More stories

  • in

    A Dire Outlook as Climate Action Falls Short

    More from our inbox:Pennsylvania Political Ads: ‘A Flood of Falsehoods’A Republican No MoreBig Lie LawyersProtests in Brazil: A Harbinger for the U.S.?Flooded farmland in Hadeja, Nigeria, in September.Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Climate Pledges Fizzle as Havoc Looms for Globe” (front page, Oct. 26):Whatever happened to mutually assured destruction?During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union never attacked each other directly for fear of a nuclear war that would destroy both nations. But today, world-threatening climate change is apparently not enough to bring the U.S. and China to the negotiating table.Without prompt and drastic action by both nations (and others) to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the planet is aimed at a global temperature rise of at least 2.1 degrees Celsius (3.8 degrees Fahrenheit). Tens of millions of people worldwide will be displaced from their homes. Hundreds of millions will suffer severe drought and food shortages due to crop loss. Billions will face dangerous, possibly deadly heat waves.Are the U.S. and China assuming that their populations will magically be spared? Or is an existential threat to both our nations no longer considered enough for our leaders to take seriously?Amy LivingstonHighland Park, N.J.To the Editor:There’s no doubt that our planet is fast approaching the point of no return for avoiding a future of unimaginable, ever-worsening climate chaos. As you report, the perilous position we find ourselves in is due largely to decades of gross inaction from the world’s biggest climate polluters. The only question now is what to do about it.Your article notes that some progress in the name of climate action has recently been made in the United States, with hundreds of billions of dollars in the Inflation Reduction Act allocated for encouraging “cleaner technologies.” But the fact is that incentivizing the development of cleaner energy sources will not by itself make a dent in carbon emissions.Our recent analysis showed that while use of renewable energy rose significantly in the previous decade, fossil fuel production increased even more. In truth, the only way to meaningfully reduce climate-killing carbon pollution is to halt it at its source, by stopping new oil and gas drilling and fracking, and preventing the buildout of new infrastructure like pipelines and export terminals that encourage the devastating extraction.Wenonah HauterWashingtonThe writer is the founder and executive director of Food & Water Watch.To the Editor:Carbon and methane emissions cause temperature to increase, and we are reading that methane emissions are rising faster than ever. At the same time, climate pledges around the globe to cut those emissions are falling short.Many people understand the potential negative effects of climate change, but don’t see the urgency to address it. We need to rectify all of these failings and create the will for faster action. Our citizens must understand and believe that the cost of inaction is too high and demand stronger action now.Perhaps some people are more worried about the immediate economic and inflation aspects. I want to remind them that every negative effect of climate change is bad for the economy and even more inflationary. Climate-related weather events (wildfires, floods, drought, hurricanes, etc.) drain production and supply and escalate demand and prices.If we don’t decrease the use of fossil fuels soon enough, climate migration will become a large issue. Such movements will harm local economies both to and from those migration areas. Climate inaction is too costly to ignore, and we need action now.Jonathan LightLaguna Niguel, Calif.Pennsylvania Political Ads: ‘A Flood of Falsehoods’Chester County elections workers scanning mail-in ballots in 2020. Unsigned letters circulated in the county this year warning residents that their votes might not have counted.Matt Slocum/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “With Push of a Button, Lies Flood a Swing State” (front page, Nov. 1):As a Pennsylvania voter, I find that it has become increasingly difficult to cut through the deluge of disinformation that has flooded the airwaves, our mailboxes and social media channels in connection with the coming election.Regrettably, far too many people choose to peddle propaganda in a brazen attempt to mislead voters, and the relative ease with which deceptive and denigrating material is widely disseminated degrades an already tenuous political system.With an electorate that is already jaded and exceedingly cynical because of the rancor that has become so pervasive in American politics, we cannot afford to give voters yet another reason to stay home on Election Day. Pennsylvanians deserve better than a flood of falsehoods that threatens to wash away the decency and credibility that we desperately need in our electoral process.N. Aaron TroodlerBala Cynwyd, Pa.A Republican No More Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesTo the Editor:My grandfather was a conservative Pennsylvania Republican. My father was a conservative Pennsylvania Republican. And I naturally became a conservative Pennsylvania Republican, holding onto it as I moved over the years to Ohio, Connecticut and New York.Several months ago, I registered as a Democrat, pen twitching in my hand, yet knowing that it was time to speak up the only way politicians comprehend.Donald Trump brought me to this. He has yet to wear his proper label. He is, and should be publicly recognized as, a cult leader: unbelievably dangerous, persuasive and dense.Until Republican Party leaders recognize that they have been “drinking the Kool-Aid” because they are afraid of the cult leader, I have no use for them, nor should any clear-thinking Republican.J.H. QuestIthaca, N.Y.Big Lie Lawyers T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesTo the Editor:The continued attack on our free and democratic elections revealed in “Same Trump Lawyers Gear Up for Midterms” (news article, Nov. 3) is even more disturbing in light of the fact that almost all of the lawyers mentioned in the article face outstanding bar complaints from The 65 Project, the bipartisan accountability group I run.These complaints were filed months ago, and in the face of inaction by the various state bar associations, these Big Lie lawyers have continued their attacks on our democracy.Until the state bar associations take action by referring these attorneys to the relevant disciplinary committees and imposing sanctions — up to and including disbarment — their actions described in this article will just be another stop along the way to more attempts to overturn elections in 2022 and 2024.Michael TeterSalt Lake CityProtests in Brazil: A Harbinger for the U.S.?Supporters of President Jair Bolsonaro gathering outside the Brazilian Army’s national headquarters on Wednesday in Brasília, the capital. Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Denying Defeat, Bolsonaro’s Supporters Ask Army to Step In” (news article, Nov. 3):It used to be that we were afraid of a coup, of a strongman or the army taking over against the will of the people. Now it seems that the people themselves are the problem. In Brazil, tens of thousands are protesting the results of their recent election, demanding a new election or, most chillingly, a military government “permanently,” as one put it.This sounds disconcertingly familiar, as millions in this country are demanding similarly authoritarian forms of government. The focus here has been on disinformation and conspiracy theories circulating on social media, and on Donald Trump himself, America’s Bolsonaro. But the real problem, here as in Brazil, is the inexplicable desire of millions of ordinary citizens to live under an authoritarian regime.We should hope that Brazil’s reaction to Jair Bolsonaro’s loss is not a harbinger of our own experience two years hence.Tim ShawCambridge, Mass. More

  • in

    Angry Bolsonaro Supporters Protest in the Streets

    Tens of thousands of people demonstrated in cities across Brazil, many of them demanding that the military stop the transfer of power to President-elect Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.BRASÍLIA — They arrived by the tens of thousands on Wednesday, angry and draped in Brazilian flags, massing outside military bases across the country. They were there, they said, to save Brazil’s democracy from a rigged election, and there was only one way to do so: The armed forces needed to take control of the government.It was an alarming demand in a country that suffered under a two-decade military dictatorship until 1985 — and yet another bizarre twist in the aftermath of Brazil’s polarizing elections.A day earlier, the far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, reluctantly agreed to a transfer of power after 45 hours of silence following his loss to a leftist former leader, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. But after Mr. Bolsonaro’s years of unfounded attacks on Brazil’s election systems, his supporters appeared far from accepting defeat.Andrea Vaz, a supporter of President Jair Bolsonaro, holds a sign claiming fraud in the presidential election outside the army headquarters on Wednesday.Dado Galdieri for The New York Times“I don’t understand it that well, but they have to intervene and hold new elections,” said Andrea Vaz, 51, a computer-hardware seller holding a sign that said, “Fraud in the voting machines!” at a large protest outside the Brazilian Army’s national headquarters in Brasília. “We saw various videos. People giving out money, buying votes,” she added. “There’s proof.”But some protesters had clearer, more drastic demands, which were circulating on WhatsApp and Telegram groups: The military should take control of the streets, the Congress and the Supreme Court should be disbanded, and the president should remain in power, at least until new elections could be held.The widespread protests and calls for the armed forces were an escalation of the Brazilian far-right’s refusal to accept the election of Mr. da Silva, a former president whom many on the right view as a criminal because of his past corruption scandal.Mr. Bolsonaro, in a two-minute speech on Tuesday in which he did not acknowledge his loss, said he supported peaceful protests inspired by “feelings of injustice in the electoral process.”Many of his followers saw that as a stamp of approval. “What he said yesterday, that gave me more energy to come,” said Larissa Oliveira da Silva, 22, who was sitting on a beach chair in the protest in São Paulo, propping up her broken foot. “After his comments, I saw that he is on our side.”But other protesters said that Mr. Bolsonaro had effectively given up with his agreement to transfer power to Mr. da Silva on Tuesday, so they were turning to the armed forces instead.In a statement, Brazil’s Ministry of Defense said that “the demonstrations, provided they are orderly and peaceful, are the exercise of freedom of expression, of thought, and of assembly, in accordance with constitutional principles and current laws.”The military has not considered intervening in the transfer of power and, if the protests expand, it may urge the president to ask his supporters to go home, according to a senior military official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private talks. The military, which helped oversee the election, found no signs of fraud, the official said.The Ministry of Defense said that it would soon deliver its report on the vote’s integrity to election officials.In interviews with more than 60 protesters across Brazil since Sunday, almost none believed the election was clean. Those beliefs were rooted in the same circumstantial evidence, unattributed reports and inaccuracies that Mr. Bolsonaro has promoted for years to claim that Brazil’s elections are rife with fraud. They had seen videos of the voting machines malfunctioning, read that patterns in the vote returns were suspicious and, they said, they simply did not trust election officials.Most of all, however, they said that Mr. Bolsonaro had drawn much bigger crowds than Mr. da Silva — and almost everyone they knew voted for the president — so how could it be that he lost?The movement was loosely organized. There appeared to be no formal protest leaders, and prominent public figures, including conservative politicians, did not echo similar calls for intervention. Yet it quickly grew into the largest demonstration since Mr. Bolsonaro lost the vote on Sunday..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.With a collective turnout of well over 100,000 people, protesters gathered in at least 75 cities, including in all of Brazil’s 27 state capitals, often around military bases.Police clashed with pro-Bolsonaro protesters blocking the Castelo Branco highway in São Paulo on Wednesday.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesElsewhere across the country, protesters continued to set up highway blockades, creating miles-long backups and disrupting transportation and freight. Those blockades began immediately after the election results on Sunday as part of what protesters said was an effort to “paralyze” Brazil and force the military to intervene. As of Wednesday afternoon, 146 blockades were still active, according to the federal highway police.Around São Paulo, the blockades caused multiple backups totaling more than 60 miles of traffic jams on Wednesday, according to the local traffic agency, and led to the cancellation of 1,400 buses. The disruptions also caused fuel shortages in at least four states.Mr. Bolsonaro released a video late Tuesday, pleading with his supporters to stop blocking the roads, saying it was disrupting lives and hurting the economy. “I am as upset and sad as you are, but we have to put our heads in the right place,” he said. “Other demonstrations that are taking place across Brazil in public squares are part of the democratic game.”“Let’s do what has to be done,” he added. “I’m with you.” He did not directly address the calls for military intervention.The protests were largely nonviolent. The most notable incident was an attack against protesters in Mirassol, a midsize city north of São Paulo, when a car drove into the crowd, injuring 11 people, according to local police. One man was arrested on attempted murder charges, police said.Beyond their insistence that the vote was stolen, the protesters were also driven by their disdain for Mr. da Silva, who has been the most dominant political figure in the 34 years of Brazil’s modern democracy. Universally known as Lula, he has been a top candidate in six of the nine presidential elections over that stretch, winning three.But after his last administration, he also served 17 months in prison on corruption charges, which were later thrown out when the Supreme Court ruled the judge in his cases was biased.He was never cleared of any wrongdoing, however, fueling a belief that he is not to be trusted and making him perhaps a more polarizing force for many Brazilians than Mr. Bolsonaro.Danielle Mota holds a banner calling for intervention in the election outside army headquarters on Wednesday.Dado Galdieri for The New York Times“We don’t want a thug president who robbed, who was arrested, who had various people in his government who looted Brazil,” said Danielle Mota, 43, a hairdresser holding a sign that said “Federal Intervention.”“We do want a military intervention.” she added. “Just like in 1964.”That was the year that the armed forces, with U.S. support, overthrew the government, instituting a military dictatorship for 21 years that killed or tortured thousands of political opponents. Most protesters interviewed on Wednesday at demonstrations in three of the country’s largest cities, Brasília, São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, said they wanted Brazil to remain a democracy. But others, faced with Mr. da Silva as president, said it was time for a military government.“Permanently,” said Kenya Oliveira, 38, holding her 4-year-old son.Camila Rocha, a Brazilian political scientist who wrote a book on the radicalization of Brazil’s right, said the calls for the military were the product of years of absorbing Mr. Bolsonaro’s claims that the elections were rigged, combined with fears of a da Silva administration.Mr. da Silva’s leftist Workers’ Party was at the center of a sprawling government kickback scheme that was revealed after he left office in 2010, leading to the imprisonment of many of the party’s top officials. Mr. Bolsonaro and his allies have long called the party corrupt, but they have also falsely framed it as communist.Many on the right view Mr. da Silva “not as an adversary, but as an enemy that needs to be contained,” Ms. Rocha said. “In this sense, there is a strong parallel with the 1964 coup, which was justified precisely to halt the advance of what was thought to be the rise of communism in Brazil.”Many of the protesters said their demands for intervention were supported by Article 142 of the Brazilian Constitution, which says that the military has the role of “guaranteeing constitutional powers” under the “supreme authority of the president.”According to constitutional lawyers and past court rulings, the article does not allow the military to take control of the government.Marco Aurélio Mello, a retired Supreme Court Justice and an outspoken supporter of Mr. Bolsonaro, said the protesters’ interpretation is merely “nostalgia for the authoritarian regime.”He added that instead the protesters had “the losers’ right to whine.”Laís Martins contributed reporting from São Paulo, Flávia Milhorance, Ana Ionova and Leonardo Coelho from Rio de Janeiro, and André Spigariol and Gustavo Freitas from Brasília. More

  • in

    Qué significa la victoria de Lula en Brasil para el clima

    Durante sus mandatos anteriores, el presidente electo ayudó a reducir las tasas de deforestación en la selva amazónica. Ahora dice que quiere volver a hacerlo.RÍO DE JANEIRO — En las elecciones más reñidas desde que el país regresó a la democracia en 1985, los electores decidieron traer de regreso al expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, quien hizo del medioambiente una piedra angular de su campaña, y rechazaron al mandatario en funciones, Jair Bolsonaro, cuya presidencia vio un fuerte aumento de la deforestación.“Brasil está listo para reanudar su liderazgo en la lucha contra la crisis climática”, dijo el domingo Da Silva en su discurso a sus seguidores tras la victoria. “Probaremos una vez más que es posible generar riqueza sin destruir el medioambiente”.El compromiso es importante porque Brasil contiene gran parte de la selva del Amazonas. En este momento, el bosque absorbe el dióxido de carbono de la atmósfera que calienta el planeta y lo almacena en las raíces de los árboles, las ramas y el suelo. Según un cálculo, hay de 150.000 a 200.000 millones de toneladas métricas de carbono encerradas en el bosque. Pero eso podría cambiar. Si la deforestación continúa, la selva pronto puede convertirse en un emisor neto de gases de efecto invernadero.La región es también uno de los lugares con mayor biodiversidad en la Tierra, y protegerla es clave para defendernos de una crisis mundial de biodiversidad.De vuelta a una lucha conocida: contra la deforestaciónCuando Lula da Silva asumió el cargo por primera vez en 2003, las tasas de deforestación eran más del doble de lo que son hoy. Él promulgó políticas que las redujeron un 80 por ciento. El ritmo más bajo de deforestación se registró dos años después de su renuncia en 2010.p y alentó a sus partidarios a continuar con la minería ilegal. Las tasas de deforestación comenzaron a dispararse nuevamente. Brasil perdió más de 3 millones de hectáreas de la selva amazónica entre 2019 y 2021.Quemando para limpiar la tierra en el estado de Amazonas en septiembre.Michael Dantas/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAhora, Da Silva dice que planea reanudar las políticas que redujeron la pérdida de bosques.“Ahora lucharemos por el fin de la deforestación en el Amazonas”, dijo. “Brasil y el planeta necesitan una Amazonía viva”.Pero la resistencia a las políticas para proteger el bosque probablemente será fuerte entre los partidarios de Bolsonaro, tanto en el Congreso como en la Amazonía. Bolsonaro ganó en más de la mitad de los estados que componen la selva.El presidente ha defendido durante mucho tiempo las industrias maderera, minera y ganadera. Si bien son destructivas para el bosque, estas industrias, que a menudo operan de manera ilegal, también brindan algunas de las pocas oportunidades económicas en la región.Fuera de Brasil: el centro de atención está en el sur globalLos dos mandatos de Da Silva como presidente, de 2003 a 2010, estuvieron marcados por iniciativas para reformar los órganos de gobierno mundial, como el Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas, y para elevar el perfil de los países en desarrollo en los asuntos mundiales.Hay señales de que podría volver a hacer de esos esfuerzos una prioridad, esta vez con un énfasis especial en los problemas climáticos.Él puede “movilizar a otros países en el sur global para insistir que cualquier reforma que se haga a la gobernanza global asuma el tema del clima con seriedad, pero que esto también tiene aportes de los países en desarrollo”, dijo Adriana Abdenur, quien dirige Plataforma Cipó, una organización de investigación en Brasil que se enfoca en la política climática.Meses antes de las elecciones, los asesores de Da Silva se estaban coordinando con Indonesia y la República Democrática del Congo a fin de presionar a las naciones ricas para que amplíen su financiamiento para proteger a los bosques. Marina Silva, su exministra de Medioambiente, dijo a Reuters el lunes que Da Silva enviaría a un representante a la COP27, la cumbre climática mundial que comienza el domingo en Egipto. Un portavoz de Da Silva dijo que el asunto aún se estaba decidiendo.El principal asesor de asuntos exteriores de Da Silva, Celso Amorim, dijo que el presidente electo también planeaba invitar a los líderes regionales a una cumbre sobre la selva amazónica en 2023. Es una señal de que planea fortalecer la Organización del Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica, lo cual podría facilitar a los países de la región unirse para diseñar estrategias que protejan el bosque y atraigan inversión extranjera para proyectos de desarrollo sostenible.Cuando Da Silva era presidente, Brasil creó uno de los mecanismos más importantes para la cooperación climática en la gestión forestal, el Fondo Amazonía. De 2009 a 2019, Noruega y Alemania donaron más de 1200 millones de dólares al fondo, que se convirtió en uno de los mecanismos de financiación más importantes para las agencias de protección ambiental en Brasil.Bolsonaro disolvió el órgano rector del fondo, que congeló todas sus operaciones, pese a que su gobierno luchaba por combatir los delitos ambientales. El domingo, el ministro de Clima y Medioambiente de Noruega dijo a los periodistas que se pondría en contacto con Da Silva para reanudar la cooperación entre los dos países.Está previsto que Da Silva asuma la presidencia el 1 de enero.Manuela Andreoni, actualmente radicada en Brasil, escribe en el boletín Climate Forward. Anteriormente fue becaria en Rainforest Investigations Network, donde examinó las fuerzas que impulsan la deforestación en la Amazonía. @manuelaandreoni More

  • in

    After the flood: inside the 4 November Guardian Weekly

    After the flood: inside the 4 November Guardian WeeklyCop27’s climate prospects. Plus: Can the Democrats rescue the US midterms?Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home address For readers of the Guardian Weekly magazine’s North American edition this week, the cover focuses on the Democrats’ precarious hopes in the midterm elections. Elsewhere, the spotlight shines on the Cop27 climate summit in Egypt.Cautious optimism followed the last Cop conference in Glasgow, where an international roadmap was agreed to keep the world within 1.5C of global heating. On the eve of this year’s summit, however, a slew of alarming reports have shown that carbon emissions are still rising.Further carbon cuts therefore ought to be a priority, argue scientists. However, Cop27 is likely to be dominated by debate about compensation that poorer nations feel richer countries should be paying for climate damage. Observer science and environment editor Robin McKie sets the scene for a summit that seems engulfed in a storm of its own. And there’s a fascinating report by Mark Townsend on the Just Stop Oil protests, as debate stirs among activists about whether direct action tactics are effective in changing attitudes.The US midterm elections next week could see a Republican party still dominated by Donald Trump gain control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. David Smith asks whether an intervention by former president Barack Obama could give a late kickstart to the Democrats’ hopes.Jubilation and relief accompanied Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s narrow election victory in Brazil, ending Jair Bolsonaro’s era of Amazon destruction. Latin America correspondent Tom Phillips reports on a much-needed moment of hope for the region and the world, but Andrew Downie warns that difficult challenges await the returning president-elect.On the culture front there’s an interview by Simon Hattenstone with the actor Damian Lewis, who talks about life after the death of his wife, Helen McCrory. And Jonathan Jones meets the artist David Shrigley, for whom a move to the countryside has not exactly mellowed his anxiety-laden brand of pop art.Get the Guardian Weekly delivered to your home addressTopicsCop27Inside Guardian WeeklyClimate crisisUS midterm elections 2022DemocratsRepublicansUS politicsBrazilReuse this content More

  • in

    Bolsonaro Supporters Protest Across Brazil After Election

    There were more than 200 blockades across Brazil on Tuesday as protesters said they were trying to draw military intervention, hoping it was a path to overturn the election results.Brazil entered its second day of silence from President Jair Bolsonaro following his election loss as his supporters around the country blocked roadways and other infrastructure with demands that the election be overturned.On Tuesday, protesters partially blocked the highway leading to the nation’s largest airport in São Paulo, forcing the cancellation of at least 25 flights. Protesters also set up hundreds of blockades across the rest of the country, disrupting traffic, according to the federal highway police.The demonstrators said they were trying to shut down or “paralyze” the country in order to draw intervention from the military, hoping it was a path to overturn the results of Sunday’s election, in which Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a leftist, defeated the far-right incumbent. Echoing baseless claims from Mr. Bolsonaro ahead of the vote, protesters claimed in interviews and in posts on social media that the vote was stolen — and that they believed they were carrying out what the president wanted.“We want to hear from our president,” said Reginaldo de Moraes, 45, an evangelical pastor standing on the side of the highway leading to São Paulo’s airport. “He has to speak, and we are going to listen. He is our president.”Mr. Bolsonaro has, so far, not spoken publicly. For years, the president has attacked Brazil’s election system as rife with fraud, despite a lack of evidence, and said repeatedly in recent months that he would only accept an election that he believed was “clean.”Blockades along the road leading to Guarulhos International Airport forced the cancellations of at least 25 flights.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesHis silence left one of the world’s largest democracies on edge that there might not be a peaceful transition of power.Several government ministers urged the president to concede on Monday, according to three government officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private meetings. By Monday evening, Mr. Bolsonaro had retired to the presidential palace to finish drafting a public response, according to one of the officials, a senior member of Mr. Bolsonaro’s administration. The president planned to release that response on Tuesday, though what exactly he would say and when remained unclear, the senior official said.The officials stressed that the president would make the final decision.The result was confusion inside the government and across the nation. Even as the president stayed silent, his chief of staff spoke with two top advisers to Mr. da Silva, according to the president-elect’s spokesman, who added that officials in Mr. Bolsonaro’s government were giving signs that there would be a normal transition. In Rio de Janeiro, the federal highway police and state police spoke with protesters before they partially blocked a key bridge linking the city with a neighboring area. Maria Magdalena Arrellaga for The New York TimesWhile the protests by Bolsonaro supporters were largely nonviolent and were smaller than the mass demonstrations that some officials had feared ahead of the vote, the disruptions were expanding.The federal highway police said that there were 220 active blockades in 21 of Brazil’s 27 states as of Tuesday morning, and that they had broken up 288 blockades since the election ended.In some cases, it appeared that some law enforcement officials were not intervening in the protests. On Monday, three federal highway police officers stood and watched as protesters blocked the main highway between Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, Brazil’s two largest cities. In Rio de Janeiro, the federal highway police and state police spoke with protesters before they partially blocked a key bridge linking the city with a neighboring area. The police watched for two hours before the protesters dispersed amid heavy rains. Posts and videos on social media also showed the federal highway police not taking immediate action against blockades across the country.Late Monday, Alexandre de Moraes, a Supreme Court justice, ordered the federal highway police and state police to clear all federal highways. Under the order, the director of the federal highway police faced arrest and a $20,000 fine if his agency did not comply.Around the same time, hundreds of protesters had begun blocking the road to São Paulo’s main airport, Guarulhos International Airport, causing long lines of traffic and forcing airlines to cancel 12 flights on Monday and 13 flights on Tuesday. Just after 8:30 a.m. Tuesday, the federal highway police sprayed a chemical agent toward dozens of protesters who were still blocking two of the three lanes of the airport highway, clearing the blockade. Traffic was flowing within minutes. The police arrested one protester. Demonstrators then stood on the side of the highway waving flags, as authorities warned them to stay off the roadway.Police officials dispersing pro-Bolsonaro protesters on the road to São Paulo’s main airport on Tuesday.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesReginaldo de Moraes, the evangelical pastor who helped lead the protest, said he and other demonstrators were demanding that the military investigate the voter fraud they believed rigged Sunday’s election.“We want the truth about the voting machines,” he said. “We don’t believe them, and we want the Army to take over and count the votes correctly.”Alexandre de Moraes, the Supreme Court justice, had already issued an order against the federal highway police earlier this week. On Election Day, federal highway officers stopped at least 550 buses carrying voters to polls, questioning people aboard. Alexandre de Moraes, who is also Brazil’s elections chief, then ordered the agency’s director to explain why. Election officials said the traffic stops delayed some voters, but did not prevent anyone from voting.The head of the federal highway police has posted extensively about Mr. Bolsonaro on his official Instagram account. That includes a post on the eve of the election that urged people to vote for Mr. Bolsonaro, according to O Globo, one of Brazil’s biggest newspapers. (The kind of message he posted automatically disappears from Instagram after 24 hours and was no longer visible.)While the protesters are calling for military intervention, a military spokesman said on Tuesday that the blockades were a police matter. The president, Brazil’s Congress or the Supreme Court have the power to order the military to contain crowds in emergencies, and some government officials and academics had worried before the election that Mr. Bolsonaro could try to use that power if he refused to concede. As of Tuesday, the military had not commented publicly on the election.Mr. Bolsonaro has attacked Brazil’s electronic voting machines for years, claiming that they are vulnerable to fraud. As a result, three out of four of his supporters trust the machines only a little or not at all, according to various polls in recent months. There is no credible evidence of fraud in the voting machines since they were introduced in 1996, and independent security experts said that while the machines are not perfect, multiple layers of security prevent fraud or errors.Jack Nicas and André Spigariol reported from Brasília and Laís Martins reported from São Paulo. Victor Moriyama contributed reporting from São Paulo, Ana Ionova from Rio de Janeiro and Flávia Milhorance from Barra Mansa, Brazil. More