Latest news with #Jair Bolsonaro
South China Morning Post
a day ago
- Business
- South China Morning Post
For Brics, it's a big leap from talk shop to institution of power
'Golden brick countries' – that's how Brics is translated in Chinese, a name that speaks volumes about its founding aspirations. But as the expanded bloc emerged from its Rio de Janeiro summit , it projected something more potent than aspiration. The message was loud and clear: the era of unipolar global dominance is drawing to an end. Brics leaders spoke with growing confidence, condemning 'coercive' economic tactics, effectively calling for de-dollarisation and rejecting US unilateralism. Following this display of unity, US President Donald Trump threatened an additional 10 per cent tariff on any country 'aligning themselves with the anti-American policies of Brics'. Since then, he has slapped a 50 per cent tariff on Brazil, in part for the trial of former president Jair Bolsonaro, accused of plotting a coup – which Trump calls a 'witch hunt'. Once little more than a diplomatic acronym, Brics is rapidly evolving into a geopolitical symbol. Yet its internal contradictions – India's careful balancing act , Brazil's pragmatic diplomacy, South Africa's domestic crises – continue to undermine its coherence. The bloc stands at a crossroads: can it become a true alternative to the G7 , or is it merely a fractured mirror of diverging interests? Brics is neither a formal military alliance like Nato nor a structured economic entity like the European Union. Rather, it is a loose strategic partnership – a forum of major emerging economies that collaborate on shared concerns, particularly global governance, development and financial reform.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Hassett says Brazil tariffs is about more than Bolsonaro charges
National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett defended President Donald Trump's newly unveiled 50% tariff against Brazil, the United States' second-largest trading partner, saying the move is part of the administration's broader global tariff strategy. Speaking with ABC News' "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl, Hassett said that the president has the authority to impose new tariffs if he thinks there is a national defense emergency or a national security threat -- though Trump's letter to Brazil highlighted the ongoing criminal case against his political ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro. 'So how is it a national security threat ... how Brazil is handling a criminal case against its former president?' Karl asked. MORE: Trump announces 30% tariffs on European Union and Mexico 'Well, that's not the only thing,' Hassett said. 'The bottom line is that what we're doing absolutely, collectively across every country is we're onshoring production in the U.S. to reduce the national emergency, that is, that we have a massive trade deficit that's putting us at risk should we need production in the U.S. because of a national security crisis,' he added. 'But again, as we've just established, we have a trade surplus with Brazil, not a deficit,' Karl noted. 'If you look at an overall strategy, if you don't have an overall strategy for this, then there'll be transshipping and everything else, and you won't achieve your objectives,' Hassett said. Pressed by Karl about Trump's recent criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, Hassett echoed the White House's criticism of recent cost overruns in the renovation of the Fed's Washington, D.C., headquarters. MORE: Rubio meets with Chinese foreign minister "I think that whether the president decides to push down that road or not is going to depend a lot on the answers that we get to the questions that [Office of Management and Budget Director] Russ Vought sent to the Fed," Hassett said when asked if the cost overruns could be used as a pretext to fire Powell. 'Yes or no answer. Does the president, in your view, have the authority to fire the Fed chair?' Karl asked. That's a thing that's being looked into,' Hassett said. 'But certainly, if there's cause, he does.' MORE: Coffee, shoes: Trump's new tariffs could hike these prices Here are more highlights from Hassett's interview Karl: So let me ask you, because what we're hearing from the Europeans and from the Mexicans is they were in the middle of these negotiations as this was, as this was going on, so is this a negotiating tactic, or are these tariffs real? Hassett: These -- well, these tariffs are real if the president doesn't get a deal that he thinks is good enough, but, you know, conversations are ongoing, and we'll see where the dust settles. The bottom line is that President Trump has produced a huge amount of tariff revenue with the tariffs we've seen in the first half of the year. The Congressional Budget Office has said that tariff revenue over the next 10 years will help reduce the deficit and secure our entitlement programs is $3 trillion and consumers haven't seen that. You know, Consumer Price Index inflation right now is the lowest it's been in over a decade. And so what President Trump has always said is that the foreign suppliers, the foreign governments are going to bear most of the tariffs. It's being visibly seen, and I think that that's probably affecting his negotiating position because we've got all this empirical evidence that his position has been proven correct in the data. Karl: Let me ask you about the 50% tariff that the president has imposed on copper imports. Copper, of course, is widely used in construction, industrial manufacturing, cars, mobile phones, and the like. This is what The Wall Street Journal had to say about these tariffs: 'Mister Trump is going to make U.S. firms pay 50% more for a vital metal while they wait five or more years for U.S. sourcing. How does making it more expensive to build aircraft, ships, and ammunition promote national security? This is national insecurity.' What's your response to The Wall Street Journal? Hassett: Right. The bottom line is that if there is a time of war, then we need to have the metals that we need to produce American weapons, and copper is a key component in many American weapon sets. And so, as we look forward to the threats that America faces, the president decided that we have plenty of copper in the U.S., but not enough copper production. And that's why he's taken this strong step. Karl: But are you concerned about the effect of higher copper prices before American manufacturing can get up to speed? Hassett: The fact is that the effect that you're just discussing is something that you mentioned that economists said were going to be coming all year, these effects, and inflation is way, way down. In fact, inflation in the U.S. is right about the same level as it is in Europe. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Guardian
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
We're becoming inured to Trump's outbursts – but when he goes quiet, we need to be worried
In the global attention economy, one titan looms over all others. Donald Trump can command the gaze of the world at a click of those famously short fingers. When he stages a spectacular made-for-TV moment – say, that Oval Office showdown with Volodymyr Zelenskyy – the entire planet sits up and takes notice. But that dominance has a curious side-effect. When Trump does something awful and eye-catching, nations tremble and markets move. But when he does something awful but unflashy, it scarcely registers. So long as there's no jaw-dropping video, no expletive-ridden soundbite, no gimmick or stunt, it can slip by as if it hadn't happened. Especially now that our senses are dulled through over-stimulation. These days it requires ever more shocking behaviour by the US president to prompt a reaction; we are becoming inured to him. Yet the danger he poses is as sharp as ever. Consider the events of just the last week or so, few of them stark enough to lead global news bulletins, yet each one another step towards the erosion of democracy in and by the world's most powerful country. On Wednesday, Trump threatened to impose 50% tariffs – yes, he's climbed back on that dead horse – on Brazil, if the judicial authorities there do not drop the prosecution of the country's Trump-like former president Jair Bolsonaro, charged with seeking to overturn his 2022 election defeat and leading a coup against the man who beat him, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. As concisely as he could manage, Lula explained, via social media, that Brazil is a sovereign country and that an independent judiciary cannot 'accept interference or instruction from anyone … No one is above the law.' This is becoming a habit of Trump's. He made the same move in defence of Benjamin Netanyahu last month, hinting that Israel could lose billions in US military aid if the prime minister continues to stand trial on corruption charges. In both cases, Trump was explicit in making the connection between the accused men and himself, decrying as a 'witch-hunt' the efforts to hold them to account. 'This is nothing more, or less, than an attack on a Political Opponent,' he posted, of Bolsonaro's legal woes. 'Something I know much about!' It's easy to make light of the transparent effort by Trump to forge an international trade union of populist would-be autocrats, but he's not solely moved by fraternal solidarity. He also wants to dismantle a norm that has long applied across the democratic world, which insists that even those at the top are subject to the law. That norm is an impediment to him, a check on his power. If he can discredit it, so that a new convention arises – one that agrees that leaders can act with impunity – that helps his animating project in the US: the amassing of ever more power to himself and the weakening or elimination of any rival source of authority that might act as a restraint. He is being quietly assisted in that goal by those US institutions that should regard themselves as co-equal branches of government – Congress and the supreme court – and whose constitutional duty is to stand up to an overmighty executive. Republicans in Congress have now approved a mega bill that they know will leave future generations of Americans drowning in debt and deprive millions of basic healthcare cover. Even so, they put aside their own judgment and bowed to the man who would be king. Less discussed was the bill's extraordinary expansion of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or Ice. Its budget has been increased by a reported 308%, with an extra $45bn to spend on detention and $29.9bn for 'enforcement and deportation'. It will soon have the capacity to detain nearly 120,000 people at any one time. And, remember, latest figures show that about half of all those detained by Ice have no criminal record at all. No wonder even conservative critics are sounding the alarm. The anti-Trump Republicans of the Bulwark warn that within months, the 'national brute squad' that is Ice will have twice as many agents as the FBI and its own vast prison system, emerging as 'the primary instrument of internal state power'. In this view, Trump has realised that corrupting the FBI is a tall order – though still worth trying – so he is supplanting it with a shadow force shaped in his own image. As the Bulwark puts it: 'The American police state is here.' Those most directly threatened might share clips of masked Ice agents snatching suspected migrants off the streets and manhandling them violently, just as reports circulate of appalling conditions in Ice premises, with people held in 'dungeon-like facilities', more than 100 crammed into a small room, denied showers or a chance to change clothes, and sometimes given only one meal a day and forced to sleep on concrete benches or the floor. But it is hardly a matter of national focus. Because it is not accompanied by a neon-lit Trump performance, it is happening just out of view. The same could be said of a series of recent decisions by the supreme court. They may lack the instant, blockbuster impact of past rulings, but they accelerate the same Trump trend away from democracy and towards autocracy. On Tuesday, the judges gave Trump the green light to fire federal workers en masse and to dismantle entire government agencies without the approval of Congress. Earlier, the supreme court had ruled that Trump was allowed to remove Democrats from the leadership of government bodies that are meant to be under politically balanced supervision. More usefully still for Trump, last month the judges limited the power of the lower courts to block the executive branch, thereby lending a helping hand to one of the president's most egregious executive orders: his ending of the principle that anyone born in the US is automatically a citizen of the US, a right so fundamental it is enshrined in the constitution. In ruling after ruling, the supreme court is removing restraints on Trump and handing him even more power. Small wonder that when one of the dissenting minority on the court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, was asked on Thursday what kept her up at night, she answered: 'The state of our democracy.' Meanwhile, Trump is succeeding in his goal of cowing the press, extracting serious cash from major news organisations in return for dropping (usually flimsy) lawsuits against them, a move that is having the desired, chilling effect. It all adds up to the steady erosion of US democracy and of democratic norms whose reach once extended far beyond US shores. Even if it is happening quietly, by Trump's standards, without the familiar sound and fury, it is still happening. The work of opposing it begins with noticing it. Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
We've become inured to Trump's outbursts – but when he goes quiet, we need to be worried
In the global attention economy, one titan looms over all others. Donald Trump can command the gaze of the world at a click of those famously short fingers. When he stages a spectacular made-for-TV moment – say, that Oval Office showdown with Volodymyr Zelenskyy – the entire planet sits up and takes notice. But that dominance has a curious side-effect. When Trump does something awful and eye-catching, nations tremble and markets move. But when he does something awful but unflashy, it scarcely registers. So long as there's no jaw-dropping video, no expletive-ridden soundbite, no gimmick or stunt, it can slip by as if it hadn't happened. Especially now that our senses are dulled through over-stimulation. These days it requires ever more shocking behaviour by the US president to prompt a reaction; we are becoming inured to him. Yet the danger he poses is as sharp as ever. Consider the events of just the last week or so, few of them stark enough to lead global news bulletins, yet each one another step towards the erosion of democracy in and by the world's most powerful country. On Wednesday, Trump threatened to impose 50% tariffs – yes, he's climbed back on that dead horse – on Brazil, if the judicial authorities there do not drop the prosecution of the country's Trump-like former president Jair Bolsonaro, charged with seeking to overturn his 2022 election defeat and leading a coup against the man who beat him, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. As concisely as he could manage, Lula explained, via social media, that Brazil is a sovereign country and that an independent judiciary cannot 'accept interference or instruction from anyone … No one is above the law.' This is becoming a habit of Trump's. He made the same move in defence of Benjamin Netanyahu last month, hinting that Israel could lose billions in US military aid if the prime minister continues to stand trial on corruption charges. In both cases, Trump was explicit in making the connection between the accused men and himself, decrying as a 'witch-hunt' the efforts to hold them to account. 'This is nothing more, or less, than an attack on a Political Opponent,' he posted, of Bolsonaro's legal woes. 'Something I know much about!' It's easy to make light of the transparent effort by Trump to forge an international trade union of populist would-be autocrats, but he's not solely moved by fraternal solidarity. He also wants to dismantle a norm that has long applied across the democratic world, which insists that even those at the top are subject to the law. That norm is an impediment to him, a check on his power. If he can discredit it, so that a new convention arises – one that agrees that leaders can act with impunity – that helps his animating project in the US: the amassing of ever more power to himself and the weakening or elimination of any rival source of authority that might act as a restraint. He is being quietly assisted in that goal by those US institutions that should regard themselves as co-equal branches of government – Congress and the supreme court – and whose constitutional duty is to stand up to an overmighty executive. Republicans in Congress have now approved a mega bill that they know will leave future generations of Americans drowning in debt and deprive millions of basic healthcare cover. Even so, they put aside their own judgment and bowed to the man who would be king. Less discussed was the bill's extraordinary expansion of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or Ice. Its budget has been increased by a reported 308%, with an extra $45bn to spend on detention and $29.9bn for 'enforcement and deportation'. It will soon have the capacity to detain nearly 120,000 people at any one time. And, remember, latest figures show that about half of all those detained by Ice have no criminal record at all. No wonder even conservative critics are sounding the alarm. The anti-Trump Republicans of the Bulwark warn that within months, the 'national brute squad' that is Ice will have twice as many agents as the FBI and its own vast prison system, emerging as 'the primary instrument of internal state power'. In this view, Trump has realised that corrupting the FBI is a tall order – though still worth trying – so he is supplanting it with a shadow force shaped in his own image. As the Bulwark puts it: 'The American police state is here.' Those most directly threatened might share clips of masked Ice agents snatching suspected migrants off the streets and manhandling them violently, just as reports circulate of appalling conditions in Ice premises, with people held in 'dungeon-like facilities', more than 100 crammed into a small room, denied showers or a chance to change clothes, and sometimes given only one meal a day and forced to sleep on concrete benches or the floor. But it is hardly a matter of national focus. Because it is not accompanied by a neon-lit Trump performance, it is happening just out of view. The same could be said of a series of recent decisions by the supreme court. They may lack the instant, blockbuster impact of past rulings, but they accelerate the same Trump trend away from democracy and towards autocracy. On Tuesday, the judges gave Trump the green light to fire federal workers en masse and to dismantle entire government agencies without the approval of Congress. Earlier, the supreme court had ruled that Trump was allowed to remove Democrats from the leadership of government bodies that are meant to be under politically balanced supervision. More usefully still for Trump, last month the judges limited the power of the lower courts to block the executive branch, thereby lending a helping hand to one of the president's most egregious executive orders: his ending of the principle that anyone born in the US is automatically a citizen of the US, a right so fundamental it is enshrined in the constitution. In ruling after ruling, the supreme court is removing restraints on Trump and handing him even more power. Small wonder that when one of the dissenting minority on the court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, was asked on Thursday what kept her up at night, she answered: 'The state of our democracy.' Meanwhile, Trump is succeeding in his goal of cowing the press, extracting serious cash from major news organisations in return for dropping (usually flimsy) lawsuits against them, a move that is having the desired, chilling effect. It all adds up to the steady erosion of US democracy and of democratic norms whose reach once extended far beyond US shores. Even if it is happening quietly, by Trump's standards, without the familiar sound and fury, it is still happening. The work of opposing it begins with noticing it. Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist
Al Jazeera
5 days ago
- Business
- Al Jazeera
Trump's tariff threat to Brazil is a gift to Lula
In a provocative move that fuses foreign policy with ideological allegiance, United States President Donald Trump has threatened to impose a 50 percent tariff on all Brazilian exports, effective August 1, 2025. The announcement came in a letter posted on social media, in which Trump explicitly linked the proposed tariffs to two ongoing domestic issues in Brazil: the judicial proceedings against far-right former president Jair Bolsonaro – whom Trump described as the victim of a political 'witch-hunt' – and recent rulings by the Brazilian Supreme Court against US-based social media companies, including former Trump ally Elon Musk's X. By doing so, Trump has escalated a trade dispute into a direct attempt to influence Brazil's internal affairs – using economic pressure to serve political ends and undermining the country's sovereignty in the process. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio 'Lula' da Silva responded swiftly and unequivocally: 'Brazil is a sovereign nation with independent institutions and will not accept any form of tutelage,' he declared, adding that Brazil's judiciary is autonomous and not subject to interference or threat. Under Brazilian law, digital platforms are obligated to monitor and remove content that incites violence or undermines democratic institutions, and they may be held legally accountable when they fail to do so. While a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian exports might appear economically devastating, it could in fact become a strategic turning point – and even a blessing in disguise. Brazil has both the resilience and the diplomatic tools to weather this storm and emerge stronger. The United States is one of Brazil's largest trading partners, typically ranking second after China – or third if the European Union is considered as a single bloc. Brazilian exports to the US include industrial goods such as Embraer aircraft, iron and steel, crude oil, coffee and semiprecious stones, alongside agricultural products like beef, orange juice, eggs and tobacco. In return, Brazil imports large quantities of US-manufactured goods, including machinery, electronics, medical equipment, chemicals and refined petroleum. Notably, the US has maintained a trade surplus with Brazil for the past five years. Should Washington proceed with the 50 percent tariffs, Brasília has several retaliatory options under its Economic Reciprocity Law. These include raising import tariffs on US goods, suspending clauses in bilateral trade agreements, and – in exceptional cases such as this – withholding recognition of US patents or suspending royalty payments to American companies. The impact on US consumers could be immediate and tangible, with breakfast staples like coffee, eggs and orange juice spiking in price. Brazil is not without friends or alternatives. The country has already been deepening ties with fellow BRICS members (China, India, Russia, South Africa) and newer partners in the bloc. This dispute only strengthens the case for accelerating such integration. Diversifying export markets and embracing South-South cooperation isn't just ideological; it's economically pragmatic. Closer to home, the tension presents an opportunity to reinvigorate South American integration. The long-held regional dream of enhanced collaboration – from trade to infrastructure – could gain new momentum as Brazil reassesses its global alignments. This realignment could breathe life into stalled Mercosur bloc initiatives and reduce dependence on an increasingly erratic relationship with the US. Ironically, Trump's aggressive move may weaken his ideological allies in Brazil. While Bolsonaro supporters (including members of his family) have praised the US president's intervention, they may be missing its broader political consequences. Trump's past influence abroad has often backfired, with right-wing candidates in countries like Canada and Australia paying the price. A similar outcome in Brazil is not unthinkable. Lula, who has consistently positioned himself as a pragmatic, diplomatic and stabilising global figure, may gain political ground from this latest episode. His defence of sovereignty, democratic institutions and balanced international relations could resonate more deeply with Brazilian voters ahead of next year's elections. This moment need not be seen as a crisis. Rather, it presents a pivotal opportunity for Brazil to assert itself as a sovereign economic power – less reliant on Washington and more engaged with an emerging multipolar global order. If Lula navigates it wisely, Trump's latest provocation may deliver not only a diplomatic win but a significant boost to his re-election prospects. In attempting to punish Brazil, Trump may well have undercut both his foreign policy ambitions and his ideological allies abroad. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
