Welcome back to Foreign Policy’s Latin America Brief.

The highlights this week: Panamanians take to the streets in unusual mass protests, Brazilian authorities sue a bank for slavery reparations, and Bolivia cuts ties with Israel.

Last week, Panama hosted a United Nations climate event for Latin American and Caribbean countries. It was meant to be a regional prep of sorts ahead of the global U.N. climate conference in Dubai that begins later this month. But environmental issues were also in the spotlight outside of formal meeting rooms, as visitors encountered a country consumed by mass protests.

Since August—and more intensely over the past two weeks—Panamanians have been demonstrating against their government’s decision to grant a new 20-year license to Canadian firm First Quantum Minerals. The government secured an increase in its royalties from First Quantum’s copper mine in Panama, which accounts for some 1.5 percent of global copper output. Copper is a key component in electric car batteries, and global demand for the mineral is expected to increase as the energy transition accelerates.

Demonstrators claim the company’s new contract was fast-tracked by legislators and that citizens were not able to properly voice concerns about the mine’s environmental impacts. Panama’s environment ministry and communities near the mine have reported multiple instances of related water contamination over the years, though First Quantum says it complies with the highest environmental standards. Many protesters also voiced opposition to the expansion of mining in Panama more broadly, citing fears about its adverse effects on biodiversity and human health.

The protests were large and disruptive, shutting down traffic across the small country. They also expanded to address other grievances, such as cost-of-living strains, corruption, and the heavy-handed police reaction to the unrest.

Panama holds general elections next May, and the demonstrations spell political danger for the party of center-left President Laurentino Cortizo, which is polling poorly. By Oct. 27, Cortizo announced he would ban new mining contracts in the country. On Sunday, he followed up by saying he planned to schedule a nationwide referendum on whether to scrap First Quantum’s deal. The government has also promoted a bill in Congress to overrule the law that enacted the contract, and Panama’s top court has agreed to hear lawsuits that challenge the deal.

The unrest and subsequent moves by the government—which is seen as among the most pro-business in the region—have shocked commodity-watchers and investors worldwide. First Quantum’s mine not only accounts for a significant chunk of the global copper supply, but it also was slated to provide the Panamanian government with annual revenues equivalent to around half a percent of the country’s GDP.

Yet the protests in Panama underscore a looming dilemma in Latin America’s energy transition. The region is home to many of the critical minerals and rare earths needed for a low-carbon transformation, and these resources could potentially be an economic boon for the region. But if voters are not on board with extraction projects, in some cases mining could come to a jarring halt.

Writing in Foreign Policy in April, Robert Muggah and Mac Margolis discussed how this quandary is playing out in Brazil, where close to one-third of the country’s critical minerals wealth—including one of the world’s largest deposits of rare earths—is located beneath the Amazon River basin. As Brazil’s mining ministry works on a national strategic minerals plan, Muggah and Margolis called for the country to “create productive strategies for delivering both wealth and well-being.”

These could include implementing the Escazú Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation, and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean, adopted in 2018 and now ratified by 15 countries in the region. Signatories to the agreement committed their government agencies to providing environmental information—such as how a mining project might affect a local community—to anyone who solicits it, taking no longer than 30 business days. Authorities must also hold public consultations on decisions that would affect the environment.

Panama has ratified the Escazú Agreement, but Brazil has not; Brazilian environmentalists including current Environment Minister Marina Silva have called for ratification. In Panama, activists claimed First Quantum’s new contract violated the treaty.

Chile, which ratified the Escazú Agreement in 2022, has built heightened environmental protection measures into its strategy to expand lithium mining and has still seen booming interest from mining firms. Though they introduce a greater burden on industry, these protection measures can also help safeguard against socio-political disruptions to production—as long as they’re followed.

Friday, Nov. 3: Latin American and Caribbean leaders meet with U.S. President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Washington for the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity summit.

Sunday, Nov. 19: Argentina holds a presidential runoff election.

Friday, Dec. 1: Brazil assumes the presidency of the G-20.

Discussions in D.C. Biden welcomes officials from Latin American and Caribbean countries at the White House today for follow-up talks on an economic partnership launched at last year’s Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles.

The United States is due to announce monetary assistance to countries hosting migrants, Reuters reported. Washington is also reportedly working to expand the financing capabilities of the Inter-American Development Bank, one of the biggest development banks serving the Western Hemisphere. Though the talks are officially about economic and migration issues, a related matter is likely to come up, too: Washington’s recent lifting of sanctions on Venezuela in exchange for free elections next year.

Despite the deal, Venezuelan authorities have continued to crack down on the country’s opposition. The Venezuelan Supreme Court voted this week to suspend the result of the opposition’s Oct. 22 primary, which could cause the United States to reimpose sanctions. Latin American leaders may confer with the Biden administration on next steps.

Brazil’s reparations lawsuit. Brazilian government prosecutors sued one of the country’s biggest banks, demanding reparations for its links to slavery at the time of its founding. A large portion of early shares in Banco do Brasil were bought using slave-trafficking proceeds, historians say.

Federal prosecutors filed a suit last Friday that gave the bank 15 days to respond and present plans for reparations. The lawsuit appears to be the first of its kind in Brazil’s history, one of the prosecuting lawyers, Julio Araújo, told the Washington Post.

Banco do Brasil has pushed back, saying that it should not be responsible for the actions of wider society and arguing that it has already made public commitments to increase racial diversity in its leadership. But historians and activists have encouraged the case. They hope it will lead to other cases targeting Brazilian institutions whose histories are intertwined with the slave trade.

Soccer fans flip. This week, after Argentine soccer star Lionel Messi won another Ballon d’Or—a French award honoring the top global player in the game—Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva posted his congratulations with what fans speculated was a subtle dig at Brazil’s own top soccer star, Neymar. Lula praised Messi for being a “professional” who does not party. Neymar, who supported former President Jair Bolsonaro in last year’s election, has the opposite reputation.

That’s not the only way relations between the traditional soccer foes have been turned on their head. An old social media post by Argentine presidential candidate Javier Milei saying that Brazilian soccer icon Pelé is better than Argentina’s Diego Maradona started circulating this week. Milei celebrated Pelé’s physical fitness and the number of goals he scored during his career—which total more than Maradona’s—breaking with Argentine orthodoxy.

• Saudi Arabia Is Mysteriously Absent in the Israel-Hamas War by Steven A. Cook
• Are Chinese Battery Companies the Next Huawei? by Craig Singleton
• The Israel-Hamas War Has Entered a ‘New Phase.’ Here’s What to Expect. by Daniel Byman

On Tuesday, Bolivia cut diplomatic ties with Israel over its bombardment and siege of the Gaza Strip following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, calling Israel’s military campaign “aggressive and disproportionate.”

Bolivia’s move came hours after Israel bombed the Jabalia refugee camp on the outskirts of Gaza City, killing dozens of people. Later that evening, Chile and Colombia recalled their ambassadors to Israel, also citing Israel’s actions; Chile called them “collective punishment,” and Colombia condemned security operations in “densely populated civilian areas.” As of writing, the reported death toll in Gaza stands at over 9,000 people as Israel pushes forward with a ground invasion.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson pushed back at all three countries, saying Bolivia’s act was a “surrender to terrorism” and calling on Chile and Colombia to explicitly condemn Hamas. (Chilean President Gabriel Boric had already done so earlier in the day, while Colombia had not.)

By Wednesday, Argentina, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru had also made statements condemning Israel’s actions. All of the statements also condemned Hamas and called for the group to unconditionally release the hostages it has held since Oct. 7. The statements expressed support for a humanitarian cease-fire and a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “Nothing justifies the violation of international humanitarian law,” Argentina’s Foreign Ministry wrote.

Meanwhile, Colombian President Gustavo Petro and Lula have both called actions that have occurred during the war “genocide” in recent days, with Petro referring more specifically to Israel. While holding the rotating presidency of the U.N. Security Council in October, Brazil authored a resolution calling for a cease-fire that was vetoed by the United States.

While there are differences in substance and tone of the Latin American countries’ comments, taken together, they sound a collective note of alarm over the civilian loss of life caused by the war and are a resounding call to stop fighting. (Two outliers, Guatemala and Paraguay, voted against a cease-fire at the U.N.)

Latin American countries have little direct sway over either Israel or Hamas. But they appear determined to take a stand on what many see as violations of international law. In doing so, they and other countries in the global south are also casting skepticism on U.S. claims to be the defender of the rules-based international order, the Getulio Vargas Foundation’s Oliver Stuenkel wrote in Foreign Policy this week.