Brasilia, Brazil – Thousands of indigenous people marched in the Brazilian capital of Brasilia on Friday to protest against the administration of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.

More than 2,000 people occupied the city’s main avenue, stopping traffic for more than three hours. Holding banners and arrows, burning sage and painting their faces red and black, the crowd marched to the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Justice to demand more land rights and access to public services.

Sonia Guajajara, coordinator of the Articulation of the Indigenous People of Brazil (APIB) held a Brazilian flag stained with red paint. She told Al Jazeera it represented “the blood of the Brazilian people, marked by the genocide of the indigenous peoples”.

A group of indigenous people led the march with a banner that read “not one more drop of indigenous blood”. 

The group protested against Bolsonaro’s decision to eliminate the Special Secretary for Indigenous Health (SESAI) that previously oversaw the healthcare issues for indigenous groups. Local councils are now responsible for providing healthcare access to the native communities. Guajajara called the decision “shameful” and “just another example of Bolsonaro’s attacks”.  

Guajajara holds a Brazilian national flags stained in red [Mia Alberti/Al Jazeera]

Outside the Ministry of Justice, protesters demanded the reversal of the Provisional Measure 870, which dismantled the National Foundation for the Indigenous (FUNAI), the government body previously responsible for protecting native groups. Under the measure, some of FUNAI’s responsibilities were moved to the Ministry of Agriculture and of Human Rights.

The crowd was met by a police officers, who had blocked off the building’s entrance. Dozens of demonstrators jumped into the lake around the building, dancing and chanting with their children and elderly.

Inside, a delegation met with the chief of staff for the minister to demand FUNAI to be reinstated in full by the cabinet.

Marcos Xukuru, chief of the Xukuru people from the state of Pernambuco, told reporters after the meeting the ministry was open to “talk” and to schedule a meeting with “the indigenous organizations of Brazil (…) as soon as [officials] receive the document with all our demands”.

He later told Al Jazeera his people were in Brasilia to “protest against the random and dangerous indigenous policies” of Bolsonaro’s government. 

“They are taking our medicine, health coverage, health workers, and it was FUNAI that helped us with this,” said Manuel Atukim, from the Atukim people in Pernambuco state.

“FUNAI is ours, we can’t let it die,” he told Al Jazeera.

The march was part of annual three-day Free Land Camp, which started on Wednesday.

Since the election of Bolsonaro last year, indigenous groups have documented an increase in number of land grabs and violent attacks. 

An indigenous woman stands in the fountain area of a government building during a protest march to defend indigenous land and rights in Brasilia [Carl de Souza/AFP]

The president’s office did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment regarding allegations by the indigenous that his government is “attacking” their rights.

Atukim said he is hopeful the government will hear their demands. “We are not going to let our culture, that comes from our ancestors, to be taken from someone who does not belong to us,” he said. “We are going to fight until the end of our lives”.

US President Donald Trump announced on Friday at the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) annual meeting that the United States will drop out of an international arms treaty signed in 2013 by then-President Barack Obama but opposed by the NRA and other conservative groups.

Trump told members of the gun lobby that he intends to revoke the status of the US as a signatory of the Arms Trade Treaty, which was never ratified by the US Senate.

“We’re taking our signature back,” Trump said to thousands of cheering attendees, many wearing red hats emblazoned with the Republican president’s “Make America Great Again” slogan.

The NRA has long opposed the treaty which regulates the $70bn business in conventional arms and seeks to keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers. The lobbying group argues it would undermine domestic gun rights, a view the Obama administration rejected.

Trump added that the United Nations will soon receive formal notice of the withdrawal.

The 193-nation UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved the treaty in April 2013 and the US, the world’s top arms exporter, voted in favour of it despite fierce opposition from the NRA.

‘Re-open the floodgates’

Trump’s action drew an immediate rebuke from some international human rights groups.

“The United States will now lock arms with Iran, North Korea and Syria as non-signatories to this historic treaty whose sole purpose is to protect innocent people from deadly weapons,” said Oxfam America President Abby Maxman.

Adotei Akwei, of Amnesty International USA, said in a statement, “With this announcement the Trump administration will re-open the floodgates for arms sales with weakened human rights criteria.”

So far, 101 countries have formally joined onto the treaty. Another 29, including the US, have signed it, but not yet formally joined. 

Trump was joined on his trip to Indianapolis by White House National Security Adviser John Bolton, an advocate of withdrawing the US from international treaties out of concern they might undermine US authority.

With Friday’s announcement, Trump continued his drive to roll back Obama-era initiatives.

Nearly two years ago, Trump announced that the US would withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, which aims to reduce global carbon emissions that scientists link to harmful climate change. Republicans argue the US economy would suffer if it met the deal’s carbon-reduction goals. He has also pulled the US out of the landmark 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

Public sentiment shifts

Trump’s announcement on Friday came as he vowed to fight for gun rights, saying Second Amendment is “under assault”, but “not while we’re here”.

And in a pre-emptive attack against his 2020 Democratic challengers, Trump claimed without evidence that the other party wants “to take away your guns”. 

An emboldened NRA had high hopes and ambitious plans for easing state and national gun regulations after pouring tens of millions of dollars into the 2016 presidential race, seeing its dark horse candidate win and Republicans in control of both branches of Congress.

But much of the legislation the group championed has stalled, due, in part, to a series of mass shootings, including the massacre at a Parkland, Florida, high school that left 17 dead and launched a youth movement against gun violence that has had a powerful impact. And Democrats won control of the House in the midterms.

At the same time, the group is grappling with infighting, bleeding money and facing a series of investigations into its operating practices.

The NRA, said Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and expert on gun policy, has dramatically changed its messaging over the last two years, with its NRATV service advocating a panoply of far-right political views that have turned off some members.

At the same time, public sentiment has shifted. A March AP-NORC poll found that 67 percent of Americans overall think gun laws should be made stricter – up from 61 percent in October 2017. And a June 2018 Gallup poll found overall favourable opinions of the NRA down slightly from October 2015, from 58 percent to 53 percent. Unfavourable views have grown from 35 percent to 42 percent. 

Against that backdrop, Democratic politicians have become more comfortable assailing – and even actively running against – the NRA and pledging action to curb gun violence. And gun control groups like Everytown, which is largely financed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and a political action committee formed by Gabby Giffords, the former Arizona congresswoman wounded in a shooting, have become better organised and more visible, especially at the state level.

That reversal was made clear during the 2018 midterm elections, when those groups vastly outspent the NRA.

Winkler said that the group had scored some victories under Trump, including the appointment of two Supreme Court justices who may be open to striking down gun laws.

But overall, he said, “On the legislative front, the NRA has been frustrated”, with priorities like national reciprocity for concealed carry laws and a repeal of the ban on silencers stalled.

Instead, Trump introduced a new federal regulation: a ban on bump stocks after a man using the device opened fire on a crowd of concertgoers on the Las Vegas strip, killing 58 people and wounding hundreds.

Thousands of Sudanese protesters have performed the weekly Muslim prayers outside the army headquarters in Khartoum, a day after a vast crowd of demonstrators flooded the capital to demand the military rulers cede power.

“Freedom, freedom,” the protesters chanted on Friday as prayer leader Sheikh Matter Younis delivered a sermon.

“We will not retreat until we get our main demand of civilian rule,” said Younis, an activist from Sudan‘s war-torn western region of Darfur, according to the AFP news agency.

He also called for the “symbols” of the old regime to be punished.

“They must face fair and transparent justice, they have to be held accountable,” he said, as the protesters chanted: “Blood for blood! We will not accept compensation!”

Demonstrators have massed outside the army complex in central Khartoum since April 6, initially to demand the overthrow of longtime leader Omar al-Bashir.

But since his removal by the army on April 11, the protesters have kept up their sit-in, demanding the military council that took control to hand power to a civilian administration.

Despite international support for the protesters, the council has so far resisted, although three of its 10 members resigned on Wednesday under pressure from the street.

Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall, reporting from Khartoum, said the military rulers and the protest leaders have been able to reach agreements on a number of issues, including the creation of the joint committee to supervise the transition to a civilian rule.

“But they are in disagreement about who should be the leading part in this partnership. The military want what they call sovereignty in their hands, because they believe they are the side that can maintain peace and security,” Vall said.

“They are going to allow for a civilian government to have a civilian cabinet, a civilian prime minister to deal with the day-to-day affairs of the country.”

He said the protest leaders wanted the military away from the ruling positions completely.

“The people are tired of the military ruling the country. They say the military should be for the protection of the country, for the protection of the borders, but the leadership of the country, including the presidency, the cabinet and so on should be in the hands of civilians.”

‘Protect Sharia’

At a separate Friday prayer gathering in a mosque in southern Khartoum, Muslim preachers long allied to al-Bashir’s government called for a rally to support military-backed Islamic rule in the face of alleged attempts by protesters to abolish it.

“They want to write a secular constitution, but we will protect Sharia (Islamic laws),” said Abdelhai Yousef, a prominent conservative imam. “We will gather on Monday to tell them that Sharia is a red line.”

Since independence in 1956, Sudan has bounced between tumultuous party politics and military rule.

But al-Bashir successfully presented himself as the leader of a new wave of “political Islam”, based on an alliance between conservative Muslim preachers and the military.

As a young officer, al-Bashir and his army were trusted by the conservative Muslim movement, which played a key role in propping him up for years.

After leading his coup with a few fellow officers, al-Bashir declared the imposition of Islamic law. The new rules included stoning and amputations as punishments.

The conservative Muslims “have not stopped their attempts at regrouping themselves, but they are not capable of standing against the revolution,” said Faysal Saleh, a Sudanese journalist. “Hence, they are rallying behind the military council.”

Some see no imminent threat posed by hardliners, arguing they lack a solid support base in today’s Sudan.

“So far these groups are standing alone and people are already resentful of them and hold them responsible for supporting al-Bashir’s regime for decades,” said Saleh.