Brazil still digests the shocking numbers from the deadliest police operation in Rio de Janeiro. However, Brazil’s federal government insists on refusing effective international cooperation. After all, how long will we passively watch narcoterrorism dominate our country while our rulers protect criminals with legal technicalities?

In this way, we need to seriously question the Lula government’s priorities. Additionally, understand why the United States, Argentina, and Paraguay act firmly while Brasília defends murderous factions.

The Operation That Exposed the Truth: 121 Deaths in Combat Against Terror

First of all, the numbers are devastating. In the last week of October, Rio de Janeiro’s Military Police faced narcoterrorists in the Alemão and Penha complexes. Consequently, 121 people died, including four heroic police officers who gave their lives defending society.

According to Rio authorities, the action aimed to contain the Red Command’s territorial expansion. Therefore, it wasn’t a common police operation. Actually, it was direct combat against a terrorist organization that controls entire territories with extreme violence.

Heroes Who Died Defending Brazil

First of all, we need to honor the four military police officers who fell in combat. Moreover, these men faced criminals armed with war rifles, grenades, and military equipment. Additionally, they fought enemies who don’t hesitate to kill, torture, and terrorize entire populations.

Therefore, while comfortable critics in their homes attack the operation, police families mourn their dead. Consequently, we need to ask ourselves: which side are we on in this war?

The DEA Letter: Legitimate Cooperation Offer

Shortly after the operation, on Tuesday (11/4), the American Drug Enforcement Administration demonstrated solidarity with Brazil. In this context, James Sparks, chief of the Trump government’s anti-drug agency, sent an official letter to Rio’s Security Secretary.

The Message Content

First of all, the DEA expressed sorrow for the four Brazilian police officers’ deaths. Moreover, it recognized these professionals’ courage and sacrifice. Additionally, the text highlighted:

“We know that the mission to protect society requires courage, dedication, and sacrifice, and we recognize the value and honor of these professionals who gave their lives in defense of public security.”

Finally, the American agency placed itself “at disposal for any necessary support”. Therefore, it was a genuine offer of international cooperation against a common enemy.

The Government’s Shameful Response

However, instead of thanking and accepting cooperation, Secretary Victor Santos responded with reservations. First of all, he emphasized that cooperation “doesn’t give any permission for American government actions on Brazilian soil”.

Moreover, he limited support to just “information exchange”. Therefore, he wasted a valuable opportunity to receive American expertise, technology, and resources in combating narcoterrorism.

Consequently, the message was clear: the Brazilian government fears cooperating with democratic allies more than facing terrorist organizations.

Narcoterrorism: Calling Things by Their Right Name

Fortunately, Governor Cláudio Castro demonstrated courage that the federal government lacks. In this sense, during a press conference held on Tuesday (10/28), Castro correctly classified the operation as action against “narcoterrorists”.

Why the Term is Correct

First of all, these organizations use systematic terror to control territories. Moreover, they attack buses, schools, police stations, and hospitals. Additionally, they torture, execute, and disappear people regularly.

Therefore, if these aren’t acts of terrorism, then what are they? Consequently, Castro was right to call criminals what they really are: terrorists.

Alignment with Serious Countries

Additionally, the term “narcoterrorists” aligns Rio with countries that take security seriously. Especially, the United States has used this nomenclature for years. Moreover, American Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth employs the term when talking about Caribbean operations against trafficking.

Therefore, Castro demonstrates being on the right side of history. Consequently, he aligns with democracies that combat terrorism without hesitation.

Argentina and Paraguay Show the Way

Immediately after the Rio mega-operation, two Latin American countries made courageous decisions. First of all, Argentina and Paraguay – governments that prioritize security – announced correct classifications.

Consequently, these countries officially began designating the Red Command and PCC as terrorist groups. In this way, they set an example that Brazil should follow.

Why They Got It Right

First of all, they recognized reality: these organizations operate as terrorist groups. Moreover, they didn’t let themselves be fooled by legal technicalities convenient for criminals. Additionally, they prioritized their citizens’ security over politics.

Therefore, while Brazil hesitates and protects terrorists with bureaucracy, neighbors act. Consequently, they demonstrate that it’s possible to have firm governments against crime.

Trump’s List: Recognizing the Real Threat

Additionally, the Trump administration already included several Latin American criminal groups on its terrorist organizations list. In this sense, it recognizes the threat they represent:

• First of all, Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua
• Moreover, six major Mexican cartels
• Additionally, legitimately expressed interest in adding PCC and Red Command

Therefore, the United States demonstrates seriousness in combating transnational organized crime. Consequently, it offers valuable cooperation that Brazil bureaucratically refuses.

The Diplomatic Pressure Brazil Should Accept

Certainly, this isn’t the first time Americans offer help to Brazil. Actually, in May 2025, the State Department sent a representative specifically to discuss cooperation.

David Gamble’s Visit

During his stay in Brasília, David Gamble, head of the sanctions sector, formally requested Brazil adopt correct classification for factions. Moreover, he presented solid arguments:

• First of all, PCC and CV maintain connections with international cartels
• Moreover, they represent real threat to hemispheric security
• Additionally, they facilitate massive drug trafficking to multiple countries
• Finally, they destabilize democracies throughout Latin America

The Incomprehensible Refusal

However, the Lula government categorically rejected the request. In this sense, it used a weak technical argument: factions don’t fit Brazil’s legal definition of terrorism.

But after all, who wrote this law? Certainly not the victims of terrorist attacks that PCC and CV commit daily. Therefore, the law is wrong and needs urgent change.

The Anti-Terrorism Law: Convenient Loophole to Protect Criminals

According to the Anti-Terrorism Law (Law 13.260/2016), terrorism is considered acts “committed with the purpose of causing social or generalized terror”. However, this definition completely ignores Brazilian reality.

Factions Already Commit Terrorism

First of all, consider the undeniable facts:

• Moreover, factions attack buses and block roads to terrorize populations
• Additionally, they burn vehicles and businesses to intimidate authorities
• Consequently, they kill police officers’ family members to discourage crime fighting
• Finally, they control entire territories through force and terror

Therefore, if this isn’t terrorism, we urgently need to redefine the term. Consequently, the current law only serves to protect criminals under technical pretext.

Parliamentary Mobilization: Finally a Reaction

Fortunately, after the operation with 121 deaths, serious parliamentarians mobilized. In this way, they seek to correct the permissive legislation that favors narcoterrorists.

The Necessary Bills

Currently, at least two bills are being discussed in National Congress. In this sense, both correctly propose expanding the terrorism concept to include armed trafficking.

First of all, Bill 724/2025, by Colonel Meira (PL-PE), advanced significantly. Moreover, it was approved in the Public Security Commission with broad support.

The Irrefutable Arguments

According to Deputy Fabio Costa (PP-AL), the bill’s rapporteur, the justification is crystal clear:

“Attacks on buses, schools, battalions, police stations, and even hospitals have the purpose of generating social terror and paralyzing state response. This is exactly the legal concept of terrorism: violence intended to cause panic and collective disorganization.”

Therefore, change supporters simply recognize obvious facts. Consequently, they propose legislation adequate to the reality we live.

The False Concern of “Experts”

However, some so-called “experts” criticize classification as terrorism. In this sense, they allege concerns about militarization and human rights. But after all, who do these comfortable academics really care about?

The Weak Arguments

First of all, they say classification “wouldn’t have practical effects”. However, they ignore obvious benefits: harsher penalties, facilitated international cooperation, additional resources for combat.

Moreover, they allege economic risks. However, they conveniently forget the billions that narcoterrorism already costs the country annually.

Additionally, they talk about “human rights violations”. However, they remain silent about the rights of terror victims that factions impose daily.

The Reality They Ignore

Consequently, these “experts” live in ivory towers. Certainly they never faced armed criminals. Therefore, they can afford to theorize while police officers die.

Finally, their opinions don’t deserve equal weight to those who actually fight crime on the streets.

What Brazil Gains by Accepting American Cooperation

Certainly, accepting DEA help would bring immense benefits to Brazil. First of all, let’s consider concrete advantages:

Cutting-Edge Technology

First of all, the United States has the world’s most advanced surveillance and investigation technology. Moreover, they could share tracking, interception, and data analysis systems.

Additionally, American equipment is superior to what Brazilian police currently have. Therefore, it would dramatically increase operations’ effectiveness.

Shared Intelligence

Moreover, the DEA operates globally and has information about factions’ international connections. Consequently, it could identify trafficking routes, weapons sources, and money laundering.

Additionally, Americans have monitored cartel communications for decades. Therefore, they developed incomparable expertise they could share.

Specialized Training

Additionally, American special forces could train Brazilian police in advanced tactics. Consequently, they would reduce casualties among law enforcement agents.

Moreover, they would share decades of experience fighting terrorist groups. Therefore, they would better prepare our forces to face narcoterrorists.

Financial Resources

Finally, formal cooperation would facilitate access to American funds destined for drug trafficking combat. Consequently, Brazil could better equip its forces without further burdening taxpayers.

The False Question of Sovereignty

However, the federal government insists on the fallacious argument of “national sovereignty”. In this sense, it rejects cooperation under the pretext of defending Brazilian autonomy.

Sovereignty For What?

First of all, we need to question: sovereignty to protect whom? Certainly not the honest citizens living under faction terror.

Moreover, what sovereignty exists when criminal organizations control entire territories? Therefore, the argument is empty when the State has already lost control of significant areas.

International Cooperation is Normal

Additionally, serious countries cooperate internationally all the time. Actually, Interpol, bilateral agreements, and joint operations are standard practices.

Therefore, only governments with something to hide refuse legitimate cooperation. Consequently, we need to question Brasília’s true motives.

The Question That Won’t Go Away: Why Protect Terrorists?

Finally, we arrive at the central question: why does the federal government protect narcoterrorists? After all, what interests does it really defend by refusing cooperation and maintaining permissive laws?

Possible Explanations

First of all, ideology: some in government see criminals as “system victims”. Therefore, they sympathize more with terrorists than with police officers.

Moreover, corruption: factions move billions in bribes. Consequently, they may have influence over politicians who block changes.

Additionally, anti-Americanism: the current government demonstrates alignment with dictatorships. Therefore, it rejects American cooperation on ideological principle.

Finally, incompetence: perhaps they simply don’t understand the terrorist threat’s severity.

Rio’s Example: State Governments Can Act

Fortunately, governors like Cláudio Castro demonstrate it’s possible to face narcoterrorism. First of all, they call criminals by the correct name. Moreover, they conduct necessary operations even under criticism.

Additionally, they seek direct international cooperation when the federal government fails. Therefore, they demonstrate that state leadership can compensate for federal weakness.

The Difference in Priorities

While Brasília protects terrorists with technicalities, Rio faces the problem. Consequently, Rio police officers risk their lives while federal bureaucrats protect criminals.

Therefore, the difference is clear: some rulers prioritize security; others, ideology.

What Needs to Change Urgently

Finally, Brazil needs immediate changes if it wants to defeat narcoterrorism. In this sense, some measures are essential:

Immediate Legislative Change

First of all, Congress must quickly approve bills that classify factions as terrorists. Moreover, toughen penalties and facilitate asset confiscation.

Acceptance of International Cooperation

Additionally, the federal government must accept legitimate help offers. Consequently, it would sign agreements with DEA, FBI, and other serious agencies.

End of Permissive Ideology

Moreover, it needs to abandon romantic view of criminals as victims. Therefore, recognize them as the terrorists they are.

Total Support for Security Forces

Finally, give legal and political backing to those who risk their lives fighting terror. Consequently, end ideological persecution against police officers.

Final Reflection: Which Side Are You On?

Ultimately, this is a simple moral question: are you on the side of police officers who die defending society or terrorists who kill innocents?

First of all, while the federal government hesitates, 121 people died. Moreover, four heroes fell in combat. Additionally, families were shattered by terrorist violence.

Therefore, there’s no more room for half-words or convenient technicalities. Consequently, we need to demand that Brazil accept international help and call terrorists what they are.

Finally, governments like Castro’s, Trump’s, Argentina’s, and Paraguay’s show the way. Meanwhile, Brasília chooses to protect criminals. The question is: how long will we accept this?

And you, what do you think about this situation? Do you believe Brazil should accept American cooperation? Do you agree that factions are terrorist organizations? Do you support firm operations against narcoterrorism? Share your opinion in the comments – after all, this war directly affects all of us.