The presidential elections this Sunday, the 25th, have reverberated in the international press. Newspapers around the world are following the contest between President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) and Senator Flávio Bolsonaro (PL) as a possible shift in the country’s political pendulum, which could join a wave of conservatism sweeping other Latin American countries and determine a new alignment for Brazil in global geopolitics.
For the Argentine newspaper La Nación, a Flávio victory, who led in the first round and remained ahead in the polls, would consolidate what some, including the Argentine president, Javier Milei, call a blue wave of right-wing governments in the region.
“Will the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, convicted and imprisoned for attempting a coup, be one more member of the group? And more importantly: will this so-called blue wave entail a medium- or long-term shift, or, on the contrary, just a movement of the Latin American pendulum, lacking the strength to endure for many years?” the publication asks.
The newspaper also notes that Lula’s fatigue after three terms was the main factor that led Flávio Bolsonaro to be the most voted candidate in the first round. “Of course the Bolsonaros have their loyal ideological base, but with that base they would not win an election. If they win, it will be because they are the option facing Lula. And the same goes for the president of Brazil. Being the only one who can defeat a Bolsonaro is what allows him to say that, without him, there will be no democracy in Brazil and the country’s sovereignty will be at stake,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Clarín newspaper observes that the discussion at the polls is not a “basic left or right” issue, but one of capacities. The report notes that Lula comes from three terms, including the current one, and with a strong macroeconomic performance, while Flávio has been seeking to establish himself on social issues.
“The social issue plays a decisive role in this final stage,” says Clarín, adding that the government managed to reverse, according to the polls, the initial blow of defeat based on an intensive offensive that included benefits, such as the payment of the Bolsa Família adjustment and the end of the 6×1 work schedule.
The French Le Monde wrote that the Brazilian election is considered the most important of the year, together with the United States midterm elections, which will take place on November 3. For the paper, the country’s voters are being called to choose “between two radically opposing visions, whose consequences will extend far beyond the borders of the country.”
The French publication assesses that Lula’s candidacy “embodies the continuity of social progress, environmental protection, defense of democratic institutions, national sovereignty and multilateralism,” while on the other side, the PL senator defends a “repressive security policy, an ultraliberal economic program and alignment with the Trump administration.” For Le Monde, a Flávio victory would place almost all of South America, with the exception of Uruguay, under Washington’s influence.
That point was also the subject of an opinion editorial in The New York Times. Published this Sunday, the piece says that the United States has a “problematic history” of interference in foreign elections. According to the publication, the U.S. has become more respectful of other democracies and largely avoided intervening in their campaigns, but President Donald Trump would be taking Washington back to its past “intrusive and counterproductive” interference.
To illustrate, the newspaper cites this Sunday’s Brazilian elections and says that voters will choose between “a left-wing populist” and “an extreme-right senator whose father is serving a 27-year sentence for attempting a coup after losing the last election.” The NYT reinforces that Trump did not formally endorse the young Bolsonaro, but that he “did everything except officially endorsing,” including promulgating policies outside the mainstream of the American diplomatic tradition.
“This meddling is detrimental to the cause of democracy and to the national interest of the United States. External interference in the elections of a democratic state is undemocratic: after all, Americans are not part of Brazil’s political body. Underlying Trump’s government interventions is a dismissive message that Americans — or at least a small number of them — think they know better than Brazilians what is best for Brazil,” the editorial says.
Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based network, highlighted that Latin American countries have been tightening ties with Israel, with a new wave of leaders acting to reverse previously adopted measures to isolate the Israeli government over the war in Gaza. The piece states that if Senator Flávio Bolsonaro wins the election, Brazil could join this movement.
Al Jazeera says that the senator has displayed Israeli flags at rallies and emphasized his friendship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. For researcher Marta Tawil Kuri, from El Colegio de México, there is a “convergence” among right-wing leaders seeking validation in Washington, backing from evangelical bases, and an Israeli diplomatic offensive in the region.
