President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) said that U.S. plans to classify Brazil's largest criminal factions as terrorists could damage bilateral relations.
The move matters because labeling these groups as terrorist organizations may reshape security cooperation and strain diplomatic ties between the two nations. The U.S. is targeting the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and the Comando Vermelho (CV), which are the two largest criminal factions in Brazil [1].
Speaking in Sergipe on Friday, May 29, 2026 [2], Lula said the reclassification of the CV and PCC was not discussed during meetings with U.S. officials.
Reports on the current status of the classification vary. Some sources indicate the U.S. is evaluating the move, while others suggest the U.S. has already completed the necessary documentation to finalize the labels. The disagreement over whether the topic was discussed beforehand highlights a potential rift in communication between the Brazilian administration and Washington.
Lula said that such a unilateral decision by the U.S. could have repercussions for how the two countries interact on security and law enforcement. The PCC and CV have long operated as powerful criminal enterprises, but the shift to a "terrorist" designation changes the legal and financial tools the U.S. can use to combat them.
This tension comes as both nations navigate complex security agreements. While the U.S. seeks to curb the international reach of these factions, the Brazilian government appears concerned about the sovereignty, and diplomatic implications of the designation.
“Lula said that U.S. plans to classify Brazil's largest criminal factions as terrorists could damage bilateral relations.”
The U.S. designation of the PCC and CV as terrorist organizations would likely trigger stricter financial sanctions and expanded intelligence-gathering powers. For Brazil, this creates a diplomatic dilemma: while the government wants to combat these gangs, it views a unilateral U.S. label as an infringement on its domestic security jurisdiction and a potential catalyst for diplomatic friction.
