Breaking News: Brazilian minister does not rule out developing nuclear weapons as part of future defense strategy.

As reported by Gazeta do Povo on September 5, 2025, Brazil’s internal debate on nuclear weapons has returned to public attention following remarks from Minister of Mines and Energy Alexandre Silveira in Rio de Janeiro. At the inauguration of new directors for the National Nuclear Safety Agency (ANSN) and the National Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Agency (ANP), he said Brazil might one day need to develop nuclear weapons to guarantee national defense. He emphasized that such a debate should be considered from a long-term strategic perspective and not as an immediate policy shift.
Follow Army Recognition on Google News at this link

Silveira underlined that the Brazilian Constitution restricts nuclear energy use to peaceful purposes such as power generation and nuclear medicine, but argued that international conditions could eventually require revisiting this principle. (Picture source: Agência Brasil)

Silveira underlined that the Constitution restricts nuclear energy use to peaceful purposes such as power generation and nuclear medicine, but argued that international conditions could eventually require revisiting this principle. He noted that the Lula government continues to preserve sovereignty within constitutional limits, yet he expressed certainty that Congress would ultimately need to review the constitutional position. Silveira justified his comments by pointing to a global climate of heightened instability and disputes. He referred to Brazil’s geographic and resource-based advantages, mentioning its 11 percent share of the world’s freshwater, its tropical climate, fertile land, and extensive mineral wealth as elements that place nuclear issues at the center of long-term national strategy.

Silveira stressed that the country’s uranium reserves and its capacity to dominate the nuclear cycle represent strategic assets. According to him, only legislative change would allow Brazil to apply nuclear technology to defense, if international dynamics demanded it. The minister argued that although the subject is controversial, global conditions demonstrate an increasing risk of conflict that could require developing instruments of deterrence. The event where these remarks were made gathered federal authorities and energy sector representatives, and the subject is expected to be discussed in congressional committees if any proposals for constitutional reform move forward.

A separate dimension of the debate involves a popular legislative proposal submitted in 2020 that called for authorizing Brazil to construct an atomic bomb as a deterrent against possible foreign interference. The idea, initiated by physician Vito Angelo Duarte Pascaretta from Paraná, obtained nearly 21,000 signatures across all states, surpassing the Senate’s e-Cidadania threshold for further evaluation. The suggestion was initially assigned to Senator Paulo Paim and later transferred to Senator Marcos Pontes, but no report has yet been presented. If approved by the Human Rights and Participatory Legislation Commission, the idea would become a bill and require approval from both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies. For now, political mobilization remains weak, although some legislators note that geopolitical shifts may force a more serious debate in the future. This proposal has been discussed against the backdrop of international developments, including a U.S. airstrike on Iranian nuclear facilities on 21 June that was justified on the grounds of preventing nuclear weapons development. Former President Donald Trump claimed that enrichment sites had been destroyed, and Israel said Iran’s nuclear program was set back by years.

The international environment is repeatedly cited as a reason for reassessing nuclear policies. China has expanded its nuclear arsenal to approximately 600 active warheads, North Korea continues developing ballistic missiles, and Iran’s nuclear program has faced renewed confrontation. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was accompanied by nuclear threats that discouraged foreign troop deployments. The United States under Trump signaled possible limits on extending nuclear deterrence to its 34 allied countries, raising concerns among NATO members and Asian allies. In response, discussions emerged in Europe on whether nations like Germany, Poland, or Sweden should explore their own nuclear arsenals, while in Asia, debates intensified in Japan and South Korea about defense against China, North Korea, and Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron indicated in March 2025 that France might place its arsenal at the disposal of European partners as a counter to Moscow. These developments suggest a trend in which reliance on extended deterrence is being questioned.

Brazil’s nuclear past remains a significant element of the debate. During the late 1970s, under President João Batista Figueiredo, the country began a secret program known as the “Parallel Nuclear Program,” separate from civilian projects such as the Angra nuclear power plants. This program aimed at full mastery of uranium enrichment, involving the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Facilities were developed in São José dos Campos, Guaratiba, and Iperó, while test tunnels were dug in Serra do Cachimbo in Pará in 1984. President Fernando Collor publicly sealed one of these tunnels in 1990, symbolically ending the program. That same year, a parliamentary inquiry revealed that Brazil had enriched uranium and examined whether the program had military applications, although officials denied plans to manufacture weapons. The investigation also documented secret financing and an alleged 1981 shipment of uranium to Iraq. Brazil’s 1988 Constitution had already limited nuclear use to peaceful purposes, and in 1998, the country signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) under President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, committing not to develop nuclear weapons.

The legal framework in Latin America is also central. The Treaty of Tlatelolco, opened for signature in 1967, created a nuclear-weapon-free zone covering Latin America and the Caribbean. The initiative began in 1963 with a joint declaration by the presidents of Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, and Bolivia, later endorsed at the United Nations. Negotiations led by the Preparatory Commission for the Denuclearization of Latin America resulted in the treaty’s unanimous approval. Mexico became a key sponsor, and Mexican diplomat Alfonso García Robles later received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1982 for his role. Brazil initially hesitated to fully comply but eventually ratified the treaty. Together with its NPT commitments, Tlatelolco sets strict legal limits on nuclear weapon development in Brazil, prohibiting production, acquisition, or storage of such weapons in the region.

Silveira’s statements, therefore, confront multiple constraints. The Constitution, the NPT, and Tlatelolco all restrict Brazil to peaceful nuclear applications. Nonetheless, he argued for considering future scenarios in which global instability might alter national defense requirements. The Ministry of Mines and Energy later clarified that nuclear energy use remains focused on civilian purposes, but the comments generated speculation about whether Brazil might be rethinking its long-term options. Analysts noted that the controversy could impact the Navy’s nuclear submarine program, which is based on propulsion technology rather than weapons. Legislators are expected to continue examining the matter, with some pointing to strategic uncertainty and others emphasizing the diplomatic costs of reversing long-standing commitments. For now, the issue remains a debate between advocates of maintaining existing obligations and those arguing for a new discussion in light of shifting global security dynamics.

Written by Jérôme Brahy

Jérôme Brahy is a defense analyst and documentalist at Army Recognition. He specializes in naval modernization, aviation, drones, armored vehicles, and artillery, with a focus on strategic developments in the United States, China, Russia, Türkiye, and Belgium. His analyses go beyond the facts, providing context, identifying key actors, and explaining why defense news matters on a global scale.