Skip to main content

Unasur Defense Summit Unable To Reach Consensus

June 27, 2008 (Southern Affairs) -- One month ago the presidents of South America formally created the Union of South American Nations.

While no one was fooled by the momentary goodwill for very long, the proposal to create a South American Defense Council did raise heads. Well, those heads can go back to whatever it was they were doing earlier; South America has proved once again that it is all talk and no walk.

At the Defense Council Summit, held on June 23 and 24 in Santiago, Chile, representatives of all the South American nations except Colombia were unable to agree on any of the basic issues outlined in the Brazilian proposal. Some of the topics discussed included the sharing of best practices and past experiences, combined military exercises, and more cooperation in peacekeeping missions like the one in Haiti.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the summit was the fact that it was even called in the first place. Given the wide-spread and in some cases escalating conflicts that have prevented any real progress since integration talks began in 2000, it seemed too far-fetched to believe that a region where governments are still arguing over 19th century border wars would be willing to share military secrets.

Why then was the council proposed in the first place?

My best guess is that it was a mixture of wishful dreaming on the Brazilian military industrial complex's part and a jab at the US government's decision to reactivate the Fourth Fleet, a World War II era command structure responsible for U.S. Navy ships, aircraft and submarines operating in the Caribbean and the waters surrounding Central and South America.

If the presidents of South America thought that creating a defense council, with no short term possibilities of success, would somehow raise their international profile, this week's summit changed that assumption. Instead, the Council was so unimpressive it didn’t even receive news coverage in Santiago, the city where the summit was actually held.
Perhaps the most regrettable result of the summit's failure is that it reinforces the widely held notion that Latin America is too unstable to merit serious attention. This is not the case. 

Many Latin American countries are already serious global players and looking forward into the 21st century, the region will certainly play a major role in international relations because of its massive human and natural resources, to mention just two of its numerous virtues.

This summit is a sad reminder of the cheap rhetoric that has come to define South American politics. Leaders seem unable to realize that they are often the biggest roadblock to their own development. If they only meant what they said and did what they promised we would be on the verge of a real revolution. Until then we are left with Bolivarianism - not much of a substitute.


Popular posts from this blog

Moving to the Suburbs: Reducciones in Recent Latin American Historiography

In 1503, the Spanish monarchy issued its first decree for the resettlement of indigenous groups in the Caribbean so that they would “live together” and “not remain or wander separated from each other in the backcountry.”[1]

As the European conquest spread to North, Central, and South America, these new settlements – known as reducciones and congregaciones in Spanish and descimentos in Portuguese – became sites of forced labor, evangelism, experimental agricultural, and refuge. Through a series of imperial policies decreed over the next decades and centuries of colonial rule, Spanish and Portuguese officials attempted to reshape the New World, including its human and natural landscapes. How colonial historians explain this process and indigenous peoples’ reactions to it is the focus of this essay.

In a review of the recent historiography of reducciones, several trends emerge that signal a shift in our understanding of the practice. As this paper will show, one common element is that …

"Open" and "Closed" Regionalism Theories

(Apr. 3, 2008) The terms "Open" and "closed" regionalism refer to the degree in which regional blocks allow nonmember nations to access their markets. In this sense, an "open region" is one with few, if any, external trade restrictions while a "closed region" can be defined as one whose external trade policies seek to restrict commerce with nations outside the region.Closed regionalism as practiced in Latin America grew out of the policy suggestions made by UN ECLAC/CEPAL school of dependency theory in the early 1960s. As discussed earlier, proponents of this policy argued that states should form regional alliances with a series of trade barriers against foreign products to foment regional industrialization and assure captive local markets for these manufactured goods. The failure of this system of integration to meet Latin America's economic goals became apparent during the 1980s and was further highlighted by the strong economic performanc…

Greetings From Gringolandia

Bloomberg Businessweek, March 28 — April 3, 2016
Susan Lamy and her husband, Jean Pierre, owned a successful interior design business in Westport, Conn., but they still worried about how they would make ends meet in retirement. “Just paying for the basic necessities was killing us, and we could see that there was no way that we would ever be able to stop working,” says Lamy. 
The search for an affordable retirement spot led the couple to Cuenca, a Unesco World Heritage site in Ecuador’s southern Andes. They settled there in 2013 and now live in a spacious apartment with a terrace overlooking the Yanuncay River. Lamy says she and her husband enjoy a high standard of living in Cuenca for around $2,500 a month, paid for by their Social Security checks: “This seemed to be the best possibility for having a really terrific life on a fixed income.” 
The combination of a subtropical climate, well-preserved colonial architecture, and low cost of living has made Cuenca a magnet for North Ameri…