-CENTRAL AMERICA- >IN THE PERIOD BETWEEN 2002-2003, I WORKED (...) FOR A YEAR AND A HALF IN CENTRAL AMERICA (MEXICO-CUBA-GUATEMALA-BELIZE-HONDURAS-NICARAGUA-EL SALVADOR-COSTA RICA-PANAMA) ALSO AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE CONTACTS BY ANTONIN KRATOCHVIL. > IN THAT PERIOD , I RECEIVED A VERY GOOD JOB OFFER FROM THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT-. >AS AN ANALYST-STRATEGIC-OPERATIONAL ON THE TERRITORY, IN THE FIELD ,”IN DA ZONE” I "FOUND" FULLY PREPARED IN A NATURAL WAY. -AFTERWARDS I WANTED/HAD TO "ABANDON THE TEAM" TO GO TO END ***-"THE NYC DANCE KABALLAH QUANTUM PROJECT"*** -I MUST SAY IT WAS A GREAT EXPERIENCE, "MADE" WITH HIGHLY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS, WITH VERY SPECIAL TALENTS AND SKILLS THEY HAVE TAUGHT ME. MOTH812 C.M.R. No alt text provided for this image

2. Latin American Nations in World Politics

4. SECOND EDITION
Latin American
Nations in
World Politics
edited by
Heraldo Munoz
and Joseph S. Tulchin
Routledge
Taylor & Francis Croup
New York London

5. First published 1996 by Westview Press
Published 2018 by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX 14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright © 1996 Taylor & Francis
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by
any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying
and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identi-
fication and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Latin American nations in world politics/edited by Heraldo Munoz and
Joseph S. Tulchin.—2nd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8133-0872-0 (he)—ISBN 0-8133-0873-9 (pbk)
1. Latin America—Foreign relations—1980- I. Munoz, Heraldo.
II. Tulchin, Joseph S., 1939-
F1414.2L329 1996
327.8—dc20 96-7424
CIP
ISBN 13: 978-0-8133-0873-9 (pbk)

6. Contents
The Dominant Themes in Latin American Foreign
Relations: An Introduction, Heraldo Munoz 1
1 Collective Action for Democracy in the Americas,
Heraldo Munoz 17
2 Understanding Latin American Foreign Policies,
Alberto van Klaveren 35
3 Politics, Bureaucracy, and Foreign Policy in Chile,
Manfred Wilhelmy 61
4 Cuba Adapts to a Brave New World,
Juan M. del Aguila 81
5 Central America and the United States,
Francisco Rojas Aravena and Luis Guillermo Solis Rivera 105
6 The Fate of a Small State: Ecuador in Foreign Affairs,
John D. Martz 129
7 Mexican Foreign Policy in the 1990s: Learning to Live
with Interdependence, Jorge Chabat 149
8 Continuity and Change in Argentine Foreign Policy,
Joseph S. Tulchin 165
9 The Foreign Policy of Brazil: From the Democratic Transition
to Its Consolidation, Monica Hirst 197
10 Postplantation Societies and World Order: Some Reflections
on the Caribbean Predicament, Jorge Heine 225
11 Soviet Union-Latin American Relations:
A Historical Perspective, Augusto Varas 237
About the Contributors 263
About the Book 267
Index 269
v

8. The Dominant Themes i n
Latin American Foreign
Relations: A n Introduction
HERALDO MUNOZ
The profound world changes brought about by the end of the cold war in-
augurated a new period in foreign affairs, modifying the traditional
post-World War II concerns of both developed and developing countries.
The growing globalization of economic affairs, the decline of world strate-
gic confrontation, the reemergence of national and ethnic rivalries and con-
flicts, and the eruption of humanitarian crises—masses of refugees,
drought, starvation, and epidemic disease in vulnerable populations—are
but some of the characteristics of a complex international situation in which
tendencies toward integration and cooperation and tendencies that foster
fragmentation coexist. Moreover, the end of the cold war and the transfor-
mations in the world economy have led to a rethinking of international re-
lations, including academic research on Latin American foreign affairs.
These world changes have had an important impact upon Latin
American foreign relations. Some concrete issues have disappeared, while
others only have been reoriented. In the new post-cold war scenario, for
example, the salience of conventional security issues has tended to de-
cline, and economics, particularly trade, has moved much closer to the
top of the Latin American and global agenda. The United States continues
to be a key factor in Latin American foreign relations, although arguably
less so than in the immediately post-World War I I era. The following brief
analysis of the evolution of the dominant themes in Latin American for-
eign relations reflects the importance of the end of the cold war as a major
historical rupture that is still reshaping the premises and priorities pre-
vailing for the past four decades.
B a c k g r o u n d Notes
International studies as a social science field is relatively new to Latin
America. Even though, exceptionally, pioneering institutions such as the
1

9. 2 Heraldo Munoz
Institute* de Estudios Internacionales of the Universidad de Chile and its
journal Estudios Internacionales and the Colegio de Mexico and its publi-
cation Foro Internacional date back to the mid-1960s, only well into the
1970s did Latin America witness a rapid growth of centers, publications,
and research projects on international affairs. The development of this
field has been extremely uneven in terms of overall quality, geographic
focus, methodological rigor, and thematic orientations.1
Latin American
foreign relations, although of increasing interest to specialists and the
general public, were for a long time noticeably understudied.
Before World War I I the principal line of research on Latin America's ex-
ternal relations was largely restricted to problems of international law, is-
sues in the diplomatic history of particular countries, and general de-
scriptions of the historical linkages between Latin America as a whole and
the United States or Europe. In the postwar context, international studies
emerged in the United States as an integral part of political science. In
Latin America, however, the field remained heavily influenced by a ju-
ridical perspective. Eventually, international studies in the region began
to be recognized as an autonomous academic field, beyond the scope of
political science, in which various disciplines converged.
Beginning in the mid-1970s, the study of Latin America's foreign rela-
tions experienced a substantial advance. Active and participatory foreign
policies were by then no longer the exclusive preserve of highly devel-
oped nations. Instead, middle-sized and small countries also asserted
their own positions and even influence with respect to neighboring coun-
tries and powers within or outside the region. For example, after the col-
lapse of the Portuguese colonial empire during the 1970s, Brazil devel-
oped a strong diplomatic drive toward Africa while at the same time
improving relations with oil-producing Arab countries and becoming
more active in Latin American affairs. On the other end of the spectrum,
a smaller country such as Ecuador also became more active internation-
ally as it engaged in a protracted fishing-boat dispute with the United
States and joined the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC). Venezuela, in turn, had active policies not only in OPEC but also
in a global context, promoting a North-South dialogue for a new world
economic order.
Both cooperation and conflict became more plausible as Latin American
countries sought to define and advance their national interests within the
hemisphere and even beyond it. The war between Argentina and Great
Britain over the Malvinas Islands, the Central American conflict, and the
debt crisis, among other situations of the late 1970s and early 1980s, re-
vealed both the importance of attempting to understand the factors that
affect the external behavior of regional states and the necessity of ex-
panding scientific research on Latin America's foreign relations. As a re-

10. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 3
sponse to this situation, particularly during the early 1980s, new interna-
tional studies centers were created in several countries of the region, and
an intensive exchange of projects, scholars, and experiences began to take
place among the various institutions in the field. The work of the
Programa de Relaciones Internacionales de America Latina (Latin
American International Relations Program—RIAL), a regional coordina-
tion mechanism for these academic institutions created in 1977, con-
tributed significantly to the progress of international studies in the region.
A milestone in the study of Latin American foreign policies was the
joint organization of a seminar held in Vina del Mar, Chile, in September
1982 by Chile's Instituto de Estudios Internacionales and the Institute of
Latin American Studies of the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill. The papers of that seminar addressed both substantive issues and
theoretical approaches to the understanding of the foreign policies of
countries of the region and became the basis for the first edition of Latin
American Nations in World Politics.
In the aftermath of the Vina del Mar conference, in 1983, the first insti-
tution dedicated exclusively to the analysis of the foreign policies of the
nations of Latin America and the Caribbean was founded in Santiago,
Chile. The Programa de Seguimiento de las Politicas Exteriores
Latinoamericanas (Program for the Study of Latin American Foreign
Policies—PROSPEL) set up a specialized documentation center and
began to publish a yearbook and a series of working papers on Latin
American foreign policies and a newsletter on foreign policy in Chile.
Books, conferences, and research projects on the previously understudied
topic of Latin American and Caribbean foreign policies began to appear.2
By the early 1990s studies of Latin American and Caribbean foreign re-
lations had multiplied, many important research centers had been estab-
lished throughout the hemisphere, and important graduate programs in
international studies had been set up in several Latin American countries.
Core T h e m e s : Autonomy, Development,
a n d the U n i t e d States
Modern works on the international position of Latin America range from
broad studies on dependency and imperialism to specific analyses of de-
cisionmaking and the balance of power. In practically all these works,
however, there is an underlying concern about the international auton-
omy and development of Latin American nations. Even the more conven-
tional studies of regional conflicts or security issues generally include
some reflections on the effects of these processes on intraregional cooper-
ation and/or national development. To be more precise, a survey of stud-
ies on Latin America's foreign relations reveals three recurrent topics: the

11. 4 Heraldo Munoz
desire to maximize national and regional autonomy, the need to advance
toward development, and the decisive importance of the United States for
all the countries of the region.
Maximizing National and Regional Autonomy
During the 1960s and 1970s studies often referred to the region's "depen-
dency/' some tracing it from colonial times, through the Monroe Doctrine
era to post-World War I I U.S. hegemony. The growing role of transna-
tional corporations was viewed as an additional dimension of the hege-
mony of the capitalist centers over the underdeveloped Latin American
periphery. In this line of analysis, one researcher asserted that since inde-
pendence the external linkages of Latin America had been oriented pri-
marily to the more economically developed countries, thus creating a
"sharp inequality of capabilities" and a situation of "enduring peripher-
a l l y " 3
Raul Prebisch, one of the pioneers of the dependency approach, argued
from the 1950s on that long-term weaknesses in raw-material prices
negated the beneficial results that were supposed to derive from compar-
ative advantage. Portraying the world as divided into a developed center
and an underdeveloped periphery, Prebisch argued that the center reaped
the benefits of technological progress and expropriated increases in the
productivity in the exporting sectors of peripheral nations through the
mechanism of deteriorating terms of trade. The negative effects of this re-
lationship of exchange constituted an external dependency that had to be
overcome if the periphery was to develop. In an essay written not long be-
fore his death, Prebisch defined dependency as "that situation in which a
country is forced to do what it otherwise would not do, or stops doing
what under other circumstances it would continue to do. Dependency
means, therefore, subordination to the interest of others, be it economic,
political or strategic."4
During the mid-1960s Latin America witnessed a wave of writings that
constituted a qualitative step forward in the discussion of underdevelop-
ment and dependency. The works of Fernando Henrique Cardoso and
Enzo Faletto, Andre Gunder Frank, Osvaldo Sunkel, and others went be-
yond Prebisch's perspective to interpret dependency holistically and in
terms of the capitalist system. In their works the key unit of analysis was
not simply the nation-state but also social groups, classes, and multina-
tional corporations. Emphasis was placed on historically grounded stud-
ies and interdisciplinary research methods.5
Following this line of
thought, dependency was conceived as the "process by which less devel-
oped countries are incorporated into the global capitalist system" and as
"a structural condition in which a weakly integrated system cannot com-
plete its economic cycle except by an exclusive (or limited) reliance on an

12. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 5
external center/'6
In the late 1970s there was a proliferation of dependency
writings, particularly in the United States and other developed countries.
A great difference between many of these new writings and earlier ones
is that whereas the former were often more interested in explaining inter-
national relations, the latter were largely interested in explaining and
solving the problem of underdevelopment. For a good number of schol-
ars from the developed world, the problem of dependency became prin-
cipally a quantifiable imbalance or disparity in power in the relationship
between two or more international actors, generally nation-states.7
In sum, the dependency approach produced a highly heterogeneous
body of literature. Still, one of its fundamental merits was that it consid-
ered a rich set of evidence and a broad range of phenomena that was
"open to historically grounded conceptualization/'8
From a practical
point of view, it was often concluded that Latin American dependency
could be overcome essentially either through a strategy of "diversification
of dependency" or through Latin American cooperation.
Diversification of dependency meant reducing reliance on merely one or
a few external centers by expanding international contacts, particularly in
the direction of Western Europe. The importance of Western Europe as an
alternative actor in the foreign relations of Latin America stimulated the
emergence of many research works on the Western Europe-Latin America
relationship and even led to the creation of specialized institutions for its
study such as the Centro de Investigaciones Europeo-Latinoamericanas
(Center for European-Latin American Studies—EURAL) in Buenos Aires
and Instituto de Relaciones Europeo-Latinoamericanas (Institute of
European-Latin American Relations—IRELA) in Madrid. Most writings
on Latin American-European relations were in accord, however, that it
was unrealistic to expect Europe to provide sufficient economic resources
for regional development or to become a clear alternative to U.S. power in
the Western Hemisphere.
Although Latin American political elites visualized Europe as an un-
derstanding and autonomous partner that had become increasingly inter-
ested in the political problems of the region, such as the Central American
peace negotiations and the democratization processes, the economic data
showed a stagnant relationship. Despite this, most researchers tended to
reject the fatalistic idea that virtually nothing could be expected of the
Europe-Latin America linkage and instead stressed that, within the limits
imposed by the Atlantic Alliance, Europe could be an important political
friend of Latin America. Through intensification of practical state and pri-
vate contacts both sides—and particularly Latin America—were expected
to increase their autonomy on the international scene.
The topic of intra-Latin American cooperation is by no means new in
the theory and practice of the region's international affairs. Many at-
tempts were made in the past to achieve regional integration through

13. 6 Heraldo Munoz
schemes such as the Latin American Free Trade Association (LAFTA),
now the Asociacion Latinoamericana de Integration (Latin American
Association for Integration—ALADI), the Andean Pact, or the Central
American Common Market. Political or economic cooperation was
also attempted through the Comision Especial de Coordination
Latinoamericana (Special Commission for Latin American Coordination—
CECLA) and the Sistema Economico Latinoamericana (Economic System
of Latin America—SELA) and more informal mechanisms such as the
Contadora Group established to pursue a peaceful solution to the Central
American crisis, and this effort eventually evolved into the Rio Group.
Much was also written on regional cooperation and integration. One
important collective work on the subject concluded that one of the funda-
mental weaknesses of cooperation in Latin America was that it had been
largely a concern of "governments/' Government or state-centered inte-
gration and cooperation in Latin America, in reality, committed only the
governing elites in the countries involved, leaving aside the business sec-
tor, the universities, the church, labor unions, political parties, profes-
sional associations, and other nongovernmental groups.9
Moreover, in the
past, cooperation in Latin America was viewed as being too rigid and
concentrated on institutional aspects, thus leading to stagnation. The cre-
ation and expansion of organizations for cooperation frequently pro-
duced bureaucratism and a tendency toward separation of the organiza-
tion, pursuing its own corporate interests as a power contender, from the
member states and their national interests.
Another problem of Latin American cooperation examined in the liter-
ature was that it frequently tended to be highly reactive, developing in re-
sponse to a specific external threat or crisis or to particular actions of ex-
ternal actors such as the United States. This feature of many efforts at
cooperation in the region entailed a high degree of instability and weak-
ness; when the common threat disappeared or subsided, cooperation de-
clined. A further widely recognized obstacle to Latin America cooperation
was seen in the survival of traditional border disputes and the arms race.
This, in turn, led some researchers to examine more conventional interna-
tional security issues in Latin American foreign relations, although most
tended to connect peace among nations and peace within nations.1 0
With the profound transformations in international politics and eco-
nomics of the post-cold war era, theoretical approaches and the traditional
Latin American concerns about autonomy and cooperation also changed.
The triumph of free-trade ideas and the widespread loss of appeal of cen-
trally planned economies led to a decline of the classical dependency ap-
proach in the analysis of Latin American foreign relations. Instead, stud-
ies in the 1990s have tended to focus on Latin America's position with
regard to the increasing globalization and interdependence of economic

14. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 7
affairs, competition among trade blocs, free-trade agreements such as the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Mercado
Comun del Sur (Southern Cone Common Market—MERCOSUR), the
danger of a "new protectionism" on the part of developed countries based
on labor and environmental considerations, and the diversification of re-
gional ties vis-a-vis the poles of world economic power, including
Western Europe and Japan. In The Politics of Trade in Latin American
Development,11
Steven Sanderson addresses many of these new issues, but,
adopting a historical perspective, he links the challenges of the present
world economy with the old themes of developed-world domination of
Latin American foreign trade.
Another indication of the new direction of Latin American foreign rela-
tions is the growing number of works on the importance for the region of
Japan and other Asian powers. One such book1 2
pays particular attention
to the largest Latin American trade partners of Japan, Mexico, and Brazil,
revealing an enduring though limited Japanese interest in Latin America,
the growing importance of Japan as a market and investment source for
several countries of the region, and the key role of the United States in the
relationship between Japan and Latin America.
Despite the obstacles to regional cooperation emerging from the more
decentralized and complex post-cold war era and consistent with the tra-
ditional concern with problems of national and regional autonomy, Latin
American action and research on regional cooperation and integration
have continued. The redemocratization, accompanied by economic open-
ing and modernization, of the late 1980s stimulated new forms of cooper-
ation among Latin American countries. Contacts and informal discus-
sions among chiefs of state and foreign ministers—for instance among Rio
Group countries—to analyze critical subjects noticeably increased.
According to one analysis, regional cooperation and integration efforts
have passed through three stages since the 1960s, the latest of these, inau-
gurated in the late 1980s, being "based on the emergence of new forms of
multilateral diplomacy or direct contact among Latin American govern-
ments to collectively manage international problems."1 3
The concern with regional autonomy and integration and with the con-
tinuing presence of the United States in the external linkages of Latin
America can be perceived in the abundant literature on hemispheric free-
trade integration, ranging from analyses of the Enteprise for the Americas
Initiative launched by then U.S. President George Bush, the approval of
NAFTA, and the December 1994 Miami Summit, at which the presidents
of the Americas agreed on the establishment by 2005 of an Americas free-
trade area.
Lastly, the end of the cold war provoked some rethinking on interna-
tional cooperation and multilateral organizations in an attempt to adapt

15. 8 Heraldo Munoz
to the new times alliances and institutional arrangements created for a
historical context that no longer exists. Studies on this subject have exam-
ined, among other things, the new hemispheric security priorities in the
emerging world context and the effects of the international changes on
multilateral institutions such as the Organization of American States.
Achieving Development
One of the basic priorities of Latin American states in the international
arena reflected in the literature is the imperative to advance toward de-
velopment. Of course, there has never been a shared definition of the term
"development" in Latin America: for some it is the equivalent of "mod-
ernization" or a process of change in the direction of the types of social,
economic, and political systems that exist in Western Europe and the
United States, while for others it is, in essence, measurable economic
growth achieved through the application of specific economic measures
and approaches, and for still others it is a complex and comprehensive
phenomenon involving economic progress, social equality, increased free-
dom, and other nonmaterial factors.
The importance of development has led many researchers to concen-
trate on the foreign obstacles to endogenous development efforts and to
advocate the need to stimulate regional economic integration for both in-
creased autonomy and development. It may also explain the primacy of
the economic dimension in studies of inter-American relations conducted
by Latin Americans; in contrast, U.S. scholars have tended to stress strate-
gic or geopolitical factors. Given this emphasis on national development,
most Latin American interpretations of international affairs generally blur
the distinction between foreign and domestic policies. In fact, Coleman
and Quiros-Varela argue that in Latin America "political leaders are
judged by their ability to articulate goals for national economic transfor-
mation as well as for their ability to produce such changes and, hence, for-
eign policymaking is unavoidably very much a function of the require-
ments of development statecraft."14
They add that for the major powers
foreign policymaking involves the analysis of many issues that are not re-
ally relevant to the foreign-policymaking process in Latin America.
During much of the 1980s the concern about development and the for-
eign relations of Latin America had one fundamental expression: the de-
bate over the foreign debt. Many conferences, books, and diplomatic ini-
tiatives dealt with the debt problem, which was viewed as a significant
hindrance to progress and a major threat to the stability and permanence
of the region's democratic governments. As the process of economic open-
ing accelerated in the 1990s, regional concern shifted to free-trade pacts
and how they would affect linkages among states. Still, the foreign debt

16. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 9
question continued to appear in the scholarly literature, although cer-
tainly less often than before. Instead, studies on concrete matters such as
debt-equity swaps, privatization, and adjustment processes in Latin
American countries abounded. However, some essays advocated the
need to reflect on alternatives to a perceived danger of "market totalitari-
anism" in the post-cold war era in an effort to arrive at a synthesis be-
tween markets and democracy and confront the lingering problems of
poverty and inequality.1 5
Latin America began to be portrayed in a more
positive light, both in the mass media and in academic circles. In many
countries of the region, despite temporary setbacks, economic growth had
resumed, inflation had declined, exports were rising, and foreign invest-
ment had begun to flow once again. But the problem of poverty and so-
cial inequality was becoming a critical diplomatic issue for Latin
American nations as well as a theme of continued analysis in the litera-
ture, thus reflecting the newest expression of the development concern in
Latin American foreign relations.
The Fundamental Presence of the United States
The role of the United States is unquestionably a key variable in under-
standing the foreign relations of Latin America.1 6
In fact, there is a broad
consensus regarding the proposition that the United States is a major con-
ditioning factor of Latin America's external ties. Scholars tend to disagree,
however, on the degree of "control" or "hegemony" that the United States
exercises over the region. During the 1970s the period of unchallenged
U.S. hegemony in the Americas seemed to have ended as a result of the
increase in the objective capability and the subjective will of Latin
American nations to forge their own policies and the erosion of U.S. pre-
dominance in a progressively decentralized, multipolar world. Thus, in-
terpretations that stressed the conspiratorial undisputed-hegemony view
on U.S. policy toward the region tended to lose their force. However, in
the early 1980s the efforts of the Reagan administration to reimpose hege-
mony over the hemisphere and beyond, the relative recuperation of the
U.S. economy, the failure of the North-South dialogue, and the external
debt crisis of the Latin American countries gave rise to intense debate
over whether the United States had managed to rebuild its past hege-
mony on a more lasting basis.
Central America became the dominant political theme in U.S.-Latin
American relations from Washington's viewpoint. In fact, it could be said
that the United States's Latin American policy became "Central-
Americanized" while at the same time it was largely transformed into a
defense policy. Academic differences over U.S.-Latin American ties
tended to focus more on the various competing approaches to the inter-

17. 10 Heraldo Munoz
pretation of these relations rather than on any difference of opinion about
the critical importance of the United States. According to Jorge
Dominguez, divergences had to do largely with the existence of several
clusters of ideas seeking to emerge as paradigms, the three principal ones
being liberal, dependency, and bureaucratic politics. Arguing that, de-
pending on the level of analysis, some perspectives are more useful for
certain purposes than for others, he offered a hierarchy of five commend-
able approaches.17
Abraham Lowenthal suggested, in turn, that the bu-
reaucratic-politics approach, by focusing on the policymaking process,
tended to provide richer insights for interpreting key issues in U.S.-Latin
American relations.18
Indeed, the bureaucratic-politics approach stresses
intrainstitutional factors and, through microscopic analyses of specific
case studies, tends to reveal the variety and inconsistency of foreign pol-
icy decisions that are generally ignored by macromodels. The dependency
perspective emphasizes structural relationships and tends to provide
comprehensive and historically relevant explanations that the micro-level
studies miss. As Cotler and Fagen once suggested, both the detailed study
of the parts of the system and the continuing analysis of the system as a
whole are needed.19
Although, in the end, bureaucratic politics and un-
orthodox dependency represent different theoretical options, it seems ap-
propriate to pursue the convergence of these two approaches to U.S.-Latin
American relations.
Beyond this theoretical discussion, in the post-cold war context of the
1990s the United States continued to be a key factor in Latin American for-
eign relations, although, again, debate resumed over the relative impor-
tance of Latin America for the United States. According to one writer, the
United States, feeling less threatened in the hemisphere with the disap-
pearance of the Soviet Union, would therefore be less likely to intervene
in Latin American domestic affairs. In this context, the case of Cuba
would have strong domestic connotations in the United States but no
longer represent a "threat" as in the period of the East-West conflict.
Consequently, he concluded, "Latin America's future is likely to resemble
its recent past, with the single exception that its importance in the inter-
national system will probably decline." In other words, according to this
analyst, Latin America—except for Mexico—"will constitute far less of a
priority to external hegemony, whether former or potential."2 0
From a dif-
ferent perspective, it was suggested that in a post-cold war context, "as
U.S. interests and energies turn inward to domestic challenges, Latin
America may well be increasingly pertinent." Far from becoming irrele-
vant, this observer asserted, Latin America's problems and opportunities
would increasingly be those of the United States. Major problems facing
the United States, such as the trade deficit, combating drug trafficking, en-
vironmental protection, and migration, would require Latin America's co-

18. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 11
operation. Also, he added, the prospects for democracy would be signifi-
cantly affected by conditions elsewhere in the hemisphere.21
In any event, it would appear that the post-cold war era will by no
means remove the United States as a key factor in Latin American foreign
affairs. NAFTA and the hemispheric integration process born of the
Miami Summit are two examples of its enduring importance for most
countries of the region.
New T h e m e s
The profound international transformations of the post-cold war era have
also stimulated the emergence or consolidation of new themes in the for-
eign relations of the region, many of them linked to the traditional themes
already discussed. The democratization of many Latin American coun-
tries, for example, has placed the issue of democracy high on the region's
foreign relations agenda. Arguing that "the internationalization of politics
is here to stay," one writer suggested that international events and forces
had much to do with the processes of democratization throughout the
Southern Cone and the Andean region, as well as with the reforms in
Mexico. His tentative conclusion was that it was necessary to approach
the role of international actors in Latin American politics "as a problem of
institutionalizing them into democratic systems."22
The growing impor-
tance in the early 1990s of collective efforts at the promotion of democracy
in the Americas, particularly through the Organization of American States
actions in Haiti, Peru, and Guatemala, highlighted the conclusion that de-
mocratic governance had become a top foreign policy matter for many
countries of the region. A n important work on the question of democracy
explored the motives, methods, and outcomes of U.S. efforts with regard
to democracy in Latin America. Its overall conclusion was that U.S. at-
tempts to export democracy have met with little enduring success and
have often proved counterproductive.2 3
Given the saliency of the democ-
racy question in the foreign relations of Latin America in the 1990s, we are
likely to see much more research and discussion on the subject.
Among the key new international themes in the external relations of
Latin America and the Caribbean are the environment and drug traffick-
ing. Some writers have in fact identified environmental protection as a
new development/security concern in the post-cold war order. In one
book on the subject it is argued, for example, that if the ecological ques-
tion is unilaterally defined, for instance, as a matter vital to U.S. security
and to relations between Washington and Latin America, there is a dan-
ger of transferring the traditional tensions and mistrust of inter-American
relations to the issue of the environment.2 4
Other studies, including the
edited volume Economic Development and Environmental Protection in Eatin

19. 12 Heraldo Munoz
America, focus on the economic-growth/environmental-conservation
challenge and touch upon the difficult question of how to confront prob-
lems of environmental pollution or decay, which have neither national or
ideological boundaries, while at the same time preserving national sover-
eignty and respecting international law.2 5
To illustrate the new salience of
the environment in Latin American foreign relations, in the first issue of
the Journal of Environment and Development, established in 1992, four arti-
cles dealt with international aspects of environmental questions in Latin
American countries.
The problem of the drug traffic in Latin American foreign relations has
been perceived in the specialized literature as somewhat similar to the
issue of the environment: as a security-related transnational problem that
elicits not only international cooperation but also confrontation having to
do, for example, with supply versus demand responsibilities or ap-
proaches to combating it. It contrasts with the problem of the environ-
ment, however, in that it is an illegal business that involves billions of dol-
lars and is linked to the illegal arms trade and terrorism.2 6
These new issues are intimately related to the dominant themes in Latin
American foreign policy studies—national or regional autonomy, devel-
opment, and the role of the United States. Parallel to their emergence
there has been an increase in the participation of nongovernmental actors
alongside the traditional nation-states and international organizations.
One discussion of the new issues on Latin America's foreign policy
agenda argues for "theoretical pluralism" to address the realities of a
complex world in the process of transformation. At the same time, it sug-
gests that in the new context, the developing countries have a declining
capacity to place their priorities on the international agenda or to shape
the treatment of those that are already on that agenda.27
In summary, the winding down of the cold war signifies, according to
many analysts, the intensification of international economic competition
and a decline of strategic confrontation, thus leading to higher priorities
for such matters as trade, investment, democracy promotion, technologi-
cal innovation, environmental protection, international migration, and
drug trafficking in the international relations of Latin American nations.
Most important, in the post-cold war context issues such as trade, drug
trafficking, and the environment do not divide neatly and automatically
along North-South or East-West lines, and it is therefore increasingly dif-
ficult to address them in terms of such traditional concepts as the distinc-
tion between developed and developing countries. Rich and poor nations
may join together on one specific agenda item and confront each other on
another, while intrabloc disagreements will also occur. The multiple
crossovers with regard to the new issues have eroded the usefulness of
conventional categories in foreign policy analysis.

20. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 13
A C o n c l u d i n g Note
The central themes in Latin American foreign relations are the need to
maximize national and regional autonomy, the importance of the United
States, and the pursuit of development. The profund changes brought
about by the end of the cold war have placed new issues on the Latin
American foreign policy agenda and reoriented others, but these issues
are linked to the traditional ones. Given the diversification of Latin
American foreign relations in a less rigid and polarized environment and
the disappearance of the Soviet threat to Washington in the region, there
is some question as to the relative importance of the United States as an
element in Latin American foreign relations. Although one might specu-
late that Japan or the European Community could become as important
as the United States for the nations of the region, at least until the end of
the century the role of the United States for Latin America and the
Caribbean will doubtless remain a key priority and a subject of academic
interest. After all, the preeminence of the United States for Latin America
certainly preceded the cold war.
Similarly, although the theoretical approaches have changed from, for
instance, the dependency perspective to neorealism or bureaucratic poli-
tics, despite state reform and modernization efforts, Latin America still
confronts serious problems of poverty and inequality that underline the
persistent salience of the development concern in the foreign relations of
Latin American and Caribbean nations.
The tendency toward the establishment of free-trade arrangements and
the increasing internationalization of economic affairs pose a challenge to
the traditional concern for preserving national sovereignty and indepen-
dence. New regional integration schemes such as MERCOSUR, NAFTA,
and a multiplicity of other integration efforts within the region suggest
that the concern for a narrow national autonomy has given way to a focus
on regional autonomy and the voluntary cession of degrees of sovereignty
in the pursuit of development as dominant themes in the foreign relations
of Latin America and the Caribbean. Similarly, the new salience of democ-
racy and human rights promotion suggest further debate over the ques-
tion of national sovereignty and regional or subregional collective action
on behalf of democracy.
Lastly, it can be safely predicted in the post-cold war context of the
mid-1990s that the study of Latin American foreign relations will continue
to evolve. The training of specialists, both in Latin America and outside
the region, is more intense than in the past, and there are increasing con-
tacts and joint research projects among the principal international studies
centers of the Western Hemisphere. Considering the revolutionary
changes of the time and the transformations that continue to materialize as

21. 14 Heraldo Munoz
the twentieth century comes to a close, the systematic analysis of the
changing nature of international relations in Latin America and the
Caribbean has become more important than ever.
Notes
1. Heraldo Munoz, "Los estudios internacionales en America Latina: Problemas
fundamentales," in Francisco Orrego (ed.), Los estudios internacionales en America
Latina: Realizacion y desafios (Santiago: Editorial Universitaria, 1980), 79-95.
2. See, for instance, Juan Carlos Puig (ed.), America Latina: Politicas exteriores
comparadas (Buenos Aires: Grupo Editor Latinoamericano, 1984); Gerhard
Drekonja and Juan G. Tokatlian (eds.), Teoria y prdctica de la politica exterior lati-
noamericana (Bogota: Friederick Ebert Stiflung de Colombia-Centro de Estudios
sobre la Realidad Colombiana [FESCOL-CEREC], 1983); Elizabeth G. Ferris and
Jennie Lincoln (eds.), Latin American Foreign Policies: Global and Regional Dimensions
(Boulder: Westview Press, 1981).
3. Douglas Chalmers, "Developing on the Periphery: External Factors in Latin
American Politics," in James Rosenau (ed.), Linkage Politics (New York: Free Press,
1969).
4. Raul Prebisch, "Prologo: Sobre la dependencia y el desarrollo," in Heraldo
Munoz (ed.), Crisis y desarrollo alternativo en Latinoamerica (Santiago: Editorial
Aconcagua, 1985), 13.
5. The classic work on Latin American dependency visualized as a transna-
tional-structural phenomenon in historical perspective and not merely an "exter-
nal" situation is Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto, Dependencia y de-
sarrollo en America Latina (Mexico: Siglo XXI, 1969).
6. James A. Caporaso and Behrouz Zare, " A n Interpretation and Evaluation of
Dependency Theory," in Heraldo Munoz (ed.), Prom Dependency to Development
(Boulder: Westview Press, 1981), 48.
7. See, for example, Harry Targ, "Global Dominance and Dependence, Post-
Industrialism, and International Relations Theory," International Studies Quarterly
20 (September 1976); David Ray, "The Dependency Model of Latin American
Underdevelopment: Three Basic Fallacies," Journal of Inter-American Studies and
World Affairs 15 (February 1973).
8. J. Samuel Valenzuela and Arturo Valenzuela, "Modernization and
Dependency: Alternative Perspectives in the Study of Latin American
Underdevelopment," in Heraldo Munoz (ed.), Prom Dependency to Development,
pp. 334-335.
9. See Heraldo Munoz and Francisco Orrego, La cooperacion regional en America
Latina: Diagnostico y proyecciones futuras (Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico, 1987).
10. See, for example, Hugo Palma, America Latina: Limitacion de armamentos y de-
sarme en la region (Lima: Centro Peruano de Estudios Internacionales, 1986);
Augusto Varas, Militarization and the International Arms Race in Latin America
(Boulder: Westview Press, 1985).
11. Steven E. Sanderson, The Politics of Trade in Latin American Development
(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992).

22. Themes i n Latin American Foreign Relations 15
12. Susan Kaufman Purcell and Robert Immerman (ed.), Japan and Latin
America in the New Global Order (New York: Americas Society, 1992); Noriaki
Kishimoto, "Japanese-Latin American Economic Relations," North-South 1,
(August-September 1991:16-18; Heraldo Munoz, "Chile: Uma ponte entre o
Pacifico e America do Sul," Folha de Sao Paulo, November 18,1994.
13. Luciano Tomassini, /
Tntroducci6n/,
in L. Tomassini (ed.), Nuevas formas de
concertacion regional en America Latina (Buenos Aires: Group Editor Latino
americana-Relaciones Internacionales de America Latina, 1990), p. 17. See
also Alicia Frohman, Puentes sobre la turbulencia: La concertacion politica lati-
noamericana en los 80 (Santiago: Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales,
1990).
14. Kenneth Coleman and Luis Quiros-Varela, "Determinants of Latin
American Foreign Policies: Bureaucratic Organization and Development
Strategies," in Ferris and Lincoln, Latin American Foreign Policies, 40.
15. See, for example, the collection of essays in Pensamiento Iberoamericano, 18
(July-December 1990).
16. The importance of the United States for Latin America led a group of schol-
ars based in Mexico to establish in late 1970s the first Latin American center for
studying U.S. reality. The Instituto de Estudios de Estados Unidos at Centro de
Investigaciones y Docencias Economicas (CIDE), Mexico City, publishes a
monthly bulletin on U.S. affairs and the journal Cuadernos Semestrales-Estados
Unidos: Perspectiva Latinoamericana.
17. See Jorge Dominguez, "Consensus and Divergences: The State of Literature
on Inter-American Relations in the 1970,
s," Latin American Research Review 13
(1978):87-126.
18. Abraham F Lowenthal, "Liberal, 'Radical/ and 'Bureaucratic' Perspectives
on U.S. Latin American Policy: The Alliance for Progress in Retrospect," in Julio
Cotler and Richard Fagen (eds.), Latin America and the United States: The Changing
Political Realities (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1974), 212-235.
19. Julio Cotler and Richard Fagen, "Introduction: Political Relations Between
Latin America and the United States," in Cotler and Fagen, Latin America and the
United States, 10.
20. Mark Falcoff, "Latin America After the Cold War," in Douglas Payne, Mark
Falcoff, and Susan Kaufman Purcell, Latin America: U.S. Policy After the Cold War
(New York: Americas Society, 1991), 27-45.
21. Abraham F Lowenthal, "Rediscovering Latin America," Foreign Affairs, 69
(Fall 1990): 34-38.
22. Douglas A. Chalmers, "Dilemmas of Latin American Democratization:
Dealing with International forces," Institute of Latin American and Iberian Studies
Papers on Latin America, no. 18 (1990):1, 18.
23. See Abraham F Lowenthal (ed.), Exporting Democracy: The United States and
Latin America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991). On this same
subject see Thomas Carothers, In the Name of Democracy (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1991).
24. Heraldo Munoz (ed.), Environment and Diplomacy in the Americas (Boulder:
Lynne Rienner, 1992). See also Norman Myers, Ultimate Security: The
Environmental Basis of Political Stability (New York: Norton, 1993).

23. 16 Heraldo Munoz
25. See Joseph S. Tulchin and Andrew I . Rudman (eds.), Economic Development
and Environmental Protection (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1991); Heraldo Munoz and
Robin Rosenberg (eds.), Difficult Eiaison: Trade and Environment in the Americas
(New Brunswick, N.J., and London: Transaction Books, 1993).
26. See Richard B. Craig, "Illicit Drug Traffic: Implications for South American
Source Countries/' Journal of Inter-American Studies and World Affairs, 29 (February
1987):2-11; Augusto Varas (ed.), Jaque a la democracia: Orden internacional y violen-
cia politica en America Eatina (Buenos Aires: Grupo Editor Latinoamericano, 1990).
27. Roberto Russell, "La agenda global en los anos 90: Antiguos y nuevos
terms," in R. Russell (ed.), Ea agenda internacional en los anos 90 (Buenos Aires:
Group Editor Latinoamericano-Relaciones Internacionales de America Latina
1990), 16-21. Also on the new Latin American agenda of the 1990s see Francisco
Rojas and William Smith (eds.), El cono sur y las transformaciones globules (Santiago:
Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, 1994).