Colombia Internacional

Colomb. int. | eISSN 1900-6004 | ISSN 0121-5612

Latin American Foreign Policy before the Hegemony of the United States and China’s Emerging Power

No. 104 (2020-10-01)
  • Sandra Zapata
    Universidad Friedrich-Alexander Erlangen-Nürnberg, FAU (Alemania)
  • Aldo Adrián Martínez-Hernández
    Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes (México)
https://doi.org/10.7440/colombiaint104.2020.03

Abstract

Objective/Context: Drawing on the analytical framework of the reconfiguration of international power, this article seeks to analyze and explain the political alignment of Latin American countries towards the great powers from the perspective of a triangular relationship: Latin America, the United States, and China. The aim is to empirically test the hypothesis that the increasingly assertive presence of the Asian country in the region since the year 2000 shapes new political alignments in its favor. Methodology: We examined the resolutions adopted by 19 Latin American countries from 1970 to 2015 at the UNGA and focused on three specific periods: bipolarity (1976-1991), unipolarity (1992-2002) and multipolarity (2003-2015). Our research combines the quantitative method with statistical analyses as it seeks to compare and explain the factors that determine foreign policy. Conclusions: The results suggest that domestic factors, political cycles, periods of global polarity, and economic conditions determine political convergences that are closer to China than to the United States. This enables defining how the group of countries, with coinciding characteristics, align themselves in relation to the two powers analyzed. Originality: The research promotes a quantitative approach to the study of International Relations, specifically to the analysis of Foreign Policy. The linkage of the theoretical foundations of neorealism with the methodological strategy that quantitatively identifies systemic and domestic variables provides a consistent model that allows us to characterize the conditions in which Latin American countries establish their foreign policy decisions. These elements, along with the descriptive and explanatory findings, show the originality of the research with respect to the state of the art in the subject.

Keywords: Foreign policy, Latin America, United States, China, UNGA

References

Arreola, Javier. 2017. “¿Qué plan tiene China para Latinoamérica?”. Forbes, 7 de julio.

Bolinaga, Luciano. S. f. “Estados Unidos y China en la era del Pacífico norte: notas para la política exterior argentina”. Conicet; UAI; Untref. https://www.academia.edu/7552905/Estados_Unidos_y_China_en_la_era_del_Pac%C3%ADfico_Norte_notas_para_la_pol%C3%ADtica_exterior_argentina

Briceño-Ruiz, José y AlejandroSimonoff. 2017. “La escuela de la autonomía, América Latina y la teoría de las relaciones internacionales”. Estudios Internacionales 49 (186): 39-89.

Corrales, Javier y RichardE. Feinberg. 1999. “Regimes of Cooperation in the Western Hemisphere: Power, Interests, and Intellectual Traditions”. International Studies Quarterly 4 (1): 1-36.

Dabène, Olivier. 2012. “Explaining Latin America’s Fourth Wave of Regionalism: Regional Integration of a Third Kind”. Ponencia presentada en el Congress of the Latin American Studies Association (LASA), panel “Waves of Change in Latin America. History and Politics”, 25 de mayo, San Francisco.

De Seixas Corrêa, Luiz Felipe. 2013. Brazil in the United Nations, 1946-2011. Brasilia: Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão.

Domínguez, Rafael. 2018. “La constelación del sur: la cooperación sur-sur en el cuarenta aniversario del Plan de Acción de Buenos Aires”. En La constelación del sur: lecturas histórico críticas de la cooperación sur-sur, editado por RafaelDomínguez, GiuseppeLo Brutto y JavierSurasky, 13-134. Cantabria: Universidad de Cantabria.

Escudé, Carlos. 1983. La Argentina vs. las grandes potencias: el precio del desafío. Buenos Aires: Editorial de Belgrano.

Escudé, Carlos. 2012. Principios del realismo periférico. Una teoría argentina y su vigencia ante el ascenso de China. Buenos Aires: Lumiere.

Gardini, Gian Luca y PeterLambert. 2011. Latin American Foreign Policies: Between Ideology and Pragmatism. Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Greig, Michael y AndrewEnterline. 2017. “Correlates of War Project”. National Material Capabilities (NMC) Data Documentation. Department of Political Science, University of North Texas. http://cow.dss.ucdavis.edu/data-sets/national-material-capabilities/nmc-codebook-v5-1

Hirschman, Albert. 1945. National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Iida, Keisuke. 1988. “Third World Solidarity: The Group of 77 in the UN General Assembly”. International Organization 42 (2): 375-395.

Jaguaribe, Helio. 1979. “Autonomía periférica y hegemonía céntrica”. Estudios Internacionales 12 (46): 91-130.

Kennedy, Paul. 1994. Auge y caída de grandes poderes. Barcelona: Plaza & Janés.

Kennedy, Paul. 2006. The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations. Nueva York: Random House.

Lijphart, Arend. 1963. “The Analysis of Bloc Voting in the General Assembly: A Critique and a Proposal”. American Political Science Review 57 (4): 902-917.

Marín-Bosch, Miguel. 1998. Votes in the UN General Assembly. La Haya: Kluwer Law International.

Marshall, Monty y KeithJaggers. 2008. “Polity IV Dataset”. Version p4v2008. Center for International Development and Conflict Management, College Park, University of Maryland. https://www.systemicpeace.org/polityproject.html

Marshall, Monty G., TedRobert Gurr y KeithJaggers. 2015. “Polity IV Project”. Center for Systemic Peace. https://www.systemicpeace.org/polityproject.html

Martínez-Hernández, Aldo A. y AsabelBohigues García. 2019. “El giro a la izquierda de los parlamentos latinoamericanos: ¿cuándo y cómo se dio?”. Política y Gobierno XXVI (1): 93-115.

Mijares, Víctor y DetlefNolte. 2018. “Regionalismo posthegemónico en crisis: ¿por qué la Unasur se desintegra?”. Foreign Affairs Latinoamérica 18 (3): 105-112.

Modelski, George. 1983. “Long Cycles of World Leadership”. En Contending Approaches to World System Analysis, editado por WilliamThomson, 115-140. California: Sage.

Murillo, María Victoria, VirginiaOliveros y MilanVaishnav. 2010. “Electoral Revolution or Democratic Alternation?”. Latin American Research Review 45 (3): 87-114.

Neto, Octavio Amorim. 2011. De Dutra a Lula: a condução e os determinantes da política externa brasileira. Río de Janeiro: Elsevier.

Neto, Octavio Amorim y AndrésMalamud. 2015. “What Determines Foreign Policy in Latin America? Systemic versus Domestic Factors in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico, 1946-2008”. Latin American Politics and Society 57 (4): 1-27.

Puig, Juan Carlos. 1980. Doctrinas internacionales y autonomía latinoamericana. Caracas: Instituto de Altos Estudios de América Latina; Fundación Bicentenario de Simón Bolívar.

Rivarola, Andrés y JoséBriceño-Ruiz. 2013. Resilience of Regionalism in Latin America and the Caribbean. Development and Autonomy. Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan.

“Rumble in the Jungle. Africa and China”. 2011. The Economist, 20 de abril.

Russell, Roberto y JuanGabriel Tokatlian. 2006. “Will Foreign Allies Help? Argentina’s Relations with Brazil and the United States”. En Broken Promises? The Argentine Crisis and Argentine Democracy, editado por EdwardEpstein y DavidPion-Berlin, 245-269. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Russell, Roberto y JuanGabriel Tokatlian. 2013. “América Latina y su gran estrategia: entre la aquiescencia y la autonomía”. Cidob d’Afers Internationals 104: 157-180.

Sanahuja, José Antonio. 2016. “Regionalismo e integración en América Latina: de la fractura Atlántico-Pacífico a los retos de una globalización en crisis”. Pensamiento Propio 21 (44): 29-76.

Sánchez, Francisco y MercedesGarcía Montero, coords. 2019. Los ciclos políticos y económicos de América Latina y el boom de las materias primas. Madrid: Tecnos.

Schenoni, Luis. 2012. “Los determinantes sistémicos de la política externa brasileña en el contexto de América Latina”. Trabajo presentado en el Cuarto Congreso Uruguayo de Ciencia Política, “La ciencia política desde el sur”, 14-16 de noviembre.

Schenoni, Luis y CarlosEscudé. 2016. “Peripheral Realism Revisited”. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 59 (1): e002. https://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbpi/v59n1/0034-7329-rbpi-59-01-00002.pdf

Selcher, Wayne. 1978. Brazil’s Multilateral Relations: Between First and Third Worlds. Boulder: Westview Press.

Serbin, Andrés. 2017. “China y América Latina y el Caribe frente a un cambio de ciclo: narrativas y estrategias”. En La proyección de China en América Latina y el Caribe, editado por EduardoPastrana y HubertGehring, 73-97. Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; Fundación Konrad Adenauer.

Singer, J. David, StuartBremer y JohnStuckey. 1972. “Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820-1965”. En Peace, War, and Numbers, editado por BruceM Russett, 19-48. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Thacker, Strom. 1999. “The High Politics of IMF Lending”. World Politics 52 (1): 38-75.

Tickner, Arlene. 2013. “Core, Periphery and (Neo)Imperialist International Relations”. European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 627-646.

Tickner, Arlene. 2015. “Autonomy in Latin American International Relations Thinking”. En Routledge Handbook of Latin America and the World, editado por JorgeDomínguez y AnaCovarrubias, 74-84. Nueva York: Routledge.

Tomlin, Brian. 1985. “Measurement Validation: Lessons from the Use and Misuse of UN General Assembly Roll-Call Votes”. International Organization 39 (4): 189-206.

Van Bergeijk, Peter. 2018. China’s Economic Hegemony (1-2050 AD). Working Papers. General Series 637. La Haya: International Institute of Social Studies.

Voeten, Erik. 2000. “Clashes in the Assembly”. International Organization 54 (2): 185-215.

Voeten, Erik. (2012) 2015. “Data and Analyses of Voting in the UN General Assembly”. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2111149; https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/LEJUQZ

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.