A drone view shows a deforested plot of Brazil’s Amazon rainforest. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Gurpreet prepares for the Panama challenge.
| Photo Credit: K. Murali Kumar

The Brazil team poses before the FIFA World Cup 2026 match against Scotland at the Miami Stadium in Florida.
| Photo Credit: Getty Images

The World Cup began as a sprawl — 48 teams, three host nations, heat, distance, noise and the promise that football’s centre of gravity might tilt somewhere unexpected.

Two knockout rounds later, Europe has placed six teams in the quarterfinals, with Argentina and Morocco the only survivors from outside the continent.

European nations — Spain in 2010 and Germany in Brazil four years later — have won the trophy only twice outside Europe, but with France, Spain, England, Belgium, Norway and Switzerland making up three-quarters of the last eight, the chances of the continent adding to that list now feel high.

This is the most European quarterfinal line-up outside Europe since 1994. The round of 16 also ended in tears for Cristiano Ronaldo and Neymar, while the three host nations disappeared one by one.

The eight teams, though, have taken very different paths to get here. Some arrived through control, some through chaos, and others through sheer stubbornness.

Argentina’s route has been the least serene and perhaps, for that reason, the most revealing. The defending champion had to keep answering uncomfortable questions. Cape Verde dragged it deep in their round of 32 clash and Egypt then had it staring at elimination in Atlanta before Lionel Messi and company overturned a two-goal deficit in the final stretch to win 3-2.

It has not always looked orderly, but Argentina has looked resilient. Messi’s goals continue to shape the campaign, but for Lionel Scaloni, the greater comfort will come from the fact that his team has already lived through the sort of disorder that often ends World Cups.

“We made our people suffer even though we didn’t play a bad game,” Scaloni said after the win over Egypt. “We would be out if we didn’t fight.”

France, too, has been left with bruises. It swatted Sweden aside in the round of 32, but Paraguay turned the last-16 tie into a scrap, defending deep, slowing the game and forcing Didier Deschamps’ side to settle for a narrow win through Kylian Mbappe’s late penalty.

Yet France still looks the deepest squad left in the competition, with Mbappe’s seven goals giving it the tournament’s sharpest edge and Ousmane Dembele, Bradley Barcola and Michael Olise all growing in stature.

England’s quarterfinal place was earned in the most difficult setting of the lot. It’s 3-2 win over Mexico at the Azteca was a test of altitude, noise and a wall of home hostility. England was reduced to 10 men and still survived.

Norway, its next opponent, authored one of the shocks of the tournament by knocking Brazil out, with Erling Haaland scoring twice in a 2-1 win. Under Stale Solbakken, Norway can hurt teams both in transition and with the ball, and England’s defenders now face the most obvious individual duel of the round — containing Haaland without losing control of the spaces around him.

Belgium and Switzerland have reached the last eight by mastering pressure in very different ways. Belgium was too calm and too clinical for the United States, winning 4-1 despite the noise around Folarin Balogun’s controversial reinstatement and the weight of a home crowd.

Switzerland, meanwhile, held its nerve better than Colombia in a goalless last-16 tie before prevailing on penalties to reach a first World Cup quarterfinal in 72 years.

Spain, meanwhile, still has not conceded a goal and removed Portugal with a cold efficiency that looks ominous.

The quarterfinal line-up now offers four very different tests. France against Morocco in Boston pits the tournament’s deepest squad against its most defiant underdog. Spain against Belgium in California feels like a contest between a side that monopolises the ball and one that can cut through space quickly.

England’s match against Norway in Miami may hinge on whether England can contain Haaland while still imposing its own rhythm. Argentina against Switzerland offers Messi another knockout maze against a side that rarely loses its shape or its calm.

The quarterfinals are evidence of where this World Cup has drifted. What began as a sprawling global carnival has tightened into a bracket dominated by Europe, with Argentina and Morocco left to resist the pull.

Published – July 08, 2026 08:50 pm IST

Getting ready: Japan goalkeeper Zion Suzuki will be in the thick of things when Brazil flies in on his post.
| Photo Credit: AP

A 25-foot cut-out of Argentine football legend Lionel Messi at Chellanam
| Photo Credit: THULASI KAKKAT

Amid a heated debate about Brazil’s flagship cash-transfer scheme last week, a United Nations report revealed that the country had made a giant leap on the Human Development Index (HDI) scale. The controversy erupted after a television presenter, Luciano Huck, said that Bolsa Família programme “discourages the poor from working”. As Mr. Huck was being fact-checked on social media, the UN Development Programme report revealed that the scheme had played a key role in Brazil raising its HDI score from 0.744 in 2012 to 0.805 in 2024.

On the UN scale, which ranges from 0 to 1, the score of 0.805 places Brazil in the category of “very high human development.” Among the Afro-Brazilians, the HDI grew by 10.3% over 12 years, almost twice the rate for the Whites. “Achieving this positive result is not by chance; it is the result of strong public policies and an inclusive national project focused on combating inequalities,” said Guilherme Boulos, the Federal Minister for Social Development, at the launch of the report in Brasilia.

The index measures indicators related to health and longevity, education, and income generation, with results broken down by race, gender, and region at the municipal level across all 26 states of Brazil. When the UNDP began calculating the index 30 years ago, Brazil was in the category of low human development. The steady rise, according to the government, has been driven by sustained planning and public spending. “We have made progress in education. We have witnessed success because of an expansion of public healthcare system, income distribution, real increase in the minimum wages and programmes such as Bolsa Família,” said the Minister.

Bolsa Família, launched in 2003 during President Lula da Silva’s first term, has inspired similar schemes worldwide, including the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in India in 2006. Walquiria Rego, a sociologist who has studied the programme for years, says its success stems from providing poor families with a regular income. “As families received money every month, their eating habits improved, hunger declined dramatically and Brazil was taken off the UN hunger map,” she says.

Healthcare guarantee

From its launch in 2003 until 2023, Brazil has spent around US$ 81 billion on the scheme which has benefitted 49 million people. Extensive studies conducted by Prof. Rego show that the programme’s impact goes beyond nutrition as, with a steady source of income, poor families were able to furnish their homes and live with dignity. “The changes have been profound: people became better nourished, healthier and more integrated into social and economic life,” says Prof. Rego, whose book ‘Voices from Bolsa Familia’ is considered a landmark work.

Besides cash assistance, Brazil’s unified health system, or SUS, has played a crucial role in its HDI improvement. Brazil spends about 9.7% of its GDP of US$ 2.64 trillion on health, with SUS getting 4% of the amount. Guaranteed by the Constitution, Brazil’s free and universal public healthcare system has been a major driver of rising life expectancy. Jorge Félix, a professor of gerontology at the University of São Paulo, says the system focused on child health in the early 1990s and eliminated the diseases like measles that were major causes of illness. “Access to healthcare has expanded across the country through a network of primary health centres. This is important because 75% of Brazilians depend on SUS,” he says, adding that vaccination campaigns for children, adults, and access to treatments like cancer have improved life expectancy.

Both Bolsa Família and SUS had come under strain between 2018 and 2022 when the government of President Jair Bolsonaro imposed deep spending cuts. The weakening of the public health system, says Prof. Félix, proved catastrophic during the Covid-19 pandemic. “Beyond financing, strategic areas of SUS were also dismantled. As a result, Brazil entered the pandemic with reduced capacity to respond. Shortages of medicines and declining operational capacity left SUS significantly weakened just as Brazil confronted the biggest public health emergency,” says the academic, whose book ‘The Economics of Longevity’ examines the healthcare challenges in Brazil.

In 2022, the last year of Bolsonaro presidency, the country’s HDI had sunk low. In 2023, when Mr. Lula returned to the presidency for his third term, the government restored funding for SUS and Bolsa Família, bringing the momentum back into Brazil’s social transformation. The gains have been particularly visible in the historically poorer Northeast region. “Bolsa Família stimulated commerce in small municipalities across the Northeast because the money circulated locally, generating jobs and creating opportunities for small businesses,” says Prof. Rego.

A key reason for Bolsa Família’s success is that payments are made directly to women, particularly mothers. This policy, says Prof. Rego, has made profound impact on families. “Women are now seen as the people responsible for food and healthcare for their children. It was not simply a cash-transfer plan to alleviate poverty. It also promoted citizenship and dignity for some of the poorest women in Brazil, thus making a significant contribution to human development and social justice,” says Prof. Rego.

Election rhetoric

While the HDI figures of Brazil are in sync with the country’s commitments to the UN’s 2030 goals, experts warn against complacency. “If the State stops assisting the vulnerable and investing in SUS, the risk of social regression remains high,” says Prof. Felix.

As Brazil enters an election cycle, the far-right circles are spreading false stories about how Bolsa Família discourages people from working. Yet studies show that about 61% of people receiving Bolsa Família in 2014 had left the programme by 2025. Because of the programme’s positive impact on human development, Mr. Luciano Huck’s remarks triggered a backlash, particularly in the politically-important Northeast, which has benefitted the most from the scheme.

With the UN report giving a timely boost to President Lula, the beneficiaries of social programmes are not in a mood to accept any argument against the policies which have lifted Brazil into the zone of very high human development.

Published – June 03, 2026 08:59 pm IST

Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and U.S. President Trump stand on opposite sides on issues including multilateralism, international trade and the fight against climate change. File.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva gestures during a press conference in New Delhi.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

  

Nearly two weeks after the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, uncertainty hangs over South America. The unease deepened on January 16 when the U.S. warned airlines to exercise caution over parts of South and Central America, citing risks linked to potential military activity. The panic followed a series of provocative remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump, who claimed drug cartels were “running Mexico” and suggested American strikes on land targets. Earlier, he had targeted Colombia, accusing President Gustavo Petro of exporting cocaine to the U.S.  

With a continent of more than 450 million people still reeling from the abduction of a sitting President, Mr. Petro responded rather bluntly to Mr. Trump. “If you detain a president whom much of my people want and respect, you will unleash the people’s jaguar,” Mr. Petro wrote on X. Later, as Mr. Trump moderated his tone a bit, Mr. Petro moved to de-escalate too, cancelling his planned trip to the World Economic Forum and, instead, focus on his planned meeting with Mr. Trump at the White House on February 3. 

As the region awaits anxiously for the Trump–Petro talks, Brazil — the largest democracy and economy in Latin America — is moving on two parallel tracks – diplomatic and humanitarian – to support Venezuela. While President Lula da Silva has publicly denounced the “violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and international law,” his government is focusing on relief efforts. Brasilia has dispatched 100 tonne of medical supplies to Caracas where a major dialysis centre was destroyed during the U.S. military operation. “We cannot forget that when there was a collapse of oxygen supply in Manaus during the COVID-19 pandemic, 1,35,000 cubic metres of oxygen came from Venezuela to save the Brazilian people,” Health Minister Alexandre Padilha said as Brazil sent a planeload of supplies to Caracas.  

Beyond humanitarian relief, Brazil has used the crisis to signal a diplomatic message: South America will not remain passive while a neighbouring country is reshaped by force. “Our priority right now is political and institutional stability in Venezuela and we are resisting pressure from some Western capitals to push immediately for elections or a rapid transition,” says a senior Brazilian diplomat. Meanwhile, Lula has activated multiple diplomatic channels, holding phone calls with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Russian President Vladimir Putin to coordinate opposition to the use of force and reaffirm respect for sovereignty of countries in the region.  

Brazil’s response to the crisis is also embedded in its rejection of unilateralism. This was underscored on January 17 as the European Union and the South American trading bloc Mercosur signed an agreement to create one of the world’s biggest free-trade zones. Speaking at the signing, President Lula argued that in an era of rising protectionism, the agreement demonstrated that “another form of global governance is possible — more active, representative, inclusive and fair.”  

Yet the region’s ability to present a unified front is being undermined by divisions within. Leaders, such as Argentina’s President Javier Milei, have openly aligned themselves with Mr. Trump. This alliance, analysts warn, risks normalising interventionist rhetoric. “Trump, being impulsive and believing in unilateral actions above all, would not be more contained even in the absence of aligned regional regimes,” says Rafael R. Ioris, professor of Latin American history at the University of Denver. “But it helps Trump to have most regional countries controlled by the Right. It provides a kind of legitimacy and puts pressure on those not yet aligned to reconsider more autonomous courses of action.” 

With Brazil and Colombia both heading into crucial elections this year, the geopolitical stakes are rising. “While Trump has openly suggested possible military action against Mexico and Colombia, pressure on Brazil is likely to be subtler. These could include support for right-wing candidates and efforts to tarnish Lula’s campaign, particularly through disinformation,” notes Mr. Ioris, adding that such tactics could also backfire, as happened in Mr. Trump’s failed tariff war against Brazil.  

With the Venezuelan crisis, South America is confronting a familiar challenge: the reassertion of a Monroe Doctrine–style logic in which the hemisphere is treated as a zone of U.S. influence. Regional leaders know that their response to this crisis will shape not only Venezuela’s future but South America’s place in the new world order. President Lula is leading the pushback against the framework. “In a multipolar world, no country should have its foreign relations questioned. We will not be subservient to hegemonic endeavors,” Lula wrote in an article for the New York Times on Sunday. Venezuela’s future, Lula asserted, “must remain in the hands of its people”. 

Brazil’s recent dealings with Washington show both the possibilities and limits of resistance. After months of confrontation, Brazil forced U.S. to roll back its tariff. Yet observers do not see this as something that will last long. “It is true that the Lula administration made significant advances in its relationship with Trump in 2025,” says Brian Mier, a Recife-based political commentator. “Make no mistake about it, however, the U.S. wants ideological hegemony in the Western hemisphere. It wants our rare earth minerals and, especially, our petroleum.” With Brazil heading to elections in October and some opposition figures openly courting Washington, the threat of renewed pressures remains high. 

The broader regional pattern only deepens these concerns. Peru has already experienced a right-wing coup, while Washington has actively sought to influence elections in favour of far-right candidates in Argentina, Ecuador, Honduras, and Chile. From Brasilia’s perspective, the logic is clear. “This is not about democracy or even oil,” says the senior Brazilian diplomat. “The real objective is to push China and Russia out, reassert the dominance of dollar and weaken the BRICS group. Venezuela is just one pressure point in an effort to drag the world back into a unipolar system where Washington sets the rules for us.”  

The challenge for South America, the veteran diplomat adds, is to resist the U.S. pressure without igniting fires across the continent. Any missteps could define the region’s autonomy for a generation. 

Published – January 21, 2026 05:00 am IST