The following is the text submitted for the May 15 EIR Emergency Roundtable, “The Iran War and the ‘Controlled Disintegration’ of the World Economy,” by Lier Pires Ferreira. Prof. Pires holds a postdoctoral degree in human rights (Universidad de Salamanca, Spain) and a doctorate of law (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), and is a researcher, BRICS Center (Núcleo BRICS or NuBRICS), Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Brazil. The video is available here.

Introduction

Today we address a matter of the utmost gravity, one that intertwines geopolitics, the global economy, and the fate of nations such as Brazil: the escalation of hostilities toward Iran, in the context of what some analysts have termed the “controlled disintegration” of the global economy. In this brief text, we will analyze the negative effects of U.S. President Donald Trump’s economic foreign policy on Brazil and defend the central role of the BRICS as a bulwark of multilateralism, global governance, and resistance against Washington’s arbitrary tariff and geopolitical policies.

1. Iran: A Manufactured Crisis

I will begin by presenting a hypothesis that has gained traction in strategic circles: the Trump administration does not act out of mere improvisation or chaos, but rather under a logic of “controlled disintegration.” This means: generating regional economic crises, supply chain disruptions, monetary fragmentation, and localized conflicts to reconfigure the global order for the benefit of U.S. financial capital, the country’s military-industrial complex, and the hegemony of the dollar.

In this scheme, Iran has become the central axis. War—whether open, by proxy, or through asymmetric attacks—is no accident. It is a tool. By attacking Iran directly or through Israel, the aim is:

A. To disrupt global routes (the Strait of Hormuz), raising the price of oil and gas, and punishing industrialized economies such as China, India, and Germany;

B. Force a flight to the dollar, weakening the ongoing processes of de-dollarization; and

C. Destroy any Eurasian security architecture independent of the United States, including the Russia-China-Iran axis.

The result is a global economy subject to “induced entropy”: imported inflation, technological fragmentation, and military rearmament as a “solution” to artificially created crises.

2. The Negative Impacts of Trump’s Economic Policy on Brazil

And what about Brazil in all this? Brazil, as a middle power in South America, is not a neutral actor and is acutely affected by this policy. Regarding this issue, there are four key points I would like to address.

The first is the tariff hikes and the closure of markets. U.S. President Donald Trump has reinstated the “America First” logic through punitive tariffs on steel, aluminum, and subsequently on agro-industrial products. Although Brazil achieved exceptional export figures in 2018-2019, the tariffs unilaterally imposed in 2019—which remain partially in effect—severely affected sectors such as ethanol, orange juice, meat, fish, and soybeans, destabilizing Brazil’s agro-industry. Furthermore, tariffs on wood and wood products, machinery and equipment, footwear, and other manufactured goods also impacted industries, requiring vigorous diplomatic action (with the U.S. government) and economic measures (subsidies for producers and the search for new markets) to minimize the harmful effects. Furthermore, the policy of domestic subsidies for U.S. agriculture distorts global prices, harming more efficient Brazilian producers.

The second point concerns exchange rate pressure and capital flight. The policy of high interest rates induced by the Federal Reserve to contain domestic inflation—exacerbated by the costs of the trade and energy wars—causes an artificial appreciation of the dollar. The Brazilian real depreciates. Brazil suffers from “capital flight,” a loss of reserves, and higher costs of servicing its external debt. Trump’s promise to “make the dollar strong” means, for Brazil, more poverty and less productive investment.

The third issue is the militarization of hemispheric relations. Trump has pressured Brazil to act as a “privileged non-NATO ally,” which would imply automatic alignment with sanctions against Russia, China, and Iran. Any military escalation against Iran could trigger demands to use Brazilian bases, violating our sovereign tradition of non-intervention. Furthermore, forced increases in military spending divert resources from education, health, and infrastructure, while also militarizing relations among South American countries, which are traditionally more peaceful.

The fourth and final point concerns the crushing of Brazilian industry. The trade war between the United States and China—exacerbated by Trump’s policies—may reduce Chinese demand for Brazilian iron ore, oil, and manufactured goods. Brazil is caught between two giants. On the one hand, it continues to suffer from U.S. protectionism. On the other hand, it fears a Chinese slowdown caused by Trump’s tariffs.

Therefore, the “controlled disintegration” orchestrated from Washington is a constant threat. It turns Brazil into “collateral damage” of an economic war it did not choose, but for which it pays the price in terms of jobs, inflation, and loss of autonomy.

3. The BRICS: Defending Multilateralism and Global Governance

Faced with this bleak outlook, what alternative exists? Here I want to be emphatic: the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, now expanded) represent the main force of institutional resistance to “controlled disintegration.” I will outline four additional points here:

The first point is the defense of multilateralism—real multilateralism. While Trump attacks the WTO, boycotts the United Nations system, and threatens to abandon climate and global health agreements, the BRICS have strengthened South-South dialogue. In particular, the New Development Bank (NDB), chaired by Dilma Rousseff and also known as the BRICS Bank, is a concrete alternative to the IMF and the World Bank, providing loans without the austerity conditions that destroy welfare states.

The second point is the construction of non-hegemonic, non-imperialist global governance. The BRICS seek reform of the United Nations system, a more democratic and inclusive Security Council, and a financial architecture that incorporates national currencies for trade. It also requires changes to the governance structure of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, so that the growing weight and economic contribution of emerging markets are adequately reflected. Furthermore, this reduces the United States’ ability to impose extraterritorial sanctions—such as those Trump has used against Iran, but also against Brazilian companies that trade with countries like Venezuela or Russia.

The third point is resistance to tariff hikes and other arbitrary measures. The BRICS have coordinated symmetrical tariff responses, redirected trade flows toward internal bloc chains, and created compensation mechanisms in local currencies (the yuan, the ruble, the rupee, the real). This protects Brazil and other members: If Trump imposes tariffs on Brazilian steel, for example, the BRICS can redirect those exports to China or India, which currently have a high demand for raw materials. Furthermore, Brazilian high-tech companies, such as Embraer (civil and military aviation) and Petrobras (energy), can find new markets and new strategic partners outside the U.S.–Western Europe axis.

Finally, the defense of peace and national sovereignty. In the context of the conflict with Iran, the BRICS have issued joint statements rejecting military intervention, demanding respect for the nuclear agreement (JCPOA), and offering platforms for dialogue. Within the BRICS, Brazil has upheld its tradition of autonomy, negotiating with all parties without submitting to any of them.

4. The Need for an Active Brazilian Foreign Policy

Given its geopolitical and geoeconomic weight, as well as its pivotal role within the BRICS coalition, Brazil cannot limit itself to merely reacting to Trump’s tariff hikes or threats. It needs an “offensive, strategic, and sovereign” foreign policy, anchored on three pillars:

A. Strengthening the BRICS as a political bloc, including the creation of a payment system in national currencies (controlled de-dollarization) and an anti-tariff stabilization fund;

B. Revitalizing South American integration (UNASUR, Mercosur) as a shield against the hemispheric fragmentation driven by Washington. Added to this are other trade alliances with diverse partners, such as the European Union and the Asia-Pacific region, as well as Africa, the final frontier of capitalist expansion;

C. Active non-alignment. In conflicts such as those in Iran or Ukraine, Brazil must offer mediation, reject unilateral sanctions, and defend international law and human rights. Furthermore, it should seek to protect the global environment by advocating for new forms of production based on renewable energy and new forms of environmental justice.

If Brazil passively submits to Trump’s “controlled disintegration,” it will be disintegrated. If it acts within the BRICS as a coordinator for the Global South, it can not only resist but also contribute to building a multipolar, just, and peaceful world order.

Final Considerations

The war against Iran is not an isolated episode; it is the surgical instrument of a policy of economic disintegration orchestrated to perpetuate U.S. hegemony under Trump. Brazil is already suffering the consequences: tariffs, capital flight, loss of sovereignty.

But in the face of this storm, the BRICS are emerging as the “dike of containment.” Defense of multilateralism, cooperative global governance, legal and economic resistance to tariff hikes. Together, the countries of the Global South are stronger.

I say this: The question is not whether Trump will attack again; the question is whether Brazil and the rest of the Global South will have the political will to chart their own course. The time is now. Either we actively participate in building a multipolar order, or we will be forced—by force—into an order of controlled disintegration, whose effects on the future of humanity will be catastrophic.