World Politics
Project Outline: The goal of the project is to discuss national security in the scope of international politics.
My reflections on the following:
Christian Soe, ed. Comparative Politics 98/99. Sixteenth Edition. Annual Editions (Guilford, Connecticut: The Dushkin Publishing Group, 1998).
"Comparative Politics studies how governments run, the roles citizens can play in different countries, and the different ways in which politics are conducted worldwide."
Nuclear Weapons: Setting Examples and Restraints
�Nothing in politics animates people as much as perceived inequity and unfairness� (Dushkin 58). . This seems to be the main danger of nonproliferation to such countries as India and Pakistan, who have been developing nuclear weapons for decades despite the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970. Although, on the whole, the NPT has been surprisingly successful, next to the predicted 20 or 30 states expected to build nuclear weapons and explosive programs and only three cause active alarm--India, Israel, and Pakistan. Yet, as NPT gave these countries a sense of security, now India and Pakistan have disrupted this norm by testing nuclear weapons and widening the eyes of inequity and unfairness. But it was not their testing that brought these concerns so much as it as the five majors powers that have declared nuclear weapons and their preset double standard that allows them to retain nuclear weapons indefinitely while denying them to everyone else.
These major powers worry about the regional arms race for there are obviously many dangers where nuclear weapons are deployed. The lack of such elaborate systems as the nuclear doctrine and command and control systems of the Cold War contributes to this alarm. India and Pakistan �may not have the satellites needed to monitor deployment of ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, or the sophisticated early warning systems to detect launches in real time or to determine whether aircraft entering airspace are carrying nuclear weapons� (59). So, without concrete, exact information, government leaders might feel pressured to make threats based on assumptions and paranoia. However, threats are not the only instigators that cause states to play active roles in nuclear proliferation. Nuclear weapons are treated like the latest toy in the international clubhouse. Without it, leading scientists and politicians are left without �grandeur, prestige, and independence�(60). As if it is a badge, a Bharatya Janata Party spokesman said in 1993 that �An Indian will talk straight and walk straight when we have the bomb�(60). And as organizations often do, nuclear testing obscures internal dangers of a struggling country by representing to its members a greater status.
One status that seems undeserved on second look is that of the benefit of a democracy concerning nonproliferation. When nonproliferation includes �unproliferation� (rollback, reductions, or controls over nuclear-weapons capabilities), possession is kept either hush-hush or not open to debate in democracies. Since these are democratic countries, politicians who try to eliminate nuclear weapons are fought with symbols, emotions, language, and institutional interests in mass-media politics. So, leaders abandon disarmament in order to become popular with voters.
Even in the NPT, top officials view negotiations made �in good faith� that would encourage �nuclear disarmament� as an inconvenience. They do not believe their nuclear weapons have encouraged other states; whereas, the value they place on these weapons has undoubtedly influenced other states. But instead of defending their �securities�, the United States and other nuclear weapons states should �declare their aim to create political and security conditions that allow for the elimination of nuclear weapons and of all weapons of mass destruction�(62). United States should gain international support by becoming an example and sacrifice their security to lower inequity and unfairness.
As stated in Article 13, there are a few restraints of nuclear weapons and all weapons of mass destruction�these include gas and microbes. Only a few countries have actually crossed the threshold to build weapons of mass destruction, and there is much general abhorrence of their use. The destruction of past nuclear bombings has made it clear that they are to be used as a deterrent if anything at all. Many countries believe chemical weapons to be too cruel for use also. Another restraint depends on the NPT, one of the most successful arms-control regimes on record. Yet there are still ways to evade its �obligations and checks�(71). With this fault corrected, countries must unquestionably accept it and only a few have done so.
There are other groups that provide checks toward proliferation. The Zanger Committee is a combination of 33 nuclear exporting countries that provides a list to the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), the NPA�s watchdog. Any suspicious items are safeguarded. The most recent efforts to control nuclear proliferation include the Comprehensive Test-Ban treaty and a new treaty to cut off the production of fissile material for bomb making. However, neither of these disrupts countries that actually have nuclear weapons, but they might help in the control of producing more sophisticated designs.
The curb of chemical use is a more intense task. The production of these weapons is much more inconspicuous. The chemical weapons convention (CWC) has had success in locating stockpiles and with states that declared and agreed to consequently destroy theirs. �America and Russia, with the worlds biggest stockpiles of chemical weapons (33,000 tonnes and 48,000 tonnes of them respectively), are destroying theirs, although Russia, which has only started, is desperately short of funds for the job�(72). But America has blocked the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) from inspecting its industrial information. This could cause other countries to become squeamish about commercial secrets. It seems that once again America sets up an atmosphere of perceived inequity and unfairness. The spread of paranoia mirrors the spread of weapons technologies and the only reassurance is the credibility of the states that pass security management.
Both articles speak of the many states that are eager to pass security management for other states but fail to balance their own technologies in accordance to international, �hoped-for� boundaries. Each state wants to feel secure in its assessment; Article 10 shows United States as particularly trying to evade rules and regulations. U.S. sets an example as a larger nuclear power by not disciplining nuclear testing. In Article 13, America dodges chemical warfare codes that suggest that the CWC check information and archives of research.
Other similarities between Article 10 and Article 13 include the number of combined efforts that lead to nonproliferation. Many organizations are formed to secure the interests of as many countries as possible. Yet in each case, there are countries that hesitate toward what seems to be a common goal. However, the very countries that make the rules, break them.
This hypocrisy can be understood through issues that have been discussed in class. First, power politics play a big part. States want to ensure their safety, which means getting other countries to promise to �behave�. By using persuasion, rewards, non-violent punishment, and finally violence, states manipulate power and form tangles in politics. One complication is the view that states have of other states. As territorial actors, they assume that other countries will not know have the �know how� like they would. Also, with this assumed inferiority, states add capability of destruction to their paranoia. Consequently, states are always on the defense. This then begins the quest for weapons, which in turn lead to protection, then back to power politics. Articles 10 and 13 consider and review the �progress� of states in this continuation.
Latin America: Integration, Trade Policies and Economic Slowdown
The Latin American-Caribbean region is a diverse region. Approximately two-and-one-half-times larger than the United States, it contains 18 Spanish American states and 13 Caribbean countries. Together with Cuba and Panama, these 33 countries exhibit great diversity in terms of culture, size, and international relations. However, Latin American self-perceptions on the whole help these people band together and create the pursuit of common purposes through organizations. Establishments such as the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA), which "represents a broadly cross regional association"; the Latin American Parliament, a "focal point for the discussion of region wide issues"; and the Special Latin American Coordinating Committee (CECLA), an "informal regional caucusing group"(Dushkin 117). Yet, despite these efforts, it is still necessary to view the sub-regions individually to get a better understanding of the comparisons between state and regional relationships among themselves and to the world.
For instance, Mexico has strong bilateral relations with the United States. Because both Mexico and the United States re-orientated their policies toward each other, United States is Mexico's major trading partner, and Mexico is the United States' third largest. However, due to complications with Mexico's economic, political, and social crises, these strong agreements might be replaced with agreements of European Union free trade.
Another region with definitive international relations is the Circum-Caribbean; including the islands of the Caribbean Sea and those nearby in the Atlantic Ocean, the Central American isthmus, and the north coast of South America. The United States has intervened in Grenada, Panama and Haiti during the twentieth century; that is, until Soviet Union took interest in Cuba. Then the region became and area of Cold War, disintegrating an attempt to join together the isthmian states. Later, these states joined the "Rio Group"; the most important and dynamic Latin American and Caribbean international organization (118).
With the exception of Cuba, which lost ties to Soviet powers and became isolated by internal economic and social problems in the post Cold War, the Central American peace process brought back integration and free form trade agreements with the United States. 12 of the 18 Commonwealth Caribbean countries (sub-regions of the Circum-Caribbean) are independent and the others have a strong "association" with Great Britain. A number of these countries established the Caribbean free Trade Association (CARIFTA) and enjoy trade preferences with the European community. Together with the Association of Caribbean States (ACS) which establishes trade within the Caribbean, ACS and CARIFTA help to define major international relations in the Commonwealth Caribbean countries.
The third important sub-region includes South America beyond the Caribbean (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, and sometimes Ecuador). Some characteristics of International relations that make this region different form the northern half of Latin America. One, the south American states have had many external relationships; but no one great power has dominated and persuaded them. Second, their integration has progressed from militarism to "partial democracies" (118). Initial attempts to build a Lain American wide market failed. Later attempts succeeded with the Common market of the South organized with LAIA (MERCOSUR), which signed an agreement with the European Union for free trade.
If these agreements work, the free trade area would constitute the largest in the world. So, despite their diverse cultures and immense size, current international relations in Latin America and the Caribbean regions are expanding to other states and within itself in order to secure such things as trade agreements, integration, and international organizations. So even though separate and distinct, these international relations result in close associations between all regions of Latin America.
Income drop, poverty rate increase, spending cuts, tax rises, inflation; all of these things are necessary to defend the economic slowdown described in Brazil in Article 23. These economic setbacks spread throughout Latin America as well, where reforms against military regimes had been going well. Having just discovered free markets and democracy, some people blame the falling economy on vulnerabilities left by the reformations and propose exchange controls. Others suggest redistributing wealth. Hugo Chavez a front runner in presidential elections, promises �to clean up politics�(118). But his commitment to democracy is unclear. Plus, Authoritarian threats challenge reform as do some voters and legislators. However, in actuality, much of the discontent they harbor is �not from reform, but its absence.� Where both political and economic stability has been achieved �voters have shown they value it�(118). As a result, many left wing candidates change their position on the reform issue and they want to complement it with political reforms. Spurred in part by voters, changes that welcome reform strengthen growth.
Furthermore, considering the consequences of a financial scare inspires governments to think about structural reform. Without it, tightening money and fiscal policy can lead to disastrous results, as in Brazil. In attempt to improve reform, this struggling country encouraged plans to make the labor markets more flexible. Plus Latin America places great importance on being �taught from experience� and from the mistakes they make. �The biggest capital we have in the region now is the stock of our past mistakes, which protect us from repeating them,� says Enrique Iglesias, chairman of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)(119). Tow more ways to protect Latin America from short-lived capital flows are to tighten macroeconomic policies and solidify banking systems. For example, having done both of these things, Argentina�s banks have risen from bank failures and a run on deposits in 1995.
But markets are affected strongly when emerging countries like Brazil and Argentina try such modest adjustments as exchange rate policy. Obviously, Latin Americans don�t welcome inflection or unemployment, so it is important to follow these states� development. Development that is influenced by many things, including relations to other states.
In connection to the agreements of trade and integration discussed in Article 20, Article 23 shows the effects on the economy of Latin American when integration is questioned and when trade policies must be changed to do things like generate export growth. Because a region's actions are so closely associated with those of another, as shown in Article 20, it is logical to see that regions fear disruptive adjustments like foreign borrowing and devaluation. These issues cause widespread financial scares among closely associated regions when places such as Brazil and Argentina have to adjust policies to defend their currency.
Other similarities between the picture of Latin America described in Article 20 and the more specific found in 23 include the comparisons of the new era. Overall, the era brings Cold War results and new framework agreements for free trade which always seems to be changing or unfinished. Article 20 provides many instances wherein countries establish and re-establish agreements international agreements. Likewise, with countries discussed in more detail Article 23, the era brings �an unfinished agenda� for such(118). This agenda includes rethinking economic policies. Therefore, it is shown in both that Latin America�s widespread poverty, inequity, and discontent with economic slowdown is still a great learning process.
In contrast, it seems the articles have different attitudes about the future. Article 20 describes Latin American hopes of becoming the largest free trade area in the world. It declares optimistic opinions of their strong relations despite their diversity. Mexico, the South American states, the isthmian states, and the Circum-Caribbean area, all appear to have promising futures with trade agreements and integration. However, Article 23 has a more dubious attitude toward stability. It cites financial, internal and economic problems that run the risk of spreading throughout Latin America. Latin Americans suffer from unemployment, taxes, and inflation. Despite their efforts to reform though free trade, research democracies, and resolve to learn from experiences, Latin America continues to "thrive against frustrations" (118). The optimism of Article 20 is clearly countered by these detailed, seemingly pessimistic views.
The diplomacy, or communication of intentions, goals, and policy preferences, in Latin America can be better explained by examining trade policies discussed in class. Over the years Latin America has formed such organizations as LAIA, ECLA, CARIFTA, and ACS to establish trade policies and protect economies activity. They help determine tariff policies that could place a tax upon goods made in other countries. This in turn, brings in the much needed capital in countries like Brazil. When duties are placed on foreign goods, this tariff re-circulates to banks and then to people. Another reason places like Brazil would tax foreign goods is so that the goods their country produces are bought. Latin American organizations can also place tariffs to protect strategic industries as protective measures. Each state must make the choice of free trade versus protectionism.
