Brazil's Minister of Foreign Affairs Mauro Vieira said labeling criminal factions as terrorist organizations creates international confusion and does not help dismantle them.
This stance highlights a strategic divide in how Brazil addresses organized crime. By resisting the "terrorist" designation, the government is prioritizing traditional law enforcement and diplomatic clarity over the broad geopolitical tools often used to combat ideological insurgency.
Vieira said these remarks during a speech at the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS) on May 23, 2026 [1]. He said that applying such a label to criminal groups generates confusion within the international community, a move that offers no practical benefit for the actual dismantling of these organizations.
Local legal and security experts have echoed this sentiment. Luis Flávio Sapori said that classifying factions as terrorists does not increase security or policing. Similarly, an unnamed justice prosecutor said that classifying the PCC and CV as terrorists does not help Brazil.
The debate centers on whether the legal frameworks used for terrorism—which often involve different international sanctions and military responses—are applicable to the profit-driven motives of Brazil's most powerful criminal factions. Vieira's comments suggest that the Brazilian government views these groups as domestic security threats rather than ideological enemies of the state.
By maintaining this distinction, Brazil avoids the complexities of international counter-terrorism treaties that might complicate regional cooperation or lead to unintended diplomatic friction. The focus remains on the operational capabilities of the factions rather than their political classification.
“Classificar facções como terroristas não aumenta segurança nem policiamento.”
Brazil is signaling a preference for a law-enforcement-led approach to organized crime over a security-state approach. By rejecting the 'terrorist' label, the government avoids the legal and diplomatic complications that accompany such designations, which are typically reserved for groups seeking to overthrow governments or impose ideologies rather than those pursuing illicit financial gain.
