Published 16/07/2025 14:36 | Edited 16/07/2025 14:50
The article published on Monday (14) by the Attorney General, Jorge Messias, in the The New York Timesrepresents a rare and firm institutional manifestation of the Brazilian State in the middle of the arena of international public opinion. Amid the growing tension between Brazil and the United States, caused by the unilateral imposition of 50% tariffs on Brazilian President Donald Trump, Messiah has appealed to dialogue, mutual respect, and international legality-without, however, giving up defending Brazilian sovereignty and the independent functioning of his judicial system.
The Brazilian strategy
The Messiah’s movement is part of a broader strategy of the Lula administration of internationalizing commercial dispute with the United States, transferring part of the pressure to the field of foreign policy and global public opinion. By vocalizing the Brazilian position in English, in the main newspaper of the political and business elite of the US, the Brazilian government shows that it will not accept the role of passive defendant and that it has technical and political conditions to dispute the discourse with legitimacy.
More than rebutting Trump, the article seeks to consolidate the image of a democratic, sovereign, and committed to international law – a direct counterpoint to unilateralism that gains strength in the US with Trump’s return to power.
A response with the weight of the state
Entitled “Brazil and the United States can do better”the article signed by Messiah is, first and foremost, a political and legal position of institutional high voltage. As Attorney General of the Republic, Messiah not only speaks as a jurist, but as a representative of one of the pillars of the Democratic Rule of Law. By taking this position to the pages of one of the most influential newspapers in the world, Brazil clearly signals that it is willing to wage the dispute with the US also in the field of international narrative and public opinion.
Sober but categorically, Messiah denounces the tariff measure announced by Trump as “unprecedented” and contrary to the spirit of historical cooperation between the two countries. It disassembles with official data the thesis that Brazil would practice “unfair trade”, pointing out that by 2024 the US had a surplus of $ 28.6 billion in the bilateral trade balance – the third largest in the world, when including goods and services.
Defense of the judiciary and democracy
One of the most incisive excerpts from the text is one in which the Attorney General rejects Trump’s attempt to link the tariffs to the progress of lawsuits in Brazil against former President Jair Bolsonaro, accused of involvement in the attempted coup of January 8, 2023. In calling the case of “hunting”, Trump-according to Messiah-surpasses the acceptable limits of diplomacy and tries to intervene in matters inmates of the Brazilian judiciary.
“No foreign government has the right to dictate or question the administration of justice in our country,” says the prosecutor. “The defense of the legality and autonomy of our institutions are non -negotiable pillars of our democracy.”
The statement carries a double message: internal, to reaffirm the legitimacy of liability of coup acts, and external, to make it clear that Brazil will not accept geopolitical guardianship about its justice system – especially from a country whose democratic image has been eroded by its own recent institutional instability.
Freedom of expression with responsibility
Another point addressed in the article is the accusation that Brazil would be chasing US technology companies and curtailing freedom of expression. Messiah refutes this thesis by explaining that the country differentiates freedom from expression from criminal practices, such as incitement to hatred or dissemination of undemocratic misinformation. He cites the recent decision of the Federal Supreme Court that admits the accountability of digital platforms in certain legal contexts, as happens in mature democracies.
The message is clear: all companies – foreign or national – must respect local laws. Reciprocity is the guiding principle.
Cooperation yes, submission not
Jorge Messias does not close the doors to dialogue – on the contrary, he concludes his article with a call to understanding and mutual responsibility among the two greatest democracies of the Western Hemisphere. But the general tonic of the text is of serene resistance to the imposition of arbitrary and unilateral measures by the United States.
He recalls the 200 years of diplomatic relations between the two countries, highlights the shared values of democracy and the rule of law, but stresses that these principles need to be practiced and respected – especially in times of disagreement.
By combining legal firmness, institutional serenity and public diplomacy, Jorge Messias offers a response that is not just a defensive: it proposes another way of making international politics in times of populism and growing protectionism.
Source: vermelho.org.br
