UNASUR beyond Brazil: Argentina’s position in support of the South American Defense Council

Abstract

• Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto e distribuído sob os termos da AbstractIn the course of the negotiations for the creation of the Defense Council (CDS), there were two proposals on the table: either to form a collective security alliance, or to establish a flexible forum for cooperation. The aim of this article is to analyze the motives, limitations, and scopes which determined that Argentina opted in favor of the flexible scheme.

Performance of the South American Defense Council Under Autonomy Pressures

“…Fernández’s relatively strong control allowed her to maintain a foreign policy according to the formal criteria of regional autonomy promoted by Néstor Kirchner (Merke & Reynoso, ; Ribeiro & Urdinez, ). Argentina oscillated between Brazil and Venezuela, trying to balance one against the other, especially concerning the security regionalism model that would be followed (Comini, ; Frenkel & Comini, ). This political reaction explained the Argentine preference for bilateral agreements and the paradoxical lack of real interest in the CDS, despite its hosting the Center of Strategic Defense Studies (CEED) in Buenos Aires.…”

“…In this sense, important conceptual aspects must be considered. The first is that the member states defined the organization in terms of “defense.” The second is composed of the terms “consultation,” “cooperation,” and “coordination.” It suggests that, although the Venezuelan thesis on the construction of a mechanism oriented openly to “collective defense,” meaning a military alliance, did not triumph (Comini, ; Frenkel & Comini, ; Sánchez Cabarcas, ; Vitelli, ), important conceptual elements of collective defense and security remained in the founding statute.…”

Mechanisms of defense policy diffusion in South America: evidence from the South American Defense Council

“…This paper, therefore, aims to advance the understanding of such lessons. Most of the existing literature frames the SADC from a security or foreign policy point of view (Fuccille and Rezende 2013;Vaz et al 2017;Mijares 2018;2020;Frenkel and Comini 2017;Vitelli 2017). Here, I offer a new perspective by approaching UNASUR/SADC as an international organization (IO) and defense policies as a type of public policy.…”

The Impossibility of a Defence Policy in the Americas? Comparing Hemispheric and South American Security Concepts and Military Roles

“…However, scholars have argued that the CDS was not conceived as a direct threat or competitor to the OAS system, in part because Brazil (the main proponent of the CDS) had no interest in confronting the USA only to foster regional peace and stability as means of attaining a more relevant goal, namely its regional leadership (Soares 2011;Spektor 2010). Together with other factors -such as Argentina's incompatibility with the Venezuelan agenda of collective defence (Frenkel and Comini 2017), and the lack of consensus among countries related to their relations with the USA (Vitelli 2016b), the CDS did not explicitly antagonise hemispheric security institutions.…”