Brazil and the United States have maintained a cooperative relationship since the early 19th century. Indeed, the United States was among the first countries to recognize Brazil’s independence from Portugal. There is no doubt, however, that relations between Brazil and the United States intensified following the establishment of the Brazilian Republic in 1889. This was not only due to ideological proximity and the shared republican ideals that characterized both nations but also because of the economic interests of Brazilian coffee growers who sought to expand their exports.
Until the first half of the 20th century, U.S. foreign policy toward the entire Latin American continent was guided by the Monroe Doctrine, which, through interventionist policies, aimed to limit European influence in the region (Milani, 2011).
During World War II, Brazil allied with the United States and remained a close partner until President Gaspar Dutra’s administration ended. However, during Getúlio Vargas’s second term (1951–1954), Brazilian foreign policy shifted toward a more populist and nationalist stance. In the 1960s, the U.S. government perceived a threat in the growing diplomatic ties between Presidents Jânio Quadros and João Goulart (1961–1964) and the Soviet Union and Communist China—especially in the context of the 1959 Cuban Revolution (Belieiro Junior & Livacic, 2017). In 1962, Ambassador San Tiago Dantas abstained from voting in favor of Cuba’s expulsion from the Organization of American States (OAS).
In 1964, Brazil underwent a coup d’état and was governed by a military dictatorship until 1985. “Even though the United States did not engage in a direct military intervention, its support […] was essential for the overthrow of Brazil’s democratic regime” (Milani, 2011, p. 72). During this period, bilateral relations fluctuated between automatic alignment and a degree of independence—despite shared agendas, such as promoting foreign capital in Brazilian development and combating communism (Milani, 2011). The re-democratization of Brazil was marked by a profound economic crisis that undermined national sovereignty, and the United States played a pivotal role in Brazil’s economic recovery during the 1990s. However, in military affairs, Brazil increasingly diverged from U.S. counterterrorism policies. With the rise to power of the Workers’ Party in 2003, these military disagreements persisted. Additionally, “Foreign Minister Celso Amorim […] advocated for multilateralism and bilateralism grounded in reciprocity” (Milani, 2011, p. 80).
After beginning his third presidential term in 2023, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva voiced strong criticism of Israel and the war in the Gaza Strip[1]. Recently, Brazil has reinstated reciprocity by requiring tourist visas from U.S. citizens[2]. In the economic sphere, over the past few decades, Brazil has diversified its international relations by establishing agreements with China, as well as with the countries of Mercosur and the BRICS bloc. Since 2009, China has become Brazil’s leading trading partner, with the United States ranking second[3].
However, despite expanding trade agreements with other countries and some divergences in the military sphere, Brazil still maintains a dependent relationship with the United States. First, the Brazilian armed forces receive equipment and training from that country. “Hidden under the guise of military cooperation […] these forms of interaction between such asymmetric countries […] contribute to the perpetuation of dependence and, perhaps, to the deepening of subordination and alignment” (Oliveira, Milani, Wietchikoski, 2023). Furthermore, the United States remains one of Brazil’s main trading partners. In fact, the new tariffs introduced by Donald Trump have raised concerns among Brazilian experts.
Moreover, after the redemocratization, the restructuring of Brazilian education was marked by agreements between the Ministry of Education and international organizations influenced by the United States, such as the World Bank and UNESCO (Fonseca, Oliveira, 2009). In the field of scientific production, Brazil has maintained partnerships with the United States since the 1950s. The American model heavily influenced the creation of the first graduate programs. Brazil imported theorists and theoretical frameworks that do not always adequately explain national phenomena. To this day, Brazilian science continues striving to de-westernize research. “A dependent society links itself to another, supposedly more organized and developed, in order to establish a relationship of “subordinated partnership” (Santos, 2003, p. 629).
Accordingly, we have chosen to classify Brazil under the category of “Dependency.”
References
Belieiro Junior, J. C., Livacic, G. E. (2017). Estados Autoritários no América Latina: uma revisão crítica ao conceito de Estado Burocrático-Autoritário em Guillermo O’Donnell. Rebela, 7(2): 261-287.
Fonseca, M., Oliveira, J. F. (2009). A gestão escolar no contexto das recentes reformas educacionais brasileiras. RBPAE, 25(2): 233-246.
Milani, C. R. S. (2011). A importância das relações Brasil – Estados Unidos na política externa brasileira. Boletim de Economia e Política Internacional, 6: 69-85.
Oliveira, A. M. P., Milani, L. P., Wietchikoski, L. (2023). Revista Monções, 12(23): 137-170.
Santos, C. M. (2003). Tradições e contradições da pós-graduação no Brasil. Educ. Soc., 24(83): 627-641.
[1] https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/internacional/lula-volta-a-dizer-que-israel-comete-genocidio-e-critica-netanyahu/.
[2] https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2025/04/10/brasil-volta-a-exigir-visto-para-turistas-dos-eua-canada-e-australia-nesta-quinta-governo-diz-que-processo-sera-eletronico-e-rapido.ghtml.
[3] https://www.estadao.com.br/economia/quais-sao-os-principais-parceiros-comerciais-do-brasil-veja-ranking-nprei/.