‘Brazil belongs to Brazilians': The world leader who refuses to bow to Donald Trump
'At no point will Brazil negotiate as if it were a small country up against a big country,' he said.
'We know the economic power of the United States; we recognise the military power of the United States; we recognise the technological size of the United States.
'But that doesn't make us afraid,' he added. 'It makes us concerned.'
Brazilian fightback
There is perhaps no world leader defying Trump as strongly as Lula.
The president of Brazil – a leftist in his third term who is arguably this century's most important Latin American statesman – has been hitting back at Trump in speeches across Brazil. His social media pages have suddenly become filled with references to Brazil's sovereignty. And he has taken to wearing a hat that says: 'Brazil belongs to Brazilians.'
On Tuesday, he said he was studying retaliatory tariffs against American exports if Trump carried through with his threats. And he said that if the January 6, 2021, riot on the US Capitol had happened in Brazil, Trump would be facing prosecution just like Bolsonaro.
'The democratic state of law for us is a sacred thing,' Lula said in a lofty room draped in a colourful tapestry in the modernist presidential palace, where emus roam the lawns. 'Because we have already lived through dictatorships, and we don't want any more.'
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Trump has gone after Brazil to come to the aid of his ally, Bolsonaro. His proposed 50 per cent tariffs would be among the highest levies he has issued against any country, and they appear to be the only ones driven by overtly political reasons and not economic ones.
Trump has said that he sees his own legal fight in the criminal trial against Bolsonaro.
Loading
Trump and Bolsonaro – two politicians with strikingly similar political styles – both lost re-election and then both denied having lost. Their subsequent efforts to undermine the vote culminated in mobs of their supporters storming their nations' capitol buildings, in failed bids to prevent the election winners from assuming the presidency.
The stark difference is that four years later, Trump returned to power, while Bolsonaro is now facing prison.
This month, Alexandre de Moraes, the Brazilian Supreme Court justice overseeing Bolsonaro's criminal case, ordered the former Brazilian president to wear an ankle monitor before his upcoming trial on coup charges.
De Moraes said Bolsonaro's efforts to lobby Trump suggested he might try to flee the country. Bolsonaro could face decades in prison if convicted.
In an interview with The New York Times in January, Bolsonaro said that to avoid prosecution in Brazil, he was pinning his hopes on intervention from Trump. At the time, the wish seemed unrealistic. Then, this month, Trump intervened.
In a July 9 letter to Lula, Trump called the criminal case against Bolsonaro 'an international disgrace' and compared it to his own past charges. 'It happened to me, times 10,' Trump said.
He also criticised de Moraes for his rulings on social media content. And he said Brazil was an unfair trading partner, claiming incorrectly that the US had a trade deficit with Brazil. The US had a $US7.4 billion ($11.4 billion) trade surplus with Brazil last year on about $US92 billion in trade.
Lula, 79, said it was 'disgraceful' that Trump had issued his threats on his social media site, Truth Social. 'President Trump's behaviour strayed from all standards of negotiations and diplomacy,' Lula said.
'When you have a commercial disagreement, a political disagreement, you pick up the phone; you schedule a meeting; you talk, and you try to solve the problem. What you don't do is tax and give an ultimatum.'
'Win-win to lose-lose'
He said Trump's efforts to help Bolsonaro were going to be paid for by Americans who would face higher prices for coffee, beef, orange juice and other products that were significantly sourced from Brazil.
'Neither the American people nor the Brazilian people deserve this,' Lula said. 'Because we are going to move from a 201-year-old diplomatic relationship of win-win to a political relationship of lose-lose.'
Trump said the tariffs were also meant to target Brazil's Supreme Court for what he says are 'censorship orders' against US tech companies.
Loading
De Moraes has ordered tech companies to take down thousands of accounts and posts that he says threaten democracy. Yet, he has largely kept his orders under seal and declined to explain why certain accounts are dangerous. He has also jailed several people for posting threats against Brazil's institutions online.
On Wednesday, the US Treasury Department announced that it had imposed sanctions against de Moraes under the Global Magnitsky Act, a severe escalation in the feud. The act is designed to punish foreigners accused of serious human-rights violations or corruption, and it places significant financial restrictions on individuals.
'De Moraes is responsible for an oppressive campaign of censorship, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights and politicised prosecutions — including against former president Jair Bolsonaro,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a news release.
Brazil's Supreme Court did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Eduardo Bolsonaro, the son of the former president, has been in Washington lobbying for such sanctions for months.
Loading
The State Department had already revoked the visas of de Moraes, other Brazilian Supreme Court justices and their families for 'censorship' and a 'political witch hunt against Jair Bolsonaro'.
When asked about the potential sanctions on Tuesday, a day before they were announced, Lula said: 'If what you're telling me is true, it's more serious than I imagined. The Supreme Court of a country has to be respected not only by its own country, but it has to be respected by the world.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
US appeals court keeps ban on LA immigration arrests
A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement. A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement.
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
India will continue to buy Russian oil, officials say
India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July. India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources say, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. "These are long-term oil contracts," one of the sources said. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump indicated in a Truth Social post in July that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had "not given any direction to oil companies" to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal said India had a "steady and time-tested partnership" with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stood on their merit and should not be viewed from the prism of a third country. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners - Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35 per cent of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up one per cent from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. In July, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported in July.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
‘A threat was made': Trump repositions nuclear subs after online spat with ex-Russian leader
Washington: In a warning to Russia, US President Donald Trump said Friday he's ordering the repositioning of two US nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of the country's former president, Dmitry Medvedev, who has raised the prospect of war online. Trump posted on his social media site that, based on the 'highly provocative statements' from Medvedev, he had 'ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that'. The president added, 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.' He told US cable network Newsmax Friday night Washington time (Saturday AEST) that the submarines had been moved closer to Russia. It wasn't clear what impact Trump's order would have on US nuclear subs, which are routinely on patrol in the world's hotspots, but it comes at a delicate moment in the Trump administration's relations with Moscow. Trump said later Friday that he was alarmed by Medvedev's attitude. 'He's got a fresh mouth,' he said in an interview with Newsmax on Saturday AEST. Trump has said that special envoy Steve Witkoff is heading to Russia to push Moscow to agree to a ceasefire in its war with Ukraine and has threatened new economic sanctions if progress is not made. He cut his 50-day deadline for action to 10 days, with that window set to expire next week. The post about the sub repositioning came after Trump, in the wee hours of Thursday morning, had posted that Medvedev was a 'failed former President of Russia' and warned him to 'watch his words'.
