Lula accuses Trump of seeking control over Brazil

Published: 25 September 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s presidential campaign has accused US President Donald Trump of attempting to influence Brazil’s upcoming election in order to advance American interests and gain greater access to the country’s natural resources.

The allegation was made in a televised campaign advertisement released by Lula’s team on Thursday, September 24, as concerns over possible foreign influence become increasingly prominent in Brazil’s presidential race. The campaign claimed that Trump was seeking to help Lula’s principal opponent, Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, and linked the alleged effort to wider US economic and political interests in Brazil.

The accusation represents another escalation in the increasingly tense relationship between Brasília and Washington. While Lula and Trump have continued to discuss trade and other bilateral issues, disagreements over tariffs, Brazil’s domestic political affairs and the direction of US policy in Latin America have created significant friction between the two governments.

The campaign advertisement used particularly strong language, accusing Trump of seeking to “colonise” Brazil and obtain control over its wealth. It portrayed Flávio Bolsonaro as the preferred candidate of the US president and suggested that an electoral victory for Bolsonaro would allow Washington to pursue its strategic and economic objectives more freely.

The US government has rejected allegations that it is attempting to manipulate Brazil’s election. The State Department has previously described suggestions that Washington is pursuing a scheme to undermine a democratic election as unfounded.

The disagreement comes less than two weeks before Brazil’s first-round presidential vote, scheduled for October 4. If no candidate receives more than half of the votes, the two leading candidates will face each other in a second round on October 25.

Lula has repeatedly raised concerns about foreign involvement in the election. Speaking at the United Nations General Assembly in New York earlier this week, he warned against attempts by internal or external actors to interfere with the will of Brazilian voters. Without directly naming Trump, Lula stressed that Brazil’s democracy belongs to Brazilians.

The issue has attracted attention beyond Lula’s own political movement. A group of Democratic members of the US Congress has also accused the Trump administration of interfering in Brazil’s electoral process. In a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the lawmakers expressed concern over what they described as a sustained campaign involving diplomatic, economic and political pressure.

The congressional letter cited several developments involving US policy towards Brazil. These included tariffs imposed on Brazilian goods, disagreements involving Brazilian judicial officials and plans for US officials to travel to Brazil to examine the country’s electronic voting system. Brazilian authorities ultimately denied visas to the proposed US delegation.

The lawmakers argued that such measures could undermine confidence in Brazil’s democratic institutions and damage relations between two countries that have traditionally maintained significant economic and diplomatic ties. They asked the Trump administration to commit to respecting Brazil’s electoral process and requested a response before October 1.

The Trump administration has not accepted the characterisation of its policies as election interference.

The dispute has also been influenced by the increasingly important economic relationship between the two countries. The United States has imposed tariffs on Brazilian products, creating additional pressure on exporters and generating a political debate inside Brazil over the reasons behind Washington’s measures.

Lula has criticised the tariffs while maintaining that Brazil remains willing to negotiate with the United States. Recent discussions between the two governments have focused on trade and the possibility of resolving disagreements through diplomacy rather than escalating retaliatory measures.

The tariffs have nevertheless become an important issue in Brazil’s election campaign. Lula has argued that US economic pressure is connected to Washington’s political preferences, while Bolsonaro and his supporters have offered different interpretations of the dispute.

The question of natural resources has added another layer to the controversy. Brazil possesses substantial deposits of minerals considered important to modern industries, including technologies associated with energy, electronics and advanced manufacturing. The country’s natural resources have consequently attracted growing international attention.

Another right-wing presidential candidate, Renan Santos, has also criticised what he described as US pressure on Brazil. Although his political position differs substantially from Lula’s, Santos has said he does not want Brazil to become dependent on Washington and has raised concerns about foreign interests in the country’s mineral resources.

His comments demonstrate that anxiety about external influence is not limited to Lula’s political camp. Different candidates and political groups have interpreted US actions through their own political perspectives, but concerns about national sovereignty have increasingly entered the wider election debate.

The controversy has also extended into Brazil’s institutions. Lula’s Workers’ Party has sought legal action concerning alleged foreign interference and has argued that measures taken by the Trump administration, together with alleged contacts involving members of the Bolsonaro family, require investigation. Those claims remain matters of political and legal dispute rather than established findings of wrongdoing.

Brazilian intelligence authorities have separately warned about the possibility of foreign influence surrounding the election. A confidential assessment reportedly sent to senior Brazilian authorities described the risk associated with potential US interference as significant. The existence of such concerns has contributed to the broader debate over the protection of Brazil’s electoral institutions.

Brazil has one of the world’s most extensive electronic voting systems, and the security and reliability of its voting process have previously been subjects of political controversy. Brazilian electoral authorities have repeatedly defended the system, while political disputes over electronic voting have continued to influence the country’s public debate.

The Trump administration’s relationship with the Bolsonaro family is another central element of the controversy. Former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro remains a major figure within the country’s political right, while his son Flávio Bolsonaro is now campaigning for the presidency. Trump has maintained political ties with the Bolsonaro family, and Washington’s policies towards Brazil have been interpreted by Lula’s allies as evidence of an effort to shape the country’s political direction.

The US government disputes the allegation that its policies amount to an attempt to control the outcome of the election.

The disagreement illustrates the broader difficulty facing US-Brazil relations. Washington and Brasília have significant shared economic interests, while Brazil remains an important regional power and a major trading partner of the United States. At the same time, the two governments have adopted different approaches to several international and domestic political questions.

For Lula, the issue has also become part of a broader argument about Brazilian sovereignty. His administration has sought to portray the election as a decision that should be determined exclusively by Brazilian voters, while warning that external pressure could undermine confidence in the democratic process.

For Trump and his administration, the central disputes with Brazil have involved trade, economic policy, security and broader US interests in the Western Hemisphere. Whether those policies constitute legitimate foreign-policy pressure or electoral interference remains sharply contested by the two sides.

With the October 4 vote approaching, the dispute is likely to remain a significant part of Brazil’s political conversation. The allegations have added an international dimension to an already closely contested election and have placed the relationship between Washington and Brasília under renewed scrutiny.

The immediate question is whether diplomatic disagreements can be contained without further damaging bilateral relations. For Brazilian voters, however, the central issue remains the country’s own electoral process and the extent to which domestic political choices should be determined without outside pressure.

The competing claims from Lula’s campaign, the Trump administration, US lawmakers and other Brazilian political figures highlight the complexity of the dispute. Allegations of interference remain contested, while documented measures such as tariffs, diplomatic actions and public statements have clearly become intertwined with Brazil’s election debate. As voting day approaches, the controversy is likely to remain closely connected to questions of sovereignty, trade, natural resources and the future direction of US-Brazil relations.