Estudios Internacionales

Resumen: La sociedad regional sudamericana se ha deteriorado en la última década. Frente al malestar social y político, los gobiernos han decidido responder a través de la militarización. Al mismo tiempo, las relaciones vecinales se han tensionado debido a diferencias ideológicas. La literatura ha logrado capturar y explicar los motivos del malestar a nivel doméstico sin ahondar en cómo afecta la forma en la que los vecinos se relacionan entre sí. En este trabajo busco entender cómo las dinámicas políticas y sociales internas están afectando las relaciones interestatales en la región. Postulo que la militarización doméstica y la distancia ideológica entre presidentes son un impedimento para avanzar en la cooperación en materia de defensa. Este trabajo busca responder las siguientes preguntas: ¿cómo la militarización doméstica y la distancia ideológica entre presidentes afectan la cooperación? ¿Cuáles son los niveles de cooperación? ¿Bajo qué condiciones se puede deteriorar una relación vecinal? Para responderlas, analizo las relaciones diádicas en materia de defensa y adopto un método mixto que combina el análisis estadístico descriptivo, la técnica QCA y el estudio de caso para identificar las combinaciones causales que llevan a que los estados dejen de cooperar. El análisis estadístico permite describir el estado de situación en la región, mientras el QCA revela que una alta militarización doméstica y una amplia distancia ideológica lleva a que los países dejen de cooperar. El análisis del caso “most-likely” de Brasil y Venezuela permite entender cómo la militarización doméstica se percibe de manera negativa cuando la brecha ideológica se amplía. La conclusión de este trabajo es que un estado percibirá la militarización de otro estado como una amenaza a su seguridad cuando la distancia ideológica entre ellos es amplia, llevando así al deterioro de la cooperación.Abstract: The South American regional society has deteriorated over the last decade. Faced with social and political unrest, governments have decided to resort to military action. At the same time, relationships between neighbors have become strained due to ideological differences. The literature has managed to capture and explain the reasons for unrest at the domestic level, without diving into how it affects the way neighbors relate to each other. In this paper, I aim to understand how political and social dynamics are influencing interstate relations in the region. I posit that domestic militarization and ideological distance between presidents are an impediment to advancing defense cooperation. The purpose of this paper is to answer the following questions: how does domestic militarization and ideological distance between presidents affect cooperation? What are the levels of cooperation? Under what conditions can relationships between neighbors deteriorate? To find the answers, I analyze dyadic defense relations and adopt a mixed method combining descriptive statistical analysis, a QCA technique and case study so as to identify causal combinations that lead states to stop cooperating. The statistical analysis allows describing the state of affairs in the region, while the QCA reveals that high domestic militarization and wide ideological distance lead countries to stop cooperating. The analysis of the “most-likely” case of the Brazil - Venezuela dyad enables me to understand how domestic militarization is perceived negatively when ideological distance between presidents widens. The conclusion of this paper is that a state will perceive the militarization of another state as a threat to its security as long as the ideological distance is wide, and this will lead to the deterioration of cooperation.

Abstract: El objetivo principal de este trabajo es analizar el fenómeno de la formación y éxito de nuevos partidos en el período de redemocratización y retorno del multipartidismo brasileño (1979-2018). Aunque el fenómeno es recurrente en Brasil, pocos estudios han abordado el tema de forma más directa en este país. ¿Cuáles son los determinantes de la formación continua de nuevos partidos? Nuestra respuesta apunta a estrategias partidarias combinadas con incentivos contenidos por reglas electorales fluctuantes. Utilizamos metodologías anteriores y conceptualizamos los partidos nuevos como aquellos que son nuevos desde el punto de vista organizativo (obtienen un nuevo registro) y obtienen al menos un escaño en la Cámara de Diputados. Dividimos a los partidos en función de si fueron fundados como partidos de contestación o de coaptación para evaluar el diferente impacto de las variables institucionales y económicas sobre ellos. Nuestros resultados indican que a los partidos totalmente "fuera del sistema" (los de contestación) les resulta más difícil llegar a ser competitivos, lo que demuestra que el fenómeno de la aparición de nuevas siglas está más vinculado a una reorganización estratégica de las élites que a una demanda de los votantes.Resumen: The main objective of this paper is to analyze the phenomenon of the formation and success of new parties in the period of redemocratization and the return of the Brazilian multiparty system (1979-2018). Although the phenomenon is recurrent in Brazil, few studies have looked more directly at the subject in Brazil. What are the determinants of the continuous formation of new parties? Our answer points to party strategies combined with incentives contained by fluctuating electoral rules. We used previous methodologies and conceptualized new parties as those that are organizationally new (gain a new registration) and win at least one seat in the Chamber of Deputies. We divided the parties by whether they were founded as contestation or coaptation parties in order to assess the different impact of institutional and economic variables on them. Our findings indicate that parties totally "outside the system" (those of contestation) find it more difficult to become competitive, demonstrating that the phenomenon of the emergence of new acronyms is linked more to a strategic reorganization of the elites than to a demand from voters.

Resumo: Este artigo avalia o cumprimento de promessas eleitorais sobre política comercial pelos presidentes dos EUA no período de 1989 a 2021 com o intuito de identificar padrões de continuidade e de mudança na agenda dos partidos e do país. A identificação de promessas foi feita a partir da análise dos manifestos de campanha dos partidos dos presidentes eleitos no período. O critério estabelecido para avaliar o cumprimento da promessa foi o da implementação da ação. Verifica-se graus de cumprimento similares entre Democratas e Republicanos, cujas agendas (i) aproximam-se no tocante aos acordos de livre-comércio e às medidas protecionistas e (ii) afastam-se em relação à aderência aos direitos trabalhistas e aos compromissos de proteção ambiental nestes acordos. Original, contribui com o debate sobre a qualidade da representação democrática ao aferir o grau de responsividade dos partidos políticos em uma política de especial interesse para os trabalhadores americanos. Ao mesmo tempo, mostra como a continuidade e convergência bipartidária foram fundamentais para orientar a política comercial dos EUA.Abstract: This article evaluates the fulfillment of electoral pledges on trade policy by US presidents in the period from 1989 to 2021 with the aim of identifying patterns of continuity and change in the agenda of the parties and the country. The identification of promises was made based on the analysis of the campaign manifestos of the parties of the presidents elected in the period. The criterion established to evaluate the fulfillment of the pledges was the implementation of an action. There are similar degrees of compliance between Democrats and Republicans, whose agendas (i) are similar in terms of free trade agreements and protectionist measures and (ii) diverge in relation to the adherence of labor rights and environmental protection commitments in these agreements. Original, it contributes to the debate on the quality of democratic representation by measuring the degree of responsiveness of political parties in a policy of special interest to American workers. At the same time, it shows how bipartisan continuity and convergence were fundamental in guiding US trade policy.

Resumen: El Diálogo Político Interregional para la Seguridad y Defensa entre la Unión Europea y América del Sur tiene una modalidad renovada, tras el quiebre por la cuestión venezolana entre ambos grupos de interlocutores y los cambios políticos internos del bloque sudamericano. El actual diálogo, gestionado desde un lado por el Servicio Exterior de la Unión Europea, como órgano diplomático, y los interlocutores de diversos países establece una prospectiva sobre los desafíos mundiales desde Europa que no coincide con las preocupaciones sudamericanas, aunque haya consenso respecto de valores como la democracia, hay una fuerte diferencia respecto del significado de su realización concreta. Ello evidencia las dificultades de un diálogo interregional que sobre consensos valóricos genéricos ha ido ampliando su agenda de temas y que impacta en la valoración de las amenazas, debilidades y oportunidades en cada contraparte.Abstract: The Interregional Political Dialogue for Security and Defense between the European Union and South America has a renewed modality, after the break between the two groups of interlocutors due to the Venezuelan issue and the internal political changes in the South American bloc. The current dialogue, managed from one side by the Foreign Service of the European Union, as a diplomatic body, and the interlocutors of various countries, establishes a prospective on global challenges from Europe that does not coincide with South American concerns, although there is consensus on values such as democracy, there is a strong difference regarding the meaning of its concrete realization. This is evidence of the difficulties of an interregional dialogue that has been expanding its agenda of issues based on generic consensus on values and that has an impact on the assessment of threats, weaknesses and opportunities in each of the counterparts.

Resumen: El presente artículo aborda la comunicación digital, emitida por 10 presidentes sudamericanos, en el contexto de salida de la pandemia del Covid-19 (segundo semestre 2021). En ello, se analiza el liderazgo comunicacional presidencial en el ámbito de las relaciones internacionales y, particularmente, respecto de la atención que en sus comunicaciones brindan a temáticas del plano internacional, así como la dirección que dicha atención asume.La estrategia metodológica puesta en práctica adapta mecanismos utilizados en estudios similares, combinando elementos del big data, con aquellos propios del análisis de contenido. En total se analizaron 11.616 datos/mensajes.Los hallazgos obtenidos explicitan que la comunicación digital presidencial en Sudamérica presta poca atención al ámbito internacional y, en los escasos espacios que se le reserva a esta temática, dicha comunicación se direcciona en virtud de temáticas de orden global, por sobre las bilaterales o multilaterales. Ello, en parcial contraste con nuestra hipótesis, que postula que la comunicación digital presidencial en Sudamérica presta sí poca atención al ámbito internacional, pero que en los escasos espacios que se le reserva a esta temática, dicha comunicación se direcciona en virtud de rivalidades bilaterales.Abstract: Presidential leadership in South America plays a crucial role in the understanding of political behavior in both international relations and the formulation and implementation of foreign policies in each country. Beyond the inherent logics that underpin the presidential systems in Latin America, this leadership has been assuming significant communicational characteristics. These are primarily characterized by deployment in the digital environment that -with even greater autonomy- the region's presidents put into practice; during the COVID-19 pandemic, this leadership became even more vertiginous. In this article we address the communication that South American presidents put into practice in the digital political territory during the second half of 2021. This, in order to understand three analytical dimensions: a) presence and technical strategies put into practice; b) levels of thematic attention placed at the international level; and c) direction that such attention assumes, either bilaterally, multilaterally or globally. It is these three levels that order the questions that guide this research and the analysis of the 11,616 data that compose it. The adopted methodological approach combines content analysis and big data components, using methods from previous investigations. The resulting hypothesis follows the following logic: South American presidential digital communication pays little attention to the international sphere, and in the few spaces reserved to this topic, said communication is addressed either because of global aspects along the same lines or because of "rivalries" from which domestic benefits can be derived. There won't be many regional or multinational guidelines at that point. The political and economic environment in which this study is conducted is also crucial to take into account, as the COVID-19 epidemic and its repercussions accounted for a significant portion of the presidential initiatives examined.