Latin America’s largest country (more than 3 million square miles) and the world’s fourth-largest democracy (more than 210 million people), Brazil, has been defined by the presence of two major political figures in recent years. Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (known as Lula) both have massive and devoted followings. But both leaders possess qualities that make them problematic either for Brazil or the world (or both).
Brazil, though currently a federal presidential democracy (a system very much like that of the United States on paper, having states with power and the same three branches of government) with protections for civil liberties, does not have a long consistent history of liberal democracy. Since 1889, the country has found itself oscillating in and out of democracy, experimenting multiple times with other systems, including prolonged periods of military rule and authoritarianism. At the height of the Cold War, an American-backed Brazilian military dictatorship ruled the country from 1964 through 1985, after which the country began its transition into its current conflicted democratic form. Democracy, worldwide, is particularly fragile in countries whose histories have mostly been marked by dictatorship and authoritarianism. Even in countries with strong democratic traditions, democracies are being seriously threatened.
As an example, after the fall of the U.S.S.R. in 1991, Russia tried democracy, initially holding genuine elections and establishing a federal republican government. Following Vladimir Putin’s rise, however, the country began to drift into undemocratic autocracy, the system that had essentially defined its entire history and which it lives under today.
While Brazil is different, it by no means has the same democratic tradition as the United States and its history of democracy is still less even when compared to some other developing nations, such as India, for example, where major threats to democracy – including radical populist religious nationalism – are afoot as well. Indeed this lack of democratic history can be seen in the two most prominent political figures of Brazil, especially in Bolsonaro.
Jair Bolsonaro, president of Brazil from 2018 until 2022 emerged from the fringes of the Brazilian right and quickly rose to the nation’s highest office. His presence in the public eye was marked by bigoted remarks against various groups and praise for the military dictatorship of years past. Bolsonaro also oversaw other destructive acts, such as the removal of protections for Brazil’s famed forests and the consistent denial of the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine. However, his response to his loss in Brazil’s 2022 election was potentially most politically damning for him. Similarly to Donald Trump in 2020 (a man Bolsonaro fervently admires), Bolsonaro refused to accept his own loss. This only made the already existing and deeply entrenched political polarization in Brazil all the worse. It led to an attack by his supporters on Brazilian government buildings on January 8, 2023, an event eerily similar to that of January 6, 2021, in the United States.
Bolsonaro also reportedly began to plan a coup d’etat of the Brazilian government behind closed doors. Leaders in the Brazilian military have testified that he approached them about the possibility of overthrowing Brazil’s 39-year-old democracy after his election loss. Bolsonaro allegedly hoped to declare martial law to prevent Lula, the rightful winner, from assuming the office of the president. This leads many to wonder what would have happened if those same military figures had agreed with his plan for a coup. Such a reality was not far from happening, as the Commander of the Brazilian Navy at the time, Almir Garnier Santos, alongside other military leaders, supposedly supported Bolsonaro’s prospective coup. Brazil truly was just inches away from losing its precious democracy. Bolsonaro has been barred from running for any political office in Brazil until 2030, though this punishment arises more from his efforts to delegitimize the Brazilian electoral system in advance of the 2022 election than from his attempted coup afterward (as of November 2024, investigation into his attempted coup remains ongoing).
Lula too, is far from perfect, though unlike Bolsonaro, he presents no existential threat to Brazilian democracy. However, Lula seeks close relationships with global totalitarians to a much greater level than did Bolsonaro. Bolsonaro by no means shied away from relationships with people like Vladimir Putin or Viktor Orbán, but his overall foreign policy agenda did not consistently hope to align Brazil with dictatorships, instead pursuing a more random form of international relations that seemed more based in Bolsonaro’s personal beliefs than in Brazil’s interests or ideology.
Lula, who is the current president of Brazil, and who held that same position from 2003 to 2011, remains extremely popular among the Brazilian left (and more). Lula spent a brief stretch of time in prison beginning in 2018 over questionable corruption charges but was released after the Supreme Court annulled the case. This case is largely seen as one created for political purposes to help Bolsonaro. Even while in prison, Lula remained widely loved by many. He immediately returned to politics after his release, winning a historically narrow electoral victory over Bolsonaro in 2022.
Lula is and always has been a behemoth of the Brazilian left. The first era of his presidency saw tremendous economic successes and better conditions for tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Brazilians, especially poorer Brazilians. He protected Brazil from ecological destruction and was admired and greatly respected by many, including those with differing political persuasions, on the world stage. Thus far into the second era of Lula’s presidency (his third term), his tenure has allowed him to undo some of the policies of Bolsonaro – such as Bolsonaro’s permittance of deforestation – and keep the country intact in the aftermath of a near coup. It is for these reasons that so many both inside Brazil and abroad worship Lula.
Lula has also adjusted Brazilian foreign policy in order to accommodate what he sees as a new international alignment, positioning Brazil as a neutral country. Both Bolsonaro and Lula did not pick a side between Russia and Ukraine. Lula attributed equal blame for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to Putin and Zelenskyy, damaging his image in the eyes of American and European leaders alike. During Bolsonaro’s presidency, the right-wing former president’s close relationship with Donald Trump meant that for a brief period, Brazilian accession into NATO was briefly discussed. Once Biden became president however, Bolsonaro’s hope for stalwart cooperation between the United States and Brazil diminished. Bolsonaro also asserted he “stood in solidarity with Russia.”
Throughout the almost two years of Lula’s third term as presidency, Brazil has become more active than ever in BRICS, an intergovernmental economic alliance that originally was composed of developing economies Brazil Ms m, Russia, India, China, and South Africa but has since expanded. This action is part of Lula’s plan to increasingly align Brazil with a diverse set of states.
To the disappointment of the United States, Lula has also moved Brazil to closer relationships with Iran, a country where many in the government refer to the United States as “great Satan.” Last year, Lula allowed two Iranian warships to dock in the harbor of Rio de Janeiro. He supported allowing Iran into BRICS – an endeavor that proved successful – and has not condemned Iranian abuses of human rights. Similarly, he has remained silent on human rights abuses at the hands of the Chinese government as well as on Russian crimes in its invasion of Ukraine. Furthermore, Lula has defended Cuba’s undemocratic Communist regime and has referred to Cuba as a “victim” of the American embargo.
For years Lula has also maintained close relationships with Venezuela’s left-wing dictators Hugo Chavez and Nicolás Maduro. Lula has previously dismissed human rights abuse allegations against Venezuela and spoken out against American sanctions. Lula has, however, finally begun to acknowledge the lack of Venezuelan democracy, criticizing the regime for the first time following its undemocratic 2024 election. He did, however, stop short of aligning himself with American policy and labeling Maduro’s opponent Edmundo González the true victor.
At the same time that he refuses to condemn many of the world’s worst, most authoritarian regimes, Lula has no problem harshly censuring Israel, a democratic state, for its actions in its war against Hamas. At one point, Lula singled out the Israeli government and compared it to that of Nazi Germany, saying, “what is happening in the Gaza Strip with the Palestinian people has not occurred at any other moment in history – actually, it has, when Hitler decided to kill the Jews.” Following backlash for these comments, he refused to apologize. Brazil has seen an increase of over 1000% in anti-Semitic attacks under Lula’s leadership since October 7, 2023, with many people, including members of Brazil’s Jewish population, attributing the uptick in hate to rhetoric like Lula’s. Just four days after Hamas’s brutal invasion of Israel which took the lives of more than 1000 innocent Israelis, on October 11, Lula called for a ceasefire, insisting Israel end its retaliation. Lula’s focus on the world’s sole Jewish state is especially questionable given his clear indifference to human rights breaches by some of the countries he seeks closer relationships with. Israel has deemed Lula a persona non grata, meaning that he is not welcome in the country.
His condemnation of the actions of Western states, like Israel with its war and the United States with its embargo on Cuba, gives a clear look into the world Lula wants to help fashion. He hopes to challenge the existing American-led unipolar world order, and replace it with a multipolar world order that sees other states, like Brazil and its BRICS allies, on equal footing with the United States and its NATO and G7 allies.
Lula is not anti-American or anti-Western, and indeed he has maintained good relations with the United States during his tenure, cooperating on a variety of issues. Rather, he simply does what he thinks will put Brazil in the best position possible, whether or not that means aligning with like-minded states. Lula ultimately seeks to be a pragmatist, not a moralist. He is fully aware of the overtly totalitarian and oppressive nature of many of the countries he seeks closer relationships with; he is also likely aware of his own hypocrisy in refusing to condemn their actions. His primary goal is to establish Brazil as a global leader. When contrasted with what seems to be Bolsonaro’s objective – doing away with Brazilian democracy and establishing himself as a right-wing dictator with no regard for the climate and rights of certain minority groups, among other things – Lula seems like a promising alternative. And while he certainly has many positives, most importantly the fact that he fundamentally believes in Brazilian democracy, he also has his share of negatives.
Brazilian politics are incredibly complex, just like any other country. After all, it is a nation of more than 200 million people. Most Brazilians likely did not vote for Bolsonaro because they seek to undo their own democracy and most Brazilians likely did not vote for Lula because they hope to align their nation with China, Iran, Russia, and the like. Brazil faces other major problems that cripple the livelihoods of millions – including its infamous crime and poverty –, and it is likely these issues that lead most Brazilians to support certain candidates. It is necessary, however, for us to be aware of the characteristics – both positive and negative – of global leaders that garner mass popularity.
