The Pacific Alliance: Integration or Dependency?

Juan Manuel Karg

08/01/2014

Opinión

^-A ⁺A

The political chessboard of Latin America has been shaken up in recent years by the appearance of the Pacific Alliance, a regional bloc made up of Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Chile. This is no accident: these are four countries which have Free Trade Agreements with the United States, and whose recent governments have been for the most part conservative: Peña Nieto in Mexico, Santos in Colombia, Humala in Peru and Piñera in Chile. What are their organizing principles? What kind of integration are these countries seeking?

Through the "Lima Declaration", the first document emerging from the bloc, the member countries point out the need to "advance progressively towards the objective of achieving free circulation of goods, services, capital and persons." This notion of integration led the bloc to form the Business Council of the Pacific Alliance (CEAP) among whose functions are to bring to the respective governments "recommendations and suggestions for the better realization of the process of integration and economic and commercial cooperation among our countries."

What is the vision behind this? It is the notion that integration among these countries should only be commercial, economic and financial, without any implications of union in the political, social or cultural realm. This is, without doubt, a fallacy, since behind any action -- or lack of action -- in the economic sphere, there is politics. Even in the most orthodox neo-liberalism of the 1990s there was a well-defined policy: the "reform" of the State in search of its shrinking, with the consequent unravelling of the productive apparatus, among other things.

Now then, related to this, the creation of the Pacific Alliance has had rapid repercussions in multilateral credit bodies. One of their main exponents, the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), provided "technical assistance to governments and business representatives" as is noted in its Web page. It is worth noting that the US holds over 30% of the stock actions in the IADB, being its founder and guaranteeing its functioning through its headquarters in Washington. The country governed by Barack Obama is in addition an observer member of the Pacific Alliance, closing the circle of common interests among them.

Criticisms of the form of integration proposed by the Pacific Alliance

Numerous political and intellectual figures have manifested critiques of the establishment of the Pacific Alliance, with similar perspectives: the denunciation of an attempt to "paralyze" regional integration – along with its subordination to Washington -- as one of the principal motives to oppose this emerging bloc.

For Bolivian vice-president Alvaro García Linera, this alliance of countries "appears to have been established to block a brotherly vision of the continent" since it has come about "strongly tied to the interests of the United States" as he declared last December in Spain. Following this, he explained his vision on integration, saying that "we are a continent, we are brothers in history. We need one another. The best results for our countries will come if we join together in a broad and fully shared horizon."

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa was more emphatic: he pointed out the existence of a "reconstitution" of the right-wing in the continent, expressed in some way by these countries, whose proposal is not “to create a great society with citizens of the region; but to create a great market, to create consumers."

The integrationist dilemma: subordination or autonomy?

The next thirty days in Latin America and the Caribbean will be important with respect to regional integration: in Havana, Cuba, there will be a meeting of the Second Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States -- CELAC -- on the 28th and 29th of January. And then on January31st, the 46th Presidential Summit of Mercosur will take place in Caracas, Venezuela. To sustain their initiative and show their dynamism, the Presidents of the Pacific Alliance plan a meeting in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, on February 10th. Clearly, behind the cold schedule of diplomatic agendas, there is a dispute over the relationships that should exist among the countries of our continent.

In closing, certain questions must be posed regarding the near future of our continent. Is it possible that a bloc that, in theory, seeks the integration of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, acts to subordinate itself to the interests of multilateral financial institutions such as the IADB? What are the ideological motivations of these countries in abstaining from incorporating the already existing mechanisms of economic, political and social integration, such as CELAC, Unasur, Mercosur or ALBA? How far-reaching will prove this attempt to paralyze -- and parallel -- the tools of autonomous integration that have been established, during recent decades, by our peoples or governments?

This coming year of 2014 may possibly provide some answers to these questions, in the light of the upcoming presidential summits, whose agreements can give us more elements towards an understanding of the integration of our continent in the coming years.

(Translated for Alai by Jordan Bishop)

- Juan Manuel Karg has a degree in Political Science from the UBA (Argentina), and is a researcher with the Centro Cultural de Cooperación.

https://www.alainet.org/de/node/82176?language=es