By Pablo Biondi (Unified Socialist Workers’ Party (PSTU – Brazil)
On July 30, the U.S. government announced financial sanctions against Minister Alexandre de Moraes, invoking the Magnitsky Act. Enacted during the Obama administration, the Magnitsky Act is designed to punish foreign individuals accused of human rights violations and corruption. The law allows for sanctions, such as a ban on entering the United States, freezing U.S. assets, and prohibiting financial transactions with any U.S. banking institution.
The use of the Magnitsky Act against Moraes, enacted through Executive Order 13818, is a continuation of the Trump administration’s efforts to discredit Brazilian authorities. On July 18, Moraes had already been subjected to visa restrictions to enter the United States. This restriction was also imposed on seven other Supreme Court (STF) judges and Paulo Gonet, the Attorney General of the Republic. Not coincidentally, all of these officials were instrumental in charging Jair Bolsonaro in Criminal Case 2668 for his attempted coup.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the sanctions against Moraes in a statement, accusing the Brazilian minister of committing serious human rights violations, such as arbitrary detentions. The statement also mentions abuse of power and the political persecution of opponents. Rubio asserts outright that the government will use all diplomatic, political, and legal tools it deems appropriate to protect Americans’ freedom of expression from malicious foreign agents. Similarly, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent alleged in a statement that Moraes was responsible for a censorship campaign carried out through unfounded preventive arrests. Moraes allegedly led an illegal witch hunt against U.S. and Brazilian citizens and companies (the statement explicitly mentions Bolsonaro’s situation).
Executive Order 13818 was issued in response to Eduardo Bolsonaro’s pleas. Since Trump’s inauguration, Bolsonaro has been living in Washington to defend his family’s interests. The U.S. authorities’ entire discourse on Moraes—whose hypocrisy cannot be overemphasized—bears the unmistakable signature of the most detestable and parasitic clan in Brazilian politics. One could imagine a dictatorial scenario in Brazil that would have been established when the participants in the 2023 coup attempt were brought to trial. If there were any real intention to protect democratic freedoms, Eduardo Bolsonaro should be expelled from the U.S. and have his financial assets frozen. Clearly, the implemented measure has no democratic pretensions, whether in the origin of the Magnitsky Act (which targeted Russian oligarchs allied with Putin) or in its current application.
Clearly, the issue at stake goes far beyond Alexandre de Moraes’s personal life: he will only experience minor inconveniences due to the sanctions, such as changing his vacation plans or finding alternative credit cards. What matters to Washington is Brazil’s continued economic subjugation to U.S. capital.
Moraes appears to be a priority target not so much because of his role in the proceedings involving Bolsonaro but because of the power struggle between the minister and businessman Elon Musk, a political enemy of Trump and a prominent representative of U.S. monopoly capital. The Bolsonaro clan is, of course, part of international far-right coalitions with which Trump can only sympathize. However, the main purpose of the former president’s family is to represent a project of unconditional adherence to U.S. imperialism without flirting with rival imperialisms, such as China’s.
This adherence implies granting large technology companies unrestricted freedom of operation (and therefore of business). Moraes is being penalized for his unfavorable decisions regarding the social media companis X and Telegram, for example. The minister did not make these decisions to oppose imperialism, but rather to prioritize institutional order amid a crisis for the Republic.
U.S. pressure on Moraes is part of a broader diplomatic coercion strategy aimed at reiterating Brazil’s submission. The objective is to assert that Brazil’s internal affairs require external validation. This is evident in the demand for Bolsonaro’s acquittal as a prerequisite for reviewing the tariffs Trump imposed on Brazilian products. It is important to highlight the submission that the White House seeks to impose in economic matters. On July 15, the U.S. Trade Representative announced the launch of an investigation into Brazil’s alleged unfair trade practices, accusing the country of making decisions that harm the competitiveness of U.S. companies in sectors such as digital commerce and electronic payment services. Trump’s agents also denounce Brazil’s tariff policy toward other countries, failures in anti-corruption oversight, and insufficient protection of U.S. intellectual property rights. They even accuse Brazil of illegal deforestation. Suddenly, the denialist leader at the heart of global capitalism has been emboldened by the environmental agenda!
Therefore, there is no doubt that Trump’s goal is to strengthen the presence of U.S. capital in Brazil and renew the complicity of the Brazilian bourgeoisie with this economic domination. This project stems from the fierce inter-imperialist dispute with China, which has voraciously conquered new markets, expanded its sphere of influence, and generated friction with the established hegemonic power. Blackmailing Brazilian state representatives was chosen as the method to remind the country of its historical alignment with the United States, in the style of the Truman Doctrine (“America for Americans”). This policy aligns with the “tariff increase,” showing that Yankee capital is unwilling to relinquish any part of its sphere of influence or any of the wealth that comes with it.
As for Lula’s government, its position has mainly been to negotiate a tariff increase with Trump to mitigate losses for the most affected sectors of the Brazilian bourgeoisie. Lula acts primarily as a trade representative of the Brazilian bourgeoisie, oscillating between yielding to U.S. imperialism and seeking protection from Chinese imperialism. Initially, the Brazilian ruling class proposes that the Brazilian government negotiate the economic subjugation of the country to two different masters. The existence of this dispute between the United States and China is in the interest of our national bourgeoisie, as it allows them to negotiate their participation as a minority partner in Brazilian capitalism more effectively. This is a conciliatory path between the bourgeoisie most dependent on business with U.S. companies and those most dependent on business with Chinese companies.
In this sense, the struggle against U.S. imperialism (and against any imperialism, for that matter) can only be taken seriously by the working class. This does not mean that conflicts or partial clashes cannot occur between the bourgeoisie and its various governments in the face of imperialist aggression. If there are, the proletariat of a semi-colonial country like Brazil must unite, even if they march separately, because the proletariat must always be at the forefront of the struggle against imperialism.
The Brazilian proletariat must firmly reject Trump’s attacks on the Brazilian state and economy. They must be ready to unite in action against any real resistance. They must demand reciprocity and other measures from the government, such as not giving in on regulating big tech and forcing them to pay taxes and respect the country’s laws. However, it must maintain its political and class independence and avoid any affiliation with state leaders or national capitalists.
Fighting imperialism means exploiting all contradictions between oppressed and oppressor countries and asserting unity of action when necessary, without abandoning the strategic struggle against all intermediaries of the bourgeois social order, even those who seek to regulate submission to imperialism. Furthermore, the U.S. proletariat must rise up against the oppression Washington perpetrates abroad. This must be done in the name of international proletarian solidarity. Moreover, there can be no compromise in condemning Bolsonaro and his entourage. While the supposed “persecution” of the former president is a manipulation by imperialism to hide its ambitions, his arrest would be a significant setback for the far right and cause confusion in certain sectors of the Brazilian bourgeoisie, particularly the agro-industrial sector.
