Jaime
Giménez Sánchez de la Blanca
21/05/2012
|
Ø Abstract
In this paper, we
analyze and discuss about Brazilian struggle to become a great power. Brazil
is recognized as major regional power, but its elite is not satisfied with
that. Here, we ask ourselves why Brazil is not recognized as great power, and
then we study the solutions that Brazil could implement in order to achieve
its goal. Main conclusion is that Brazil must consolidate its regional
leadership through Mercosur, and solve its internal imbalances through the
strengthening of its institutions.
|
Ø Introduction
In discussions of
global political development, the South American region has been a
long-forgotten region. First, relegated to Iberian colony, and, after, underestimated
as “backyard” of the superpower. South America is determined by its geography:
isolated by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Nowadays things seem to have
changed. South America emerges as a potential economic power. Led by Brazil,
the region can increase its influence beyond the Western Hemisphere if Mercosur
consolidates. In this paper I will examine the possible rise of Brazil under
the current global political condition of order under the hegemony led by US.
Therefore, I take the point of departure in GP theory, stating that the
stabilization of the global strategic architecture (Kondrup, GP4) caused by the
shift from violence interdependence to functional interdependence (Kondrup,
GP7) has allowed Brazil to increase its economic capabilities and, thus,
improved its possibilities of becoming a great power.
Brazil is a major
regional power that aims to increase its status. Unifying its region under its
strong leadership may be the necessary step to improve its global influence.
Brazil is willing to access the global polity core. In 2001, 99% of Brazilian
ruling elite said that becoming a world leader was a main goal of the country,
while 76% considered important become part of the UNSC (Volgy et. al. 2011,
170). Now, Brazil needs to convince the rest of powers that it is prepared to
order the globe.
Brazil, as an
emergent power, struggles to achieve that goal. The question is: is Brazil on
the right way of passage? Answering this question is the purpose of this paper.
To that end, we will frame the problem in Global Polity theory, and, after
that, we will analyze and discuss Brazilian geopolitical situation in order to
reach some conclusions.
Ø Problem
Brazil is widely
recognized as a major regional power due to its ability to forge conflict and
corporation in South America. But this status is not enough for its
expectations. Brazil sees itself as capable to reach great power status, and it
is in a continuous struggle to achieve that aim. In this paper, we will try to
explain the reasons why Brazil is not yet qualified to improve its geopolitical
status. The inability to project power beyond its region undermines the credibility
of Brazil among its neighbors. This gives rise to weaker countries like Venezuela,
whose aspirations to become the leader of an alternative to the capitalist
system, calls into question even the leadership of Brazil in the region.
However, economic capabilities of Brazil are much larger than any other South
American state. Also, Brazilian leaders have tried to gain influence in the
global decision-making spheres. Brazil has risen as one of the emergent powers
that presumably will lead the world in some decades. Thus, Brazil meets all the
conditions to become a great power, but it has not been able to achieve that
status yet.
According to GP
Theory, Brazil accepts the status quo
of the current international system. Brazil benefits from the interdependency
games of the global economy. Its economic growth is highly dependent on the
stability of the world strategic architecture. Although Brazil would like to
improve its status, it does not call into question the main characteristic of
the current world order. Brazil is a liberal democracy in line with the
capitalist globalization. Nevertheless, in the last decade Brazilian President
Lula has slightly changed the discourse, trying to present Brazil as the leader
of the developing world, struggling for its rights against the West. In any
case, this change is more rhetorical than material, because Brazil’s respect
for the established global institutions remains unchanged. Also, Brazil is
still an ally of the USA. Even though the regional rivalry has strongly
increased in the last decades, Brazil still needs the military support of the
superpower. The USA, for its part, wants Brazil to stabilize and order the
region against potential threats like Venezuela.
So, if Brazil wants
to become a great power, it needs to improve the domination over its region,
and, then, be able to influence the global decisions. Mercosur is a key point
on these aspirations. This organization has allowed Brazil to finish the
rivalry with Argentina, and begin a mutual cooperation. This is crucial for
Brazil, as Argentina used to be the major regional power, and now Brazil has
replaced it as South American leader, and also has achieved its support within
Mercosur. If the entire continent is someday united under the umbrella of a
Brazil-led Mercosur, Brazil would be much closer of its goal: great power status.
Becoming a
permanent member of the UNSC would be an undeniable proof of the rising status
of Brazil. Taking into account current global situation is not unlikely that
would happen. UN system is under reforms in order to gain legitimacy in the new
global scenario. Rising powers like India and Brazil, and consolidated ones
like Japan, want to entry in the global polity core. However, as they need the
approval of the current UNSC members, it is not likely that India and Japan
could become permanent members of the Council, because China see them as
regional threats and will never allow this to happen. So Brazil can take
advantage of its relatively isolated geographical position, and being selected
to enter the UNSC.
Ø Method
To write this
paper, I have used different kind of sources. Mainly, bibliography consists of
Global Polity texts and books and articles specialized in Brazilian and South
American politics. As analyzing a political entity in Global Polity requires
investigating the self-image of the object of study, the methodology followed
to write this paper is based on discourse analysis. Nonetheless, to support our
argument, we have also searched for quantitative data and statistical sources.
Ø Global Polity Framing
The current
stability in the global political order is key to grasp the dynamics of global
polity. Interstate wars have been replaced by military actions coordinated from
intergovernmental organizations such as the UN. After a period of instability
that Kondrup names the international state of exception (1999-2006), world
appear to be stabilized (Kondrup, GP4). The elite suppression of China, India,
Russia and Brazil by US and EU in concert, together within the solid
partnership of NATO members and substantial ties with Japan, has led to a
global hegemony that maintains a relatively stable world. Main global polity
decisions are taken in the Security Council of the UN. Since 2006, civic
homogeneity between elite states has made the decision-making processes in the
global arena easier. However, in February 2012, Russia and China vetoed a
Security Council resolution about Syria. This has created some degree of
uncertainty on the future of global polity. In reference to Brazil, this
country is pressuring to achieve a permanent seat in the Security Council,
because Brazilian elites understand the importance of being part of this
privileged club.
The stabilization
of the strategic architecture has a main reason: the rising importance of
functional interdependence on the expense of violence interdependence as the
prime feature of interactions between states. Function interdependencies, where
states work together to exploit their relative advantages leads to economic
growth which brings prosperity, and thus increases the material capabilities of
the states, which is essential to improve their position in the global order.
Hence, the emerging nations prefer to maintain the global stability (as they
benefit from it), instead of challenging it. This is crucial to understand the
global polity. Neither China, nor India, nor Brazil, are interested in subverting
the current global order. For the moment, they prefer a world controlled by the
superpower and its allies, as their development depends on the security of the
trade routes. Thus, as the states enough powerful to challenge the status quo prefer to accept it because it favors their growth;
interdependency games are the main factor of stabilization of the global
political order (Duedney 2007).
Another aspect that
has helped the stabilization of world order is the unipolarity. The US displays
its power, articulating the world order in its own interest (Ikenberry 2007).
Nonetheless, as we said, the superpower has been able to shape a world in which
the emergent powers prefer stability than instability.
However, as Duedney
remarks (Duedney 2007), the liberal order based on function interdependencies
needs a political form to work correctly. This means that the subjection of the
states to a common rule is an essential requirement to avoid anarchy. Some
degree of institutionalization is needed. In other case, the realist view of
the anarchic international community will be true again, and conflicts will be
solved mainly by interstate wars. Duedney’s Republican Security Theory (Duedney
2007) advocates the subjection to the rule and, maybe, the establishment of a
global government that supervise its enforcement. In all cases, this possibility
is still quite far of coming true. Nowadays states are not yet prepared to
accept that extremely high institutionalization. For the moment, the benchmark
of Jurisdictional Structure in the global polity seems far from being overcome.
Another fundamental
element in the study of global polity is sovereignty. As one of its four basic
institutions (together with war, balance of power, and diplomacy),
understanding sovereignty is essential to grasp global polity dynamics. The
concept of sovereignty has four dimensions (Krasner 2001): interdependence
sovereignty (ability of a government to regulate the movement of goods,
capital, people, and ideas across its borders), domestic sovereignty (de facto
internal domination), international legal sovereignty (recognition by other
states), and Westphalian sovereignty (autonomy).
Interdependence
sovereignty is especially interesting for my analysis. This kind of sovereignty
is only achieved through trustworthiness. As the states have to interact with
each other in the global arena, they need to be trusted by the others. When a
state is reliable, then it has cultural capital. This facilitates getting into
the core circles¸ and thus improving status in global polity. Brazil, for instance,
have gained a lot of cultural capital in the core, as it respects the global
political and economic institutions. But, as Brazil also maintains an
independent position in global policy forums, it has gained influence among its
South American neighbors as well.
Analyzing the
status of Brazil requires a study of both global and regional levels, but also
local. To improve its global role, Brazil needs to fulfill some regional and
local goals. As Brazilian socio-geographic concretion is relatively isolated of
the other powers, it can develop its relations more freely than the rest. Even
so, Brazil, as the whole Latin America, is in the “backyard” of the superpower.
Brazilian interests are somehow in conflict with those of the US. In its
struggle to order its region, Brazil has to gain influence to the detriment of
the hegemon. This regional rivalry with the US may carry problems for the
global aspirations of Brazil, as the support of the superpower may be decisive
for the achievement of Brazilian goals. In addition, in the local level Brazil
must solve the huge social, economic and political gap existing among its
population. Polity divisions and closed elites are important obstacles in the
way to improve its global status. Brazil cannot be considered as a developed
country if it does not reduce the severe inequalities existing in its society.
Hence, both regional and local levels have an important role in the status of
Brazil in global polity.
In short, the
promotion of Brazil is the result of its successful economic policies and
diplomacy, which have allowed the country to take advantage of the stability of
the global order, caused by the prominence of interdependence sovereignty in
global polity.
Ø Analysis and discussion
During his second
mandate, Brazilian President Lula made clear the aspirations of the country to
become major power. Between 2007 and 2011, Lula pursued a variety of steps to improve
the role of Brazil. The two main objectives of the Brazilian leader were
obtaining a permanent seat in the Security Council of the UN, and broadening
and deepening the regional alliance of Mercosur (Love et al. 2009).
However, these high
expectations of Brazilian elite are not new. Already in 1943, Brazilian foreign
minister Oswaldo Aranha “saw Brazil and the United States as “cosmic and universal” nations, whose futures could only be
continental and worldwide. Realistically he knew that Brazil was still “a weak country economically and
military”, but he had no doubt that
with a capital and population which would come from the country’s natural
growth, or would flow to it after the war, it would be “inevitably one of the great economic and political powers of the
world”” (McCann 1973, 304).
Thus, Brazil has
traditionally seen itself as a potential great power. Lately, Brazilian
economic capabilities have grown spectacularly, bringing closer the possibility
of reaching the desired status. Nevertheless, Brazil is still far from
achieving its aim.
According to Volgy
et al. (2011, 22), the requirements of a state to be recognized as a great
power are:
a) “Having unusual
capabilities”
b) “Pursue unusually
abroad and expansive foreign policies”.
c) “Seeking to
influence the course of international affairs relatively independently”.
Also, it is also
necessary being perceived by other states as unusually powerful and willing to
influence global affairs, and acting consistent with that perception (Volgy et
al 2011, 22).
So, improving
status in global polity is not just a matter of material resources; a
consistent behavior of the state representatives according to the status they
want to achieve is also needed.
As we have seen,
Brazilian elites have the will to make their country a major power. The problem
is that Brazil does not fulfill all the requisites formulated by Volgy et al.
Although economic capabilities of Brazil are indisputable (7th GDP
in the world[i]), Brazil is unable to
entirely control its own region. Also, although the rest of powers recognize
the regional leadership of Brazil, they view with indifference its
participation in the global decision-making processes. Its military dependence
of the US, together with its internal socio-economic inequalities, undermines
the capacity of Brazil to present itself as a fully autonomous and developed
actor. However, it seems that Brazil is improving its military capabilities. As
Holtom et al. (2012, 6) recall,
Brazil has placed “significant orders in recent years including licensed
production deals with France for 4 Scorpène class submarines, 1 SNBR
nuclear-powered submarine and 50 EC-725 helicopters, as well as a licensed
production deal with Italy for over 2000 VBTP Guarani APCs. Four of the helicopters
had been delivered by the end of 2011, while deliveries of the armoured
vehicles and submarines are due to start in 2012 and 2017, respectively. Brazil
made no decision on awarding long-discussed deals for combat aircraft and naval
systems but did order three VT-90m offshore patrol vessels from the UK”. So, Brazil
is willing to improve its military capabilities towards ceasing to be dependent
on the US and improve its global status.
Regional integration
After the end of
the Cold War, the world lived a wave of regionalism (Schirm 2002). In 1991,
four South American states signed the Treaty of Asunción, initiating the
project of Mercosur. This is an organization sponsored by Brazil, who opted for
the regional integration in order to open the neighbors’ markets and expand its
influence over them. If Mercosur success, Brazil would have forged a strong
leadership in South America, and this would facilitate progress toward its aim
of improving its geopolitical status.
For the moment,
Mercosur has only five full members (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and
Venezuela), but it also has special agreements with Bolivia, Chile, Colombia,
Peru, and Ecuador. Mexico participates as an observer. Mercosur aims to create
a common market to promote the economic growth of its members. It was the
response of the South American states to the globalization process, trying to
avoid marginalization in the global economy (Buzan 2003).
Mercosur was only
possible due to the cooling of relations between Brazil and Argentina. After
almost two centuries of rivalry for the domination of South America, both
regional powers gave up in their fight and began to cooperate. A key step in
this process was the creation of the Brazilian–Argentine Agency for Accounting
and Control of Nuclear Materials in 1986, with which both states renounced to
develop nuclear energy for military purposes. Argentina and Brazil signed a
protocol that allowed each other to verify the compliance of the agreement.
Transitions to democracy in both countries, and the consequent weakening of
both armies, facilitated the easing of historical tension, and made possible
the establishment of their trading partnership (Buzan 2003). Now, trading
operations between both countries have multiplied (Schirm 2002). However,
leadership of Brazil in its region is a reality only because of Argentinian economic
stagnation during the same period of the “Brazilian economic miracle”
(1968-1974). In fact, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia, the three buffer states
which are now de facto satellites of Brazilian economy, where once controlled
by Argentinian capital (Buzan 2003). Today, Brazil and Argentina are allies
that cooperate to spur their region.
The main challenge
of Brazil in its region consists on building trust among its neighbors, so they
accept it as their representative on the global level. This would consolidate
Brazilian leadership in South America and would improve its influence capacity
in global polity institutions. However, this goal is far from being satisfied.
The condition of regional leader was placed in doubt when some neighbors voted
against Brazilian candidature for a permanent seat on the Security Council
(Love et al. 2009). Searching for a solution to this problem, Brazil has taken
some steps in order to gain confidence of the rest of South American states.
For example, Lula implemented the “diplomacy of generosity”, inviting Brazilian
companies to import products from its neighbors, even though they might be more
expensive (Love et al. 2009). In the same way, Brazil accepted to be the
largest contributor to FOCEM, the development fund for the poorest countries of
Mercosur.
Apart from
Argentina, the other big rival of Brazil is the US. Although Brazil depends on
the military power of the hegemon, it also represents a challenge for its
protector (Arceneaux et al. 2005). For the moment, Brazil lacks of enough
military resources to defend itself, so it has to seek the defense provided by
the US. Nevertheless, Brazil tries to satisfy its own interests, although they
can collide with American ones. Mercosur is an example of the clashing interests
between Brazil and the US. Brazil is trying to organize the South American
region through the integration of the sub-continent. Multilateralism is the way
chosen by the Brazilian leaders to reinforce their leadership in the region.
For its part, the US continues with bilateralism, seeking to reach agreements
with each state separately. However, Mercosur treaty prevents member states
from bilateral trading arrangements (Brown 2010). Moreover, Mercosur was
launched by Brazil as a prevention mechanism against American project Free
Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Brazil wants to avoid the penetration of the
superpower in the Southern Cone. And, for the moment, it has succeeded in this
task (with the exception of Chile). The challenge for Brazil now is reinforcing
Mercosur, and extending it to the Andean region, where the influence of the US
is greater.
In last decades,
different regional integration attempts have taken place in Latin America[ii], apart from Mercosur. ALBA,
a recently-created regional organization could be a threat for Brazilian
interests. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA) was created by
Venezuela and Cuba in 2004. Later, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador joined the
treaty. Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez was the promoter of this project,
which aimed to be an alternative to the American FTAA. ALBA is said to be the
first integration agreement based on social and not only economic purposes
(Hart – Landsberg 2010). Some leftist governments of Latin America have joined
this organization, based on ideological assumptions. ALBA is clearly
anti-American and it is also against free market rules (Brown 2010). The main
problem for Brazil is that, if more and more countries join the organization,
Venezuela could dispute its regional leadership. Furthermore, ALBA promotes
alternative economic and political ideas which are not shared by Brazil. This
is a clear challenge to Brazilian regional hegemony. ALBA, together with the US
influence in South America, makes it improbable that Brazil could extend its
domination over its region in the near future (Volgy et al. 2011).
Summing up, a
successful Mercosur would have a dual function for Brazilian interests. On the
one hand, it would unify the region under Brazilian leadership. On the other
hand, it would give credibility to Brazil in the global decision-making
circles. If the project finally succeeds, Brazil would be much closer to
becoming a great power. But Mercosur will have to struggle with the threats of
ALBA and the US penetration.
Regional leadership
Brazil leads its
region, no question about that. However, its neighbors do not have total confidence
in Brazil. Although they accept Brazilian leadership to design new institutions
like Mercosur, or to mediate regional conflicts, neighbors doubt on the
hypothetical great power status of Brazil (Volgy et al. 2011).
Mercosur is a key
point, but the mediation role of Brazil is also quite important to understand
the regional leadership of the country. Brazil was mediator after the armed
conflict between Peru and Ecuador in 1995 (Roett 1999). The major regional
power guaranteed the ceasefire after skirmishes that took place in the border
of those countries due to a territorial dispute. Both Andean countries accepted
Brazilian mediation to solve the conflict. This is a clear indicator of the
leading role of Brazil in its region, as both neighbors trusted it in that
critical situation.
Another indicator
of the willingness of Brazil of ordering its surroundings was showed in Haiti.
Brazil led the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti. Although Haiti is
not in South America, it is part of the Brazilian meta-region. Lula wanted to
show both to its neighbors and to international society that Brazil was
prepared to improve its global status (Love et al. 2009).
Also, Brazil is an
active player in meta-regional organizations and meetings like the OAS and the
Ibero-American Summits.
Thus, Brazil has
showed its ability to solve most of recent regional conflicts and enjoys leadership
in its region, yet it must increase in order to achieve Brazilian aims.
Institutional underdevelopment: the main problem of Brazil
Latin America and
the Caribbean is the world’s most unequal region (UNDP 2010). In South America,
Uruguay is the country with the best Gini coefficient (39), while Bolivia is
the worst (58.2)[iii]. The lack of equality is
related to institutional underdevelopment in the region. As jurisdictional
structure is sick, government policies do not reach further than the highest social
strata. This also affects to territorial distribution of wealth: rural areas
remain much poorer than the urban ones due to the inability of states to
implement their measures further than cities. These huge imbalances make it
difficult the socio-economic development in South American countries.
In the Geographic
concretion scale (Kondrup, GP), Brazil does not get beyond the Polity Division
threshold. Brazilian extremely closed elites, together with the lack of wealth
distribution, relegate Brazil to a non-developed country. Although it is the
seventh economy in the world, Brazil cannot be considered as developed until it
does not overcome this challenge[iv].
Brazilian elite is
divided in ruling class and political elite (Roett 1999). The ruling class is
composed of large land-owners, who manage production of sugar, coffee and meat.
As land distribution is extremely unequal, just a few families compound the
traditional ruling class (Schneider 1991). For its part, political elite
manages the “patrimonial state” and enjoys the patronage benefits of political
power (Roett 1999). As their objectives are complementary, both groups work
together to maintain internal status quo. Ruling class is focused in preventing
any reform of the land tenure. Political elite aim to gain public office.
Brazilian elite can be permeable, but the aspirants must accept the corrupt
rules of the patrimonial state, which final goal is the self-perpetuation of
the elites (Roett 1999).
However, in lasts
years some changes have occurred. Groups like the army have lost part of their
power in favour of new emergent classes. Especially after 1964, the military
regime promoted new groups, in its effort to reform Brazilian economy. This was
called military developmentalism (Worth et al. 2009). A new class of young and
better educated entrepreneurs from the agro-industry sector emerged and assumed
leadership positions. This was the basis of the economic take-off.
The problem of
Brazil is that the outstanding economic development has not been accompanied by
the same degree of social development. Although Brazilian inequality has decreased
(Gini index fell from 60.7 in 1998 to 51.9 in 2012)[v],
Brazil is still a quite unjust country. For example, its education system is
ranked in 114th position of the world (Love et al. 2009). This fact
gives an idea about the huge social problem in Brazil.
Also, there are
regional imbalances that hobble Brazilian progress. Great economic influence of
Sao Paulo distorts development of the poorest regions (Schneider 1991). Half of
the wealth generated in the country comes from the states of Sao Paulo, Rio de
Janeiro and Minas Gerais, the three of them located in the South East (Hagopian
1996).
Finally, the third
problem related to Brazilian institutional underdevelopment is the inability of
state mechanisms to ensure maintenance of law and order. Organized crime and
drug trafficking are huge problems that ravage the whole Latin America. Brazil
is no exception, and must solve these internal problems in order to satisfy its
global expectations. If Brazil could defeat its internal drug crime, and also
help to eradicate it in other countries like Colombia, Brazil would inspire a
lot of confidence of its neighbors. Thus, fighting lack of order both in local
and regional level, would improve Brazilian possibilities of becoming a great
power.
Brazil: leader of the South?
Brazil host
diplomatic missions from 134 countries, and receives state visits disproportionate
to other countries in the region (Volgy et al. 2011). This gives an idea of the
geopolitical weight of Brazil. Its social capital is strengthening in the same
way as the number of its allies grows. Mercosur and UNASUR are proof of that.
But Brazil is also gaining friends beyond its region. In the last decade,
Brazil has cooperated with lusophone countries in Africa. Brazilian penetration
in Angola and Mozambique is evident (Love et al. 2009). Brazil is also part of
the G-20, G-3 and the BRICS, so it is expanding its soft power base.
Brazil respects
main institutions of global polity, but it also raise an independent voice to defend
the rights of the developing countries. Brazil forged its reputation as
representative of the South in the WTO. Brazil lobbied for a fairer world trade
during the Round of Doha, especially demanding the lift of agriculture tariffs
on the developed world (Lassiter 2007).
Lula reinforced
South-South relations at the same time as he distanced himself from the United
States. Since the 60s, Brazil has had and independent foreign policy from the
hegemon (Roett 1999). Under Lula, this trend was accentuated, probably trying
to gain trust of South American neighbors (most of them under leftist
governments). However, Brazil has never totally separate from the US, as is
dependent of its military protection. Lula carried out an “activist and
progressive diplomacy” focusing on issues related to the South like environment
or fighting AIDS. In the same way, current Brazilian foreign policy is based in
three D’s: “Decolonization, Development and Disarmament”.
Brazil is also
critic with R2P doctrine, and prefers the “principle of non-indifference”
(Volgy et al. 2011). Brazilian delegation abstained in the voting on the 1973
resolution of the Security Council that allowed the intervention in Libya.
Neither Brazil supported wars in Yugoslavia and Iraq (Volgy et al. 2011).
Brazil jealously guards Westphalian sovereignty[vi].
Authorities fear the humanitarian interventions of the superpower. This is
because, as environmental securitization is increasing on relevance, Brazil
fears the internationalization of the Amazonia, which could justify a foreign
intervention on its own soil. Instead, Brazil claims for the securitization of
social development, because “social development is the condition for economic development
and constitutes the first line of national defense and maintenance of
sovereignty” (Buzan 2003, 322).
A long-held
ambition of Brazil is achieving a permanent seat in the Security Council.
Brazil tried to play a major role in the League of Nations and in the early
United Nations. Brazil failed in both attempts. Now, it has retaken that ambition.
Brazil argues that the UN must be renovated in order to represent the modern
world and gaining legitimacy. Lula’s rhetoric consisted on presenting Brazilian
candidature as a common interest of the whole Third World (Love et al. 2009).
Now, with the mentioned unwillingness of China to accept India and Japan in the
UNSC, Brazil can take advantage and present itself as the ideal candidate.
Ø Conclusions
Brazil is a major
regional power that aims to reach great power status. Although it possesses the
economic potentialities, Brazil lacks the necessary influence in its own region
and in the global arena to achieve its goal.
Brazil has
benefited from the swift in global polity from violence interdependence to
functional interdependencies. Brazil has taken advantage of the economic
globalization and it is likely to become one of the top 5 world economies in
few decades (Love et al. 2009).
Brazilian elites
see their own country as capable to order global polity, beyond the limits of
its region. This is a fundamental step to improve its status. However, as the
rest of powers do not see Brazil prepared to be a great power, there is status
inconsistency (Volgy et al. 2011).
Hence, Brazil is
seeking to change that perception to become part of the global polity core.
Brazil is firmly committed to obtain a permanent seat of the Security Council
of the UN, the maximum organ of decision-making of global polity. As it tries
to represent the demands of the developing world, Brazil could be seen by the
current great powers as the cornerstone that would give more legitimacy to the
global polity system.
If Brazil manages
to strengthen Mercosur, it will increase its influence over its region. This is the key step towards its goal, as a
strong regional leadership would be the perfect visiting card to present to the
rest of the world, in order to be perceived as prepared to improve its geopolitical
status. Moreover, consolidating Mercosur would permanently reduce the threats posed by ALBA and the US penetration in
South America. Maintaining friendly relationships with Argentina may be a key
factor in this issue.
In addition,
solving its internal institutional problem is also extremely important.
Reducing socio-economic inequalities, together with ensuring law enforcement
all over Brazilian territory, would strengthen a lot the perception which the
relevant states have of it.
Ø Policy recommendation
The address to the
Roussef administration based on the current research would be to use all the diplomatic
resources to strengthen Mercosur in order to achieve a strong alliance that unifies
the region under Brazilian leadership. This could also help to reduce the
dependency of the US and enable Brazil to carry out an entirely independent
foreign policy. Roussef should also work hard to reduce internal inequalities.
Ø Bibliography
-
Abers, Rebecca Neaera, Inventing
local democracy, grassroots politics in Brazil (Boulder, Colo. : Lynne
Rienner Publishers 2000)
-
Arceneaux, Craig, & Pion-Berlin, David; Transforming Latin America, the international and domestic origins of
change (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press 2005)
-
Barnett, Michael & Duvall, Raymond, Power in Global Governance (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press,
2005)
-
Barton, Jonathan R; A political
geography of Latin America (New York : Routledge 1997)
-
Beck, Ulrich, Power in the Global
Age, A new global political economy (Cambridge : Polity, 2005)
-
Brown, Kristin L; “Venezuela Joins Mercosur: The Impact Felt Around the
Americas”, Law & Bus. Rev. Am.
16, (2010) pp. 85-94.
-
Deudney, Daniel; Bounding power,
republican security theory from the polis to the global village (Princeton
: Princeton University Press, 2007)
-
Hagopian, Frances; Traditional
Politics and Regime Change in Brazil (Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press 1996)
-
Hart - Landsberg, Martin; “ALBA and the promise of cooperative
development”, Monthly Review, Dec,
2010, Vol.62(7), pp.1-17
-
Holtom, Paul; Bromley Mark; Wezeman Pieter D. & Wezeman Siemon T.,
“Trends in International Arms Transfers”, 2011 (SIPRI
Fact Sheet, 2012), pp. 1-8
-
Ikenberry, G. John, Liberal order
and imperial ambition, essays on American power and world politics, (Cambridge
: Polity, 2007)
-
Krasner, Stephen D., Problematic
sovereignty, contested rules and political possibilities(New York :
Columbia University Press, 2001),
-
Lassiter, Mary P; Economics,
politics, and social issues in Latin America (New York: Nova Science
Publishers, Inc. 2007)
-
Love, Joseph LeRoy Baer, Werner, Brazil
under Lula, economy, politics, and society under the worker-president (New
York, NY : Palgrave Macmillan 2009)
-
Mainwaring, Scott ; Scully, Timothy, “Latin America: Eight Lessons for
Governance” (Journal of Democracy,
2008, Vol.19(3))
-
McCann, Frank D; The Brazilian American Alliance, 1937-1945 (Princeton,
Princeton University Press, 1973)
-
McDonough, Peter, Power and
ideology in Brazil (Princeton : Princeton University Press, 1981)
-
Power, Timothy J., & Taylor, Matthew M., Corruption and democracy in Brazil, the struggle for accountability
(Notre Dame, Ind. : University of Notre Dame Press 2011)
-
Roett, Riordan, Brazil, politics
in a patrimonial society (Westport, Conn. : Praeger : London 1999)
-
Schneider, Ronald M; "Order
and progress", a political history of Brazil (Boulder, Colo. :
Westview Press 1991)
-
Schirm, Stefan A; Globalization
and the new regionalism, global markets, domestic politics and regional
cooperation (Oxford : Polity 2002)
-
Vieira, Marco Antonio; Alden, Chris & Morphet, Sally, The South in world politics (Basingstoke
: Palgrave Macmillan 2010)
-
Volgy, Thomas J.; Corbetta, Renato; Grant, Keith A. & Baird, Ryan G,
Major powers and the quest for status in
international politics, Global and regional perspectives (New York:
Palgrave MacMillan, 2011)
-
Wæver, Ole & Buzan, Barry, Regions
and Powers. The Structure of International Security (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2003),
-
Worth, Owen, & Moore, Phoebe; Globalization
and the 'new' semi-peripheries (Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan 2009)
Ø Notes
[i] World Bank: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?order=wbapi_data_value_2010+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
[ii] South America is known for the high number of
integration failures. Many organizations have been created but very few have
reached their aims. The aforementioned FTAA and others like the Latin American
Integration Association, the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), UNASUR, CELAC
or ALBA, are some examples of these attempts of integration. Not all of them
have failed, for instance, the CAN is a custom union area formed by Colombia,
Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia. It is perceived as a competitor of Mercosur, and the
aim of Brazil is attracting its members to the Southern Cone organization.
However, CAN and Mercosur are both part of UNASUR, an intergovernmental
organization that integrates the two existing customs unions. Brazil is also
leading UNASUR, and it could be an important instrument for its regional aspirations.
[iii] CIA World Factbook:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html
[iv] As a
country cannot be a superpower with 90% of poor among its population, Brazil
must solve this social problem in order to reach its geopolitical goals.
[v] Ibídem
[vi] However, Brazil signed the Non
Proliferation Treaty, which is discriminatory with sovereign equality of
states.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario