The United States and 14 Latin American and Caribbean governments signed a joint declaration on 22 September 2026 designating 24 criminal organizations as narcoterrorists, a coordinated security response that notably excluded Brazil and Mexico despite targeting major Brazilian crime syndicates.
The Shield of the Americas declaration followed a request from President Donald Trump. It imposes asset freezes, immigration and visa restrictions, and establishes criminal liability for anyone providing the listed groups with material support. Among the designated organizations are Brazil's Primeiro Comando da Capital, or PCC, and Comando Vermelho, two of South America's most powerful criminal networks.
Brazil's Absence Raises Questions
Brazil didn't sign the declaration even as two of its largest criminal organizations appeared on the narcoterrorist list. Mexico also stayed out of the agreement. The absence of these two regional powers undermines what would otherwise represent a unified hemispheric front against transnational organized crime.
The designation landed as a political shock in Brazil, where officials responded defensively to being treated as a problem rather than a partner in the security effort. The move puts pressure on Brazilian authorities to either join the framework or explain why they're declining to participate in sanctions against groups operating within their borders.
Enforcement Mechanisms
The declaration creates real consequences for the 24 designated groups. Asset freezes will target financial networks that fund operations across borders. Immigration and visa restrictions aim to limit the movement of operatives and associates. The criminal liability provision extends to anyone offering material support, creating legal exposure for facilitators who might operate in gray areas of financial services or logistics.
These enforcement tools represent a market-based approach to security, using financial pressure and legal risk rather than military intervention. The framework relies on sovereign nations choosing to enforce sanctions within their jurisdictions, making Brazil's and Mexico's participation crucial for effectiveness.
Regional Security Landscape
The 14 signatories represent a significant coalition, though the specifics of which nations joined weren't detailed in initial reports. The declaration establishes a formal structure for treating certain criminal organizations not simply as law enforcement problems but as terrorist entities, a designation that carries heavier penalties and broader enforcement authority.
The PCC and Comando Vermelho operate extensive criminal enterprises that stretch beyond Brazil's borders, involved in drug trafficking, money laundering, and violent territorial control. Designating them as narcoterrorists acknowledges that these aren't street gangs but sophisticated organizations that threaten regional stability.
The Trump administration's push for the declaration fits within a broader emphasis on border security and combating drug trafficking at its source. By securing multilateral support, the U.S. creates a framework where participating nations share intelligence and coordinate enforcement actions.
Why This Matters:
The Shield of the Americas represents the most comprehensive multilateral effort to designate Latin American criminal organizations as narcoterrorists, creating financial and legal tools that go beyond traditional law enforcement. Brazil's refusal to participate despite having two major groups on the list creates a significant gap in enforcement, potentially leaving safe havens for operations and assets. Mexico's absence compounds this problem. The declaration's effectiveness depends entirely on whether major regional players eventually join or whether it becomes a partial coalition unable to disrupt the cross-border networks it targets. For U.S. border security and drug interdiction efforts, the framework only works if the nations where these groups operate actually enforce the sanctions and restrictions. Without Brazil and Mexico, the declaration risks being symbolic rather than operational.