauguration, although his inability to travel due to judicial restrictions prevented him from attending.
This alliance between Trump and Bolsonaro goes beyond the symbolic. It represents a shared set of strategies, such as nationalist rhetoric, skepticism toward global institutions, and appeals to traditional conservative values. Both leaders have built their political brands by challenging the status quo, using populist narratives, and mobilizing disaffected voters.
The potential economic ramifications of Trump’s presidency for Brazil add another layer of complexity to this dynamic. An article published by The Wall Street Journal suggested that Trump could consider imposing tariffs on Brazil, citing allegations that the Brazilian government had engaged in “lawfare” against Jair Bolsonaro (Pearson, 2025). This term, frequently used by Bolsonaro’s allies, refers to the use of legal mechanisms as a tool for political persecution.
Although this allegation remains unfounded and no official source has confirmed the possibility of tariffs, the narrative emphasizes the growing polarization in Brazilian political discourse. Pro-Bolsonaro commentators and right-wing media outlets have amplified these concerns, presenting them as evidence of international solidarity against what they perceive as left-wing excesses in Brazil.
For Brazil, the intersection of Trump’s presidency and Bolsonaro’s legal disputes creates a complex scenario. On one hand, the ideological alignment between Trump and Bolsonaro’s base could encourage conservative movements within Brazil, potentially destabilizing the government of Lula da Silva. On the other hand, the possibility of economic retaliation led by Trump adds an extra layer of uncertainty to Brazil’s foreign relations.
If Trump were indeed to pursue tariffs against Brazil, the economic consequences could be significant. Such measures could also complicate Brazil’s efforts to recover from post-pandemic economic challenges and weaken its position in global trade networks.
It is important to approach these developments with caution. The allegations about potential tariffs and the broader implications of Trump’s victory are largely speculative at this stage. Much of the discourse surrounding these issues originates from ideologically-driven sources, including right-wing journalists and former officials from Bolsonaro’s government.
Thus, any analysis of the impact of Trump on Brazil should be based on verified information and a deep understanding of the broader geopolitical context. While the alignment between Trump and Bolsonaro represents a powerful symbolic force, its practical implications will depend on a range of factors, including Trump’s actual policy decisions, Bolsonaro’s legal strategy, and the responses of other key actors in Brazil’s political landscape.
The economic implications of Donald Trump's proposed agenda
The agenda proposed by Donald Trump for his second term includes a range of aggressive policies, such as mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, significant increases in import tariffs, and expanded subsidies for domestic industries. While these policies aim to promote U.S. economic self-sufficiency and job creation, analysts warn that they could have far-reaching consequences, such as an increase in U.S. public debt, a rise in inflation, and disruption to global trade flows.
One of the most concerning aspects of Donald Trump’s agenda is the plan to impose comprehensive tariffs on imports, ranging from 10% to 20% for all U.S. trading partners, 60% on Chinese goods, and additional surcharges exceeding 100% in specific circumstances. Trump argues that these measures would incentivize companies to move production to the United States, creating jobs and reducing the trade deficit. However, the broader economic implications of such a policy are far more complex (Veras Mota, 2024).
For trading partners such as Brazil, the imposition of high tariffs would have direct consequences, particularly in terms of reduced export volumes. If U.S. consumers face significantly higher prices for imported goods, they may either absorb the additional costs or reduce consumption, leading to a contraction in trade. This reduction in U.S. imports would directly affect countries that depend on exports to the United States, such as Brazil, which could see a decline in its trade surplus and overall economic growth.
Moreover, the higher costs would likely be passed on to U.S. consumers, fueling inflation. The rise in inflation, in turn, would force the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to stabilize prices, strengthening the U.S. dollar. A stronger dollar would make Brazilian exports more expensive on the international market, further exacerbating the challenges for Brazil's economy.
The proposed tariff increases could also have significant effects on global trade. For example, the imposition of a 60% tariff on China aligns with Trump’s consistent view of framing China as an economic adversary. However, the broader implications of this policy could lead to a significant reduction in trade flows between the U.S. and China. As China is Brazil's largest trading partner, accounting for a substantial share of its commodity exports, any slowdown in the Chinese economy—triggered by reduced U.S. demand for Chinese products—could reduce China's demand for Brazilian commodities such as iron ore, soybeans, and crude oil.
While Brazil could benefit from reduced Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans, potentially opening up space for increased Brazilian exports, this benefit would likely be outweighed by the overall decline in global commodity prices. For instance, a sharp drop in the prices of coal, copper, aluminum, and iron could negatively impact Brazil's export revenues, undermining its economic stability.
While the main expectation is that Trump’s policies would lead to higher inflation and interest rates, some analysts consider alternative scenarios. For example, the imposition of high tariffs could introduce significant uncertainties and disrupt supply chains, potentially slowing down economic activity in the U.S. In this case, the Federal Reserve could respond by lowering interest rates instead of raising them.
However, this alternative scenario would not necessarily be favorable for Latin America. A slowdown in U.S. economic activity could weaken global demand, leading to a contraction in trade and investment flows. For Brazil, this would likely result in reduced demand for its exports and falling commodity prices, further pressuring its economy.
Additionally, José Márcio Camargo, Emeritus Professor at PUC-RJ and Chief Economist at Genial Investimentos, highlights a potential economic slowdown in China, Brazil’s largest trading partner. A reduction in trade between the U.S. and China could weaken China’s demand for commodities, exacerbating the challenges faced by Brazil’s export-oriented economy.
Strategic agenda of Brazil's foreign policy
Brazil's foreign policy in 2025 will be defined by a combination of diplomatic pragmatism, environmental leadership, and a focus on strengthening the Global South. As Brazil navigates its relations with a Donald Trump administration, hosts COP 30 in Belém, and presides over the BRICS bloc, its ability to harmonize diverse and often conflicting priorities will be crucial.
With Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency, Brazil’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mauro Vieira, advocates for a strategy of political disengagement combined with economic pragmatism. Drawing parallels with Brazil's approach to Javier Milei in Argentina, Vieira emphasizes the importance of prioritizing economic ties over ideological alignment (Murillo Camarotto, 2024).
The United States remains a critical economic partner for Brazil, with U.S. investments in the country totaling $150 billion, while Brazilian companies employ thousands of people in the U.S. This deep interdependence makes it imperative for both nations to maintain functional relations, despite potential political differences. Vieira’s remarks highlight Brazil’s intention to compartmentalize its relationship with the U.S., focusing on areas of mutual benefit and minimizing potential friction in the political sphere. However, Trump’s protectionist tendencies could challenge this approach. Should his administration impose tariffs or pressure Brazil to distance itself from China, Brazil’s balancing act between the U.S. and China will become increasingly delicate.
The 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 30) in Belém marks a decisive moment for Brazil's environmental diplomacy. Under the leadership of President Lula, the government has positioned itself as a global advocate for ambitious climate action, particularly emphasizing the role of the Amazon in combating climate change.
Minister Mauro Vieira stresses the urgency of achieving meaningful outcomes at COP 30, underscoring Brazil’s role as a bridge between the Global South and developed nations in addressing climate change. The conference offers Brazil a critical platform to advocate for more robust climate commitments. However, this advocacy becomes more complex in a geopolitical context shaped by Trump’s return and his historically antagonistic stance on environmental policies.
During Trump’s previous administration, environmental initiatives faced significant setbacks, including the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the promotion of fossil fuel industries at the expense of renewable energy. The potential continuation of these policies in his new term presents a challenge to global climate efforts. Brazil’s strategy now must navigate between Trump’s environmental stance and the more collaborative approach adopted by key actors in the Global South, particularly China.
China, a central member of BRICS and the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, has demonstrated a growing commitment to environmental issues, particularly through investments in renewable energy and long-term carbon neutrality goals. China’s leadership on the Global South’s climate agenda provides a counterbalance to the potential inertia or resistance from a Trump-led U.S.
Brazil's presidency of BRICS in 2025 presents a unique opportunity to deepen this cooperation. Under the theme “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Effective and Sustainable Governance,” Brazil can work with China and other BRICS members to promote innovative climate financing mechanisms and sectoral projects aimed at emission reductions in emerging economies (Presidência da República, 2025). By aligning BRICS’s climate initiatives with the objectives of COP 30, Brazil can amplify the collective voice of the bloc in global climate negotiations, presenting the Global South as a unified front advocating for ambitious climate action.
A central focus of Brazil’s efforts will be advocating for increased climate financing from developed nations, particularly under the “Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capacities” (CBDR-RC). This principle emphasizes that, while all nations should contribute to addressing climate change, developed nations, historically responsible for the largest share of global emissions, bear a greater financial responsibility (Climate Nexus, 2019).
Trump’s anticipated reluctance to commit to ambitious climate goals may isolate the United States from the broader international consensus, especially as the Global South asserts its leadership on the issue. Brazil, alongside China and other BRICS members, is well-positioned to push for concrete outcomes at COP 30, such as enforceable emission reduction targets and a robust climate adaptation financing framework.
Conclusion
As Brazil navigates its dual role as a leader in the Global South and a key economic partner of the United States, its ability to balance competing pressures will be crucial. While Trump’s potential opposition to climate action represents a challenge, Brazil’s pragmatic approach—focusing on areas of mutual benefit while leveraging its leadership within BRICS—may help mitigate tensions.
At the same time, Brazil must resist pressures that could undermine its climate commitments. For instance, the Trump administration may seek to weaken Brazil’s ties with China, using trade or economic incentives as leverage. Brazil’s ability to maintain its independence in foreign policy while fostering collaboration with both the U.S. and China will define its success in navigating this complex scenario.
As COP 30 approaches, Brazil's role as a climate leader will be tested on multiple fronts. By defending the interests of the Global South, fostering innovation within BRICS, and advocating for meaningful commitments from developed nations, Brazil has the opportunity to shape the global climate agenda in 2025.
However, this vision depends on Brazil’s ability to handle domestic and international challenges with strategic foresight. Whether navigating Trump’s foreign policy or strengthening alliances within the Global South, Brazil’s leadership in 2025 reflects a broader ambition to contribute to a more inclusive, sustainable, and multipolar world order.
Ultimately, COP 30 will serve as a decisive test of Brazil’s ability to reconcile its environmental aspirations with the realities of global politics. Success will require not only diplomatic skill but also the courage to lead by example in a world increasingly defined by its environmental and geopolitical complexities.
Bibliography
Climate Nexus. 2019. “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC).” Climate Nexus. 2019. https://climatenexus.org/climate-change-news/common-but-differentiated-responsibilities-and-respective-capabilities-cbdr-rc/.
Murillo Camarotto. 2024. “Brazil Must Be Pragmatic with Trump, Foreign Minister Says.” Valor International. December 27, 2024. https://valorinternational.globo.com/foreign-affairs/news/2024/12/27/brazil-must-be-pragmatic-with-trump-foreign-minister-says.ghtml.
Pearson, Samantha. 2025. “Trump Invited Bolsonaro to His Inauguration. Brazil Won’t Let Him Go.” The Wall Street Journal. January 15, 2025. https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/trump-invited-bolsonaro-to-his-inauguration-brazil-wont-let-him-go-42e75973.
Prazeres, Leandro. 2024. “Eduardo Bolsonaro: ‘Vitória de Trump Ativa Imaginário de Que Bolsonaro Pode Retornar’ - BBC News Brasil.” BBC News Brasil. November 6, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/c4gz2ve905eo.
Presidência da República. 2025. “Brazil Takes over the BRICS Presidency in 2025.” Planalto. January 1, 2025. https://www.gov.br/planalto/en/latest-news/2025/01/brazil-assumes-the-presidency-of-brics-in-2025.
Veras Mota, Camilla. 2024a. “Dólar: O Que Eleição de Trump Significa Para Economia Do Brasil - BBC News Brasil.” BBC News Brasil. November 6, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/c1dpng7k0zlo.
Veras Mota, Camilla . 2024b. “Eleições EUA 2024: As Polêmicas Propostas Populistas de Trump E Kamala Para a Economia - BBC News Brasil.” BBC News Brasil. November 4, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/cp9z210vk9do.
Comentarios