DOCSLIB.ORG

7 NATO's Role in the Post-Modern European Security Environment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
7 NATO's Role in the Post-Modern European Security Environment Baltic Security & Defence Review Volume 8, 2006 NATO’s Role in the Post-Modern European Security Environment, Cooperative Security and the Experience of the Baltic Sea Region ∗ By Holger Mölder Introduction In 1991-1992, the European security environment experienced an institutional change. The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact Organization abandoned a direct conventional threat against the Western society. As the Cold War ended, there was no need for traditional military alliance anymore. NATO, with the new Strategic Concept approved in the Rome Summit, entered into the new era often called the post-modern society. The creation of North Atlantic Cooperation Council, NATO’s first cooperative security arrangement, was the beginning of NATO’s new cooperation-oriented security strategy, known as partnership. NATO as a pluralistic security community is presumably one of the most effective ways to produce security, stability and democracy in the new post-modern security environment. The Maastricht Treaty started the process of the European Union, another potential security community. This paper analyses the structure of post-modern European security environment and the perspectives of the Baltic Sea region for the adaptation in this environment. Karl Deutsch introduced the idea of Western security communities in the 1950s, in the middle of the Cold War. Particularly today, there exist two parallel communities (two different institutions) – the European Union and NATO - that base on similar liberal democratic values but different security cultures. This work focuses on NATO as a specific form of security community and its cooperative security initiatives. NATO has played an outstanding role, achieving institutional control over the political situation that emerged in Europe after the end of the Cold War. The active involvement of Central and Eastern European countries in cooperative security arrangements with NATO has played an important role in the stabilisation of political climate and the promotion of democracy in state building in partner countries. Partnership initiatives deal not only with purely military issues but, for ∗ Holger Mölder is a PhD student at the University of Tartu and Head of the Analysis Section at the Defence Planning Department of the Estonian Ministry of Defence (MoD). This article reflects the author’s personal opinions and not necessarily those of the MoD. 7 NATO, EUROPEAN SECURITY AND THE BALTIC SEA REGION Volume 8, 2006 instance, are actively involved in security and defence reforms in Partner countries. The Baltic Sea region hardly pretends to be a separate security community, but it has significantly contributed to both existing Western security communities. As a security complex, the Baltic Sea region has its advantages and challenges, but in sum, it might be a perfect example how security cooperation between countries with different institutional affiliation can develop peace and stability. 1. Security communities Universal peace seems to be the most desirable international regime 1, and for that reason states at least try to organize systems that could build up zones of peace and stability (e.g., security communities and cooperative security arrangements) in order to establish such international regimes. In general, liberal democratic security communities follow the idea of Immanuel Kant – “if a powerful and enlightened people should form a republic … this would serve as a centre of federal union for other states in accordance with the idea of nations. Gradually, through different unions of this kind, the federation would extend further and further”. 2 A unified global community seems to be unachievable, at least in the current stage of human development. However, the concept of security communities may perfectly fit into the post-modern security environment. “A world of mature, overlapping security communities may also provide perpetual peace between states.” 3 A security community where the use of war against other community members is avoided is one tiny step towards universal peace. The post-modern international system evoked two security communities in Europe, based on liberal democratic values – NATO and the European Union. “The first could be due to the peculiarities of the case, where in Europe the pre-eminent security organization has been NATO, which was there from the beginning, already before the security community and probably part of the reasons for its formation. The second important organization, the EU, has been the main format for the continued non-war community and probably its cultivation of the real security community features in terms of identity and the non-imaginability of war.” 4 These arrangements may be accompanied by collective security arrangements like United Nations Organization (UNO) and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). 8 Baltic Security & Defence Review Volume 8, 2006 Karl Deutsch, following Immanuel Kant’s ideas on peaceful change towards unions where disputes are resolved peacefully, has “distinguished between amalgamated and pluralistic security communities: while both have dependable expectations of peaceful change, the former exists when states formally unify, the latter when states retain their sovereignty.” 5 Pluralistic security communities came into existence in Western-European liberal security communities such as the EU or NATO. Even there may be discussions that the European Union gradually moves towards the amalgamated security community. NATO contrariwise clearly corresponds to the definition of the pluralistic security. Present-day security communities are theoretically and empirically pluralistic security communities. Institution building does not necessarily mean unification and losing of national identity. Even amalgamated security community may exist without federative institutional arrangement. Deutsch noted ten characteristics for describing what he called an amalgamated security community: 1) similar values (political ideologies but also economic and religious values); 2) the formation of a common sense of us; 3) similar lifestyles; 4) group of leading actors (so to avoid that the logic of the balance of power prevail); 5) high economic growth; 6) positive expectations with respect to the advantages of integration; 7) intensive transactions and communication; 8) widening of the leading elites; 9) stable links among the elites of different states; 10) high geographical mobility of the population. 6 At the institutional level, Deutsch’s characteristics of amalgamated security communities, however, apply to the post-modern security order, which does not identify security communities solely in military terms. The European Union basically follows all the ten principles of the idea of Deutsch’s amalgamated security community. Moreover, under the circumstances of post-modern institution building, the difference between pluralistic and amalgamated security communities hardly exists. “Strangely, Deutsch is still caught in a dichotomy such as domestic/international, inside/outside and hierarchy/anarchy – here called amalgamated/pluralistic security communities. However, the rhetoric of union builders is often an intentional ambiguity between amalgamation and plurality.” 7 Similar values shared by nations are the most important elements in order to establish successful security communities. Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett defined communities through three characteristics: 9 NATO, EUROPEAN SECURITY AND THE BALTIC SEA REGION Volume 8, 2006 1. Members of community have shared identities, values and meanings; 2. Those in a community have many-sided and direct relations; interaction occurs not indirectly and in only specific and isolated domains, but rather in some form of face-to-face encounter. 3. Communities exhibit a reciprocity that expresses some degree of long-term interest and perhaps even altruism .8 Although the existence of security communities has often been connected with the required settlement of liberal democratic values, there may exist other security communities relying on values other than liberal democracy. The existence of security communities created by totalitarian regimes and based on non-democratic values and identities is also possible. For example, The Warsaw Pact Organization was undoubtedly a security community, though based on Marxist values and dominated by hegemonic Soviet Union. I would call such security communities hegemonic security communities. Hegemonic security communities can also produce stability, and a conflict situation may arise when one member of the community tries to change its identity in a way that is not acceptable for the hegemon (like Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, etc.). War within any kind of security community is impossible. Hegemonic security communities are built up on the forces used by the hegemon in order to hold the community together. 1.1 What characterises pluralistic security communities? Security communities are institutionalised formations of countries, which share common values, unified norms and similar identity and exclude the use of force in conflict resolution within the community. Pluralistic security communities have been established on the basis of 1) shared liberal democratic values and common identity; 2) complex interdependence between community members; 3) principles of democratic peace; 4) partnership strategy and cooperative security arrangements; 5) collective defence and collective security mechanisms for a crisis situation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE EU, NATO and the European System of Liberal-Democratic Security Communities
    Research project funded by the NATO Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council Individual Research Fellowships – 2000-2002 Programme FINAL REPORT PEACE AND DEMOCRACY: THE REDISCOVERED LINK THE EU, NATO and the European System of Liberal-Democratic Security Communities Sonia Lucarelli Author’s addresses: Sonia Lucarelli, PhD Jean Monnet Fellow Forum on the Problems of Peace and War Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Via G.P.Orsini 44 European University Institute I-50126 Firenze - Italy Via dei Roccettini 9 tel. (+39)055.6800165 I -50016 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) - Italy Tel. (+39)055.4685.828; Fax (+39)055.4685.804 e-mail: [email protected] FINAL REPORT PEACE AND DEMOCRACY: THE REDISCOVERED LINK THE EU, NATO and the European System of Liberal-Democratic Security Communities Sonia Lucarelli ABSTRACT Since the beginning of the last decade, the major actors of the Western European security community have been putting increasing or new emphasis on the need to develop liberal democracy as a form of foreign and/or security policy in the post-bipolar era. Apparently rediscovering the theory of democratic peace of Kantian memory, all institutions of the so- called European security architecture, plus the US, have dedicated a substantial part of their redefined (external) role to democratisation. This (re)discovered emphasis has clearly been a response to post-bipolar security (lack of clearly defined) challenges but has had implications that have gone beyond the specific interests of each actor involved. The discourse and practice of democracy-export has in fact contributed to creating the conditions for the definition of a system of democratic security communities characterised by different degrees of maturity and tightness (Adler & Barnett 1998), but with a common sense of “us”: liberal democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Security Communities, As One of the Aforementioned Formulations
    REVISITING SECURITY COMMUNITIES AFTER THE COLD WAR : THE CONSTRUCTIVIST PERSPECTIVE Hasan Ulusoy* History shows that ‘security, whether defined narrowly or widely, is a scarce commodity’.1 Therefore, it is generally observed that in face of security threat perceptions, states feel the necessity to combine their efforts to strengthen their own security by acting together. This brings us to the concept of collective security, which has been widely debated in the literature of international relations, both in practice and in theory, during which scholars have attempted to provide several formulations to ensure collective security, in the context of international relations theory. This articles revolves around the concept of security communities, as one of the aforementioned formulations. It will focus on the concept in view of theoretical perspectives, in which the constructivist approach will be the main emphasis, with a view to assessing the viability of security communities at the global level 2 in the post-Cold War context. The study, which aspires to examine the theoretical and empirical viability of security communities at global level in view of constructivist approach, is in fact three-fold. * First Secretary, Embassy of the Republic of Turkey, Bern, Switzerland. Ulusoy is also a Phd candidate in the fields of international security. 1 J.C. Garnett, ‘Introduction: Conflict and Security in the new world order’, in M.J. Davis, ed., Security Issues in the Post-Cold War, (Edward Elgar, London, 1996), p.10. 2 Related studies generally argue for the existence of regional formations in different parts of the world that can be regarded as security communities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence of Human Security: a Constructivist View
    International Journal of Peace Studies, Volume 14, Number 2, Autumn/Winter 2009 THE EMERGENCE OF HUMAN SECURITY: A CONSTRUCTIVIST VIEW Yu-tai Tsai Abstract In response to the end of the Cold War and the increasing pace of globalization, the concept of human security has taken on greater importance in international relations. This article argues that while conventional approaches to security studies focus on security community or security culture, the constructivist perspective offers additional conceptual tools through its insight into the issues of human consciousness, national identity, and interest formation. Hence, various phenomena of importance to international society can be better understood by applying the insights of constructivism to the concept of human security. The main purpose of this article is to explore human security as elucidated by the constructivist perspective. In light of this analysis, specific issues will be examined, including the relationship between human security and constructivism, the interpretation of human security by constructivist scholars, and the implications of human security for constructivism. ―The state remains the fundamental purveyor of security. Yet it often fails to fulfill its security obligations….That is why attention must now shift from the security of the state to the security of the people—to human security. ‖ —Commission on Human Security, 2003 20 The Emergence of Human Security Introduction The end of the Cold War and the increasing pace of globalization have given rise to fundamental changes in many of the paradigms employed in the social sciences. Amongst the various new ideas which have emerged, ―human security‖ has become somewhat of a buzzword.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO As a Factor of Security Community Building
    NATO as a Factor of Security Community Building: Enlargement and Democratization in Central and Eastern Europe EAPC-NATO Individual Fellowship Final Report 1999-2001 BY CORNELIU BJOLA CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY International Relations and European Studies Program Email: [email protected] DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or the Central European University (CEU), Budapest. The author wishes to thank to the NATO Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and to the CEU International Relations Department for financial and academic support. List of Tables and Graphs Table 1: Level of political engagement with NATO……………………………………. 29 Table 2: Level of military engagement with NATO…………………………………….. 30 Table 3: Major political-military agreements between Hungary and Romania…………. 32 Table 4: Foreign and military policy orientations……………………………………….. 33 Table 5: Legal basis of the Hungarian and Romanian NSSP……………………………. 36 Table 6: Restructuring of the armed forces……………………………………………… 38 Table 7: Readiness status of the Romanian and Hungarian armed forces………………. 40 Table 8: General framework of democratic civilian control of the military…………….. 43 Graph 1: Major bilateral agreements……………………………………………………. 30 Graph 2: Official high-level meetings…………………………………………………... 31 Graph 3: Trade relations………………………………………………………………… 49 Graph 4: Satisfaction with democracy…………………………………………………... 50 Graph 5: Respect for human rights……………………………………………………… 50 Graph 6: Public support for extremist parties…………………………………………… 50 Graph 7: NATO centripetal influence…………………………………………………… 57 2 TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS INTRODUCTION 4 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 7 RESEARCH DESIGN 11 A) TESTING HYPOTHESES : 11 B) CONSTRUCTION OF VARIABLES , METHODOLOGY: 12 C) CASE STUDIES , DATA SOURCES : 13 I. BUILDING TRUST BETWEEN FORMER ENEMIES 15 SEARCHING FOR A NEW IDENTITY 15 EXPORTING STABILITY TO THE EAST 17 TAKING ON NEW RESPONSIBILITIES 21 II.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges Facing the ASEAN Political–Security Community1
    Preventing War, Building a Rules-based Order: Challenges Facing the ASEAN Political–Security Community1 Aileen Baviera Professor, Asian Center, University of the Philippines Editor-in-chief, Asian Politics and Policy ‘In substance, security is at the core of ASEAN’s existence; indeed, in today’s comprehensive concept of security, as well as in the original conception of ASEAN, regional economic cooperation and integration are seen as part of the endeavour to bolster regional security through economic development, even as security continues to be regarded as an essential condition for development.’ Rodolfo Severino, former ASEAN Secretary–General, 2004 Glass Half-Empty or Glass Half-Full The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) turns 50 in 2017. Both critics and supporters of ASEAN have much to say about the group’s achievements and shortcomings since its establishment in 1967. Perhaps more fairly, others will measure ASEAN’s record only from the time it achieved its current composition of 10 members, in 1999. Critics will say ASEAN has been measured and found wanting. There are too many conflicts within and amongst its members that remain unresolved. There is too much privileging of the principles of sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs, at the expense of effective cooperation. Organisationally, ASEAN is too process-oriented while inadequate in achieving timely results and impact; and consensus remains shallow even on certain critical issues that require solid agreement. The absence of a common foreign policy and differences in security priorities and threat perceptions continue to stand in the way of true integration, it might be said.
    [Show full text]
  • Theorizing Regionalism: Cooperation, Integration, and Governance by Tanja A
    Theorizing Regionalism: Cooperation, Integration, and Governance by Tanja A. Börzel Prepared for Tanja A. Börzel/Thomas Risse (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, in prep.) “[W]ith the exception of European institutions, regional institutions have occupied a small and insignificant part of the overall theoretical literature on international institutions” (Acharya and Johnston 2007a: 2). The end of the Cold War saw a surge in regionalism. While the number of preferential trading agreements (PTA) exploded (Mansfield and Pevehouse 2013), long-standing regional organizations, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), experienced the delegation of more political authority and policy competencies in the past two decades (Börzel 2013). These two trends of more and deeper regionalism, respectively, are often attributed to processes of diffusion or interdependent decision-making. Regional cooperation and integration spread across time and space once the constraints of geopolitics had ceased to exist (Risse in this volume). This chapter explores how mainstream theories of regional cooperation and integration account for the changes in the quantity and quality of regionalism.1 Unlike diffusion, these theories implicitly or explicitly conceptualize regionalism as driven by independent decision- making of regional actors responding to causal factors located within or outside the region. The chapter starts by arguing that the dominant theories of regional cooperation and integration share a bias towards taking states as the main drivers of regionalism and 1 Critical theories to regionalism, such as the World Oder Approach, are dealt with by the chapters on new regionalism (Söderbaum in this volume) and non-Western approaches (Acharya in this volume) Börzel Theories of Cooperation, Integration and Governance focusing on processes of formal institution-building at the regional level.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidentialism and Mercosur: a Hidden Cause for a Successful Experience*
    Published in Finn Laursen (ed): Comparative Regional Integration: Theoretical Perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003. Chapter 3 Presidentialism and Mercosur: A Hidden Cause for A Successful Experience* Andrés Malamud** ‘El Mercosur es una historia exitosa’ Adalberto Rodriguez Giavarini, Argentine Foreign Minister, October 2001 Introduction The consolidation of European unity since the signing of the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992, along with the contemporary mushrooming of integrating regions all around the world, illustrate a significant new phenomenon. This is the way most nation-states are choosing, at the turn of the century, to deal with new challenges that risk placing their previous positions in jeopardy. Some of the larger regional entities are the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the Common Market of the South (Mercosur or Mercosul). All of these initially – if not as maximum aspiration – aimed at becoming free trade zones, in order to increase both their intra-regional trade and investment flows and the competitive position of their member countries vis-à-vis the global markets. Notwithstanding these common goals, some of the newly created regions have attempted to go further, Mercosur being the most ambitious in this respect. * This chapter constitutes a part of an ongoing broader research. I owe much stimulus and advice to Philippe Schmitter and Stefano Bartolini. I would also like to thank Félix Peña and Marcelo Oviedo for their early comments on some of the ideas herein presented. ** Department of Social and Political Sciences, European University Institute, Florence. Email [email protected] 54 Comparative Regional Integration Mercosur was formally created in 1991, when previous agreements between Argentina and Brazil were expanded and Paraguay and Uruguay joined these countries in the venture.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening States and Building a Security Community in East Africa Mohamed J. Mwinyi Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the V
    Strengthening States and Building a Security Community in East Africa Mohamed J. Mwinyi Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In Political Science and International Studies Priya Dixit, Committee Chair Paul Avey Yannis Stivachtis February 2, 2017 Blacksburg Virginia Keywords: Security, International Relations, Political, Economy, East Africa, Participatory Budgeting, EACSOF Mohamed Mwinyi Strengthening States and Building a Security Community in East Africa ABSTRACT One monumental problem the East African Community faces today is implementation of its proposed bill known as the East African Community Security Protocol on peace and security. This bill was crafted upon the basis of existing scholarship which examines security and community either from the top-down/state-centric approaches (neorealism/neoliberalism/constructivism/etc.) or as vernacular security--bottom-up. Both of these approaches are inadequate in that they still a) prioritize the state/relate to the state/central authority, b) are Eurocentric (based on/dominated by European points of views), and c) do not adequately explain security collaborations in areas such as East Africa (EA). Therefore, this thesis develop a “responsive security community” approach which does not only ties top-down and ground-up approach, but it also advocates for development of strong states before the creation of a security community. This thesis argue that different states have their very different historical backgrounds and legacies. Hence, in order to have effective security community in EA there need be responsive, human security oriented states which embrace participation and inclusion in sub-national and national level.
    [Show full text]
  • ASEAN Political-Security Community: of International Studies, 2019
    Putra, Bama Andika, Darwis, & Burhanuddin. (2019). ASEAN Political-Security Journal Community: Challenges of establishing regional security in the Southeast Asia. of International Journal of International Studies, 12(1), 33-49. doi:10.14254/2071-8330.2019/12-1/2 Studies © Foundation ASEAN Political-Security Community: of International Studies, 2019 Challenges of establishing regional © CSR, 2019 Scientific Papers security in the Southeast Asia Bama Andika Putra Department of International Relations, Universitas Hasanuddin Indonesia [email protected] Darwis Department of International Relations, Universitas Hasanuddin Indonesia [email protected] Burhanuddin Department of International Relations, Universitas Hasanuddin Indonesia [email protected] Abstract. The paper determines the essence and the functionality of the ASEAN Received: October, 2018 Political-Security Community (APSC) by looking at a wide range of regional 1st Revision: studies, evaluating theoretical approaches in international relations, and January, 2019 examining case studies related on regional security in the Southeast Asia, since Accepted: February, 2019 the establishment of the APSC in 2015. Essential complex challenges faced include the rise of China, unresolved territorial conflicts and maritime disputes, DOI: rigid application of non-interference principles in the internal affairs of the local 10.14254/2071- states, and the failure of ASEAN in protecting human rights regionwide. Based 8330.2019/12-1/2 on the study cases that were analysed in this paper, the paper concludes that: (1) the essence of multilateralism is challenged by the complicated nature of interstate relationships and interactions of individual ASEAN member states; (2) development of security cooperation cannot be measured due to complexity of geopolitical and geoeconomic interests; and (3) boundaries in the ASEAN framework have very weak foundations.
    [Show full text]
  • Origins and Evolution of the North American Stable Peace
    Origins and Evolution of the North American Stable Peace Origins and Evolution of the North American Stable Peace David G. Haglund The Oxford Handbook of Peaceful Change in International Relations Edited by T.V. Paul, Deborah Welch Larson, Harold A. Trinkunas, Anders Wivel, and Ralf Emmers Subject: Political Science, International Relations Online Publication Date: Nov 2020 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190097356.013.36 Abstract and Keywords Interstate relations among the North American countries have been irenic for so long that the continent is often assumed to have little if anything to contribute to scholarly debates on peaceful change. In good measure, this can be attributed to the way in which discus­ sions of peaceful change often become intertwined with a different kind of inquiry among international relations scholars, one focused upon the origins and denotative characteris­ tics of “pluralistic security communities.” Given that it is generally (though not necessari­ ly accurately) considered that such security communities first arose in Western Europe, it is not difficult to understand why the North American regional-security story so regularly takes an analytical back seat to what is considered to be the far more interesting Euro­ pean one. This article challenges the idea that there is little to learn from the North American experience, inter alia by stressing three leading theoretical clusters within which can be situated the scholarly corpus of works attempting to assess the causes of peaceful change on the continent. Although the primary focus is on the Canada–US rela­ tionship, the article includes a brief discussion of where Mexico might be said to fit in the regional-security order.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4. U.S. Conceptions of Security: Cold War Inertia Confronts New Threats1
    1 Chapter 4. U.S. Conceptions of Security: Cold War Inertia Confronts New Threats1 Phil Williams Introduction Security is a rich and subtle term that is as powerful as it is elusive. Conveying great symbolism and emotional impact, security and secure are words that are as pervasive in international relations as they are in personal relationships and personal life. Not only is the term widely applicable to different kinds of situations, but it is also has several different uses that add to the difficulties in using it in a clear, consistent analytical way. As defined by Merriam-Webster, the term security has four meanings: • “the quality or state of being secure: as a: freedom from danger: b: freedom from fear or anxiety”. • “something given, deposited, or pledged to make certain the fulfilment of an obligation” • “an evidence of debt or of ownership (as a stock certificate or a bond)”. • a: something that secures b: (1) : measures taken to guard against espionage or sabotage, crime, attack or escape (2) : an organization or department whose task is security. It is clear from these various meanings that security can refer to: a set of aspirations to strive towards, a set of conditions that are favorable to its attainment, or something that exists but is being challenged or threatened. It has both objective and subjective dimensions that are sometimes congruent and sometimes dissonant. People or states can 2 believe that they have security, and might be wrong, ignoring threats or challenges until it is too late. In other cases, threats to security are exaggerated and there is over-insurance rather than under-preparation.
    [Show full text]
  • TURNING INWARD Ruling Coalitions and Mercosur’S Retrenchment
    19 TURNING INWARD Ruling Coalitions and Mercosur’s Retrenchment Joshua Malnight and Etel Solingen Mercosur (Mercado Comun del Sur, “Common Market of the South”) is the fourth-largest trad­ ing bloc (following the European Union [EU], North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA], and Association of Southeast Asian Nations [ASEAN]), and home to a BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) member. As it enters its twenty-second year, we consider what best explains Merco­ sur’s trajectory thus far, from promising start to recent stagnation. The common market project requires Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and recent member Venezuela to integrate their markets and policies more deeply than would be required of a simple free trade area (FTA). Yet Mercosur lacks the binding supranational institutions an economic union would require. The four founding members sought regional integration that, according to the founding treaty, would yield greater economic development and competitiveness. Moreover, the newly democratized founding members also sought integration to consolidate their emerging open-economy democ­ racies (Solingen 1998; Kaltenthaler and Mora 2002;0elsner 2003). Following the 1991 Treaty of Asuncion, it appeared that integration would indeed yield the desired benefits: the flow of goods among members increased dramatically from 1991 to 1999, and Mercosur’s organizational structure deepened and expanded, albeit in a limited way. Merco­ sur helped prevent a 1996 coup in Paraguay. A series of economic upheavals in its two prime engines, Brazil (1999) and Argentina (2000), revealed snakes in the integration garden and began stymieing the project. Intraregional trade (as a percentage of total trade) decreased and Mercosur’s survival was in doubt (Carranza 2003).
    [Show full text]