• Tariff against Brazil is no isolated act; it is part of a coercive toolkit that includes extraterritorial sanctions, arbitrary restrictions, and demands for alignment with US strategic priorities
• By focusing on Brazil, Trump sends a message to wider BRICS community: deviation from US policy will have economic consequences

The author is a visiting professor at China Foreign Affairs University and a senior fellow at the Policy Center for the New South, based in Morocco.

ISTANBUL

History has an obstinate way of reminding us that empires rarely fall solely under the pressure of external enemies; more often, they corrode from within through the strategic myopia of their leaders. US President Donald Trump, in reclaiming the political stage in the United States, seems determined to offer yet another example of this historical pattern. The "America First" credo of his first presidency has now been distilled into "America Only," a doctrine of zero-sum logic whose consequences extend far beyond US borders. Those who believe such a posture can succeed misread history; the cost of Trump’s approach will be high, prolonged, and corrosive for global trade, the architecture of international politics, and the very legitimacy of American hegemony.

Brazil today stands as a unique case in Trump’s tariff wars — the only country to have been both threatened with and subjected to a punitive 50% tariff without securing a negotiated reprieve. While other nations have found pathways to exemptions, Brasilia has been left isolated — an unusual fate for Latin America’s largest economy, which has long maintained complex, at times turbulent, ties with Washington.

The official rationale is familiar: countering “unfair” trade practices, protecting American workers, leveling the playing field. This echoes Trump’s rhetoric, but with a sharper edge — one that goes beyond trade deficits and into the realm of political symbolism. In Brazilian President Luiz Lula da Silva, Trump sees not just a foreign head of state, but the embodiment of an opposing worldview: a progressive leader rooted in the labor movement and committed to South–South cooperation.  

Politics behind the tariffs

Some suggest that the trial of former President Jair Bolsonaro — Trump’s close political and ideological ally — has aggravated this personal-political rift. While difficult to prove, such perceptions matter in diplomacy; they shape atmospheres and can turn economic measures into coded rebukes. In truth, the tariff is more than an economic measure: it is a strategic signal. In Chinese statecraft, there is a saying: “kill the chicken to scare the monkeys” — to make an example of one to intimidate others. By targeting Brazil, Trump sends a message to the wider BRICS community: deviation from US policy will have economic consequences.

This fits a broader pattern in US foreign economic policy. For decades, Washington championed a global trade system ostensibly based on open markets, a rules-based order, and reciprocity. But as with all hegemonies, the rhetoric of fairness fades when relative decline sets in. Increasingly, the United States sustains its standard of living not only through domestic productivity, but also by extracting value from the rest of the world — a 21st-century form of economic imperialism cloaked in the language of “fairness.”

Henry Kissinger once observed: “To be America’s enemy is dangerous, but to be its friend is fatal.” This warning feels painfully relevant for middle powers like Brazil. The US market is treated as a privilege to be granted or withdrawn, rather than as a reciprocal relationship. Competitiveness is tolerated only so long as it does not challenge American primacy. The tariff against Brazil is not an isolated act; it is part of a coercive toolkit that also includes extraterritorial sanctions, arbitrary restrictions, and demands for alignment with US strategic priorities.

Indeed, Lula is far from the ideal leader for this moment. His past entanglement in corruption scandals, along with Brazil’s judicial system’s handling of politically charged cases, has left deep divisions within the country and weakened trust in institutions. Yet in this critical period, he is the leader Brazil has — and it falls to him to rise above past controversies and partisan divides. He must seize this crisis as an opportunity to set Brazil on a new course for growth and development by deepening engagement with its BRICS+ bloc and strengthening strategic partnerships with other rising powers. Brazil has the potential to lead in shaping a fairer global order, and this vision should guide its actions.  

Cost and opportunity of defiance

Brazil’s challenge is twofold. Economically, it must cushion the impact of the tariff while accelerating diversification of export markets — expanding ties with China, Asia’s ASEAN group, and fellow BRICS members. Strategically, it must safeguard its sovereignty in critical sectors, especially rare earth minerals vital to high-tech industries. The US interest in Greenland, Iran, and other resource-rich regions should serve as a warning. With vast reserves of its own, Brazil cannot ignore the possibility that economic coercion today may precede resource pressure tomorrow. The choices it makes now will shape not only its own future, but also the global balance of power.

Ironically, Washington’s tactics may accelerate the very trends it seeks to resist. Alienating Brazil risks hastening the erosion of US influence in Latin America — a region where China’s growing presence is already transforming trade and infrastructure. America’s retreat from multilateralism weakens institutions like the WTO, undermines trust, and fractures the cooperative norms that underpinned decades of global integration.

For Brasilia, the answer lies not in capitulation but in deft statecraft. It must rally domestic industry around a coherent export diversification strategy, invest in industrial capacity, and use multilateral platforms such as the WTO and the United Nations to frame the tariffs as part of a systemic imbalance in the world economy. The goal should be not only to defend, but to lead: to position Brazil as a champion of a genuinely equitable rules-based order — one negotiated, not imposed; one that fosters balance rather than enforces hierarchy.

Trump’s “America Only” is not a doctrine of strength; it is the symptom of an empire uneasy about its decline. In the short term, such measures may win domestic applause. In the long term, they breed isolation, resistance, and a slow slide into irrelevance. For Brazil, the 50% tariff is a test: will it remain the “chicken” in someone else’s cautionary tale, or will it turn this moment into an inflection point — proof that in a multipolar world, sovereignty is not conceded, but asserted? The need for Brazil to assert its sovereignty in the face of these challenges is urgent, demonstrating its resilience and determination to shape its destiny.

*Opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Anadolu's editorial policy.