Title: Different Paths and Divergent Policies in the UN Security System: Brazil and Mexico in Comparative Perspective
Abstract: Abstract How can we explain foreign policy variation among UN member states? Brazil and Mexico are the most likely cases for international primacy in the UN system, given their territorial dimension, demographic tendencies, economic importance, geopolitical location and relative weight in Latin America. Yet, despite their structural similarities, their policies and behaviour in the UN system have varied, both in terms of engagement with the Security Council and commitment regarding peacekeeping. By comparing two of Latin America's most influential countries, this study identifies the underlying conditions and mechanisms that explain their differences in behaviour and policy in the UN. In particular, this article analyses and contrasts how geopolitics and civil–military relations in Brazil and Mexico affect their incentives to participate in international organizations and their overall international commitment to peace. Acknowledgements For suggestions on earlier drafts, I thank Raúl Benítez, Enrique Berruga, Adriana Crespo, Michael Doyle, Virginia Page Fortna, Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Sergio Galaz, Guadalpue González, Blanca Heredia, Matthew Kocher, David Mares, Antonio Ortiz Mena, Covadonga Meseguer, Susan Minushkin, Olga Pellicer, Chuck Parker, Michael Pugh, Ekaterini Papagianni, Mónica Serrano, Eugênio Vargas Garcia, Erik Voeten and the anonymous reviewers who provided constructive feedback. Research for this project was partially funded by the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Center for Inter-American Policy and Research Post-Doctoral Program at Tulane University. Notes See Edward D. Mansfield and Jon C. Pevehouse, ‘Democratization and International Organizations’, International Organization, Vol.60, No.4, 2006, pp. 137–67; Pevehouse, ‘With a Little Help from My Friends? Regional Organizations and the Consolidation of Democracy’, American Journal of Political Science, Vol.43, No.3, 2002, pp.611–26. Stephen M. Walt,The Origins of Alliances, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987. David Mares, ‘Civil-Military Relations, Democracy, and the Regional Neighborhood’, in Mares (ed.) Civil-Military Relations: Building Democracy and Regional Security in Latin America, Southern Asia, and Central Europe, Boulder, CO: Westview, 1998, pp.1–24. Miriam Fendius Elman, ‘The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism in its Own Backyard’, British Journal of Political Science, Vol.25, No.2, 1995, pp.171–217. According to the Global Policy Forum, in 2007 Mexico was the tenth largest financial contributor to the UN system, with US$45 million, accounting for 1.82 per cent of all the assessment; while Brazil was the fifteenth largest contributor, with US$18 million, accounting for 1.48 per cent of the UN budget (see www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/reg-budget/large07.htm). Athanasios Hristoulas and Monica Herz, ‘Brasil y México enfrentan a la seguridad regional e internacional después de la Guerra Fría’ [Brazil and Mexico Face Regional and International Security Challenges after the Cold War], in Antonio Ortiz Mena Lopez Negreto, Octavio Amorim Neto, and Rafael Fernández de Castro (eds.) Brasil y México: Encuentros y Desencuentros, [Brazil and Mexico: Encounters and Partitions] Mexico City: Instituto Matías Romero-SER, 2005, pp.259–320; Olga Pellicer, Voz de México en la Asamblea General de la ONU, 1946–94, [Mexico's Voice in the UN General Assembly, 1946–94] Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1994. Ricardo Ubiraci Sennes, ‘Intermediate Countries and the Multilateral Arenas: Brazil in the General Assembly and UN Security Council Between 1980–95’, in Andrew Hurrell et al., Paths to Power: Foreign Policy Strategies of Intermediate States, Working Paper 224, Washington, DC, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2000; Olga Pellicer, ‘México y las Naciones Unidas, 1980–1990: De la crisis del multilateralismo a los retos de las posguerra fría’ [‘Mexico and the United Nations, 1980–90: From the Crisis of Multilateralism to the Challenges of the Post-Cold War’], in César Sepúlveda (ed.) La Política Internacional de México en el decenio de los ochenta, [Mexico's International Policy in the Eighties] Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1994, pp.199–231. Claude Heller, ‘México y el Consejo de Seguridad’ [Mexico and the Security Council], in México en las Naciones Unidas [Mexico in the United Nations], Mexico: Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, 1996. Michael W. Reisman, ‘The Case of the Nonpermanent Vacancy’, The American Journal of International Law, Vol.74, No.4, 1980, pp.907–13. Mónica Serrano, Common Security in Latin America: the 1967 Treaty of Tlatelolco, London: Institute of Latin American Studies, 1992; Olga Pellicer, ‘Mexico – a Reluctant Middle Power?’, in New Perspectives in Global Change Briefing Papers, Berlin: Friedrich Elbert Stiftung, 2007. Mario Ojeda, Alcances y límites de la política exterior de México [Scope and Limits of Mexico's Foreign Policy], Mexico City: El Colegio de México,1976. Sennes (see n.7 above), p.91. Paulo Roberto Campos Tarrisse da Fontoura, O Brasil e as Operações de Manutenção da Paz das Nações Unidas [Brazil and the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations] Brasilia: Instituto Rio Branco-Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão-Itamaraty, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1999, pp.201–65; Alfonso José Sena Cardoso, O Brasil nas Operações de Paz das Nações Unidas [Brazil in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations], Brasilia: Instituto Rio Branco-Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão-Centro de Estudos Estratégicos, 1998. Davis Bobrow and Mark A. Boyer, ‘Maintaining System Stability: Contributions to Peacekeeping Operations’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.41, No.6, 1997, p.742. Edmundo Sussumu Fujita, ‘O Brasil e o Conselho de Segurança: Notas sobre uma década de transição, 1985–95 [Brazil and the Security Council: Notes from a Decade in Transition, 1985–95], Parcerias Estratégicas, No.2, 1996, 95–119. Thomaz Guedes da Costa, ‘Democratization and International Integration: The Role of the Armed Forces in Brazil's Grand Strategy’, in Mares (ed.), (see n. 3 above), p.232. Clóvis Brigagão, ‘Haiti o Brasil e a MINUSTAH’ [Haiti, Brazil and MINUSTAH], Cadernos Grupo de Análise de Prevenção de Conflitos Internacionais I [Working Papers on the Analysis of International Conflict Prevention], Rio de Janeiro, Candidos Mendes University, 2007. See ‘Nada tenemos que hacer en el Consejo de Seguridad: Manuel Tello’, [We Have Nothing to do at the Security Council: Manuel Tello], Crónica [Mexico City], 13 Sept. 2002, (at: www.lacronica.com); ‘Cuestionarán a Castañeda sobre ingreso de México al Consejo de Seguridad’, [Castañeda Will be Questioned Regarding Mexico's Membership to the Security Council], El Economista (Mexico City), 13 Sept. 2001, p.3. David McCormick, ‘From Peacekeeping to Peacebuilding: Reconstructing Police and Military Institutions’, in Michael W. Doyle, Ian Johnstone and Robert Orr (eds.) Keeping the Peace: Multidimensional UN Operation in Cambodia and El Salvador, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, pp.282–311. See, for example, Pellicer (n.10 above); Pellicer, ‘Los dilemas de México en el Consejo de Seguridad’ [The Dilemmas of Mexico in the Security Council], in Rafael Fernández de Castro (ed.) México y el mundo: En la frontera del imperio, [Mexico and the World: In the Borderline of the Empire], Mexico City: Editorial Planeta, 2003, pp.91–104; Guadalupe González, ‘Incertidumbres de una potencia media regional: las nuevas dimensiones de la política exterior mexicana’ [‘The Uncertainties of a Regional Middle Power: New Dimensions of Mexico's Foreign Policy’], in Olga Pellicer (ed.) La política exterior de México: desafíos en los ochenta [Mexico's Foreign Policy: Challenges in the Eighties], Mexico City: CIDE-Colección Estudios Políticos, 1983, pp.15–83. Walt (see n.2 above). Walt (n.2 above); E.J. Labs, ‘Do Weak States Bandwagon?’ Security Studies, Vol.1, No.3, 1992, pp.383–416; Steven R. David, ‘Explaining Third World Alignment’, World Politics, Vol.43, No.2, 1991, pp.233–56. Jorge I. Domínguez and Rafael Fernández de Castro, The United States and Mexico: Between Partnership and Conflict, New York: Routledge, 2001, pp.55–8. Ojeda (see n.11 above), p.93. Peter Smith, ‘Mexico’, in Robert Chase, Emily Hill and Paul Kennedy (eds), The Pivotal States. A New Framework for United States Policy in the Developing World, New York: W.W. Norton, 1999, p.217. See, for example, Raúl Benítez, ‘Mexico and the New Challenges of Hemispheric Security’, Reports on the Americas No.11, Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2004, p.56; Mónica Serrano and Paul Kenny, ‘Iraq and World Order: A Latin American Perspective’, in Ramesh Thakur and Waheguru P.S. Sidhu (eds.), The Iraq Crisis and World Order, Tokyo: UN University Press and International Peace Academy, 2006, pp. 298–314. See, for example, Roberto Lajous Vargas, ‘¿Es buena idea participar en el Consejo de Seguridad? [Is it a Good Idea to Participate in the Security Council?’], Nexos [Mexico], 4 Jan. 2007 (at: www.betanexos.webcom.com.mx). Celso Lafer, ‘Brazil in a New World’, in Abraham F. Lowenthal and Gregory F. Treverton (eds.) Latin America in a New World, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994, p.223. Peter Hakim, ‘Two Ways to Go Global’, Foreign Affairs, Vol.81, No.1, 2002, p.153. Antonio Ortiz Mena, ‘Mexico’, in Patrick F.J. Macrory and Arthur Appleton (eds.) The World Trade Organization: A Legal, Economic, and Political Analysis, New York: Spring, 2005, pp.217–47. Domínguez and Fernández de Castro (n.23 above). Ana Covarrubias, ‘La política mexicana hacia Cuba a principios de siglo: de la no intervención a la protección de los derechos humanos’ [Mexico's Policy Towards Cuba at the Turn of the Century: From Non-Intervention to the Protection of Human Rights], Foro Internacional, Vol.63, No.3, 2003, pp.627–44; Arturo C. Sotomayor, ‘México y la ONU en tiempos de transición: entre activismo externo, parálisis interna y crisis internacional’ [Mexico and the UN in Transition: Between External Activism, Internal Paralysis and International Crisis], Foro Internacional, Vol.48, Nos.1–2, 2008, pp.238–67. Approximately 19 million people in the United States identify themselves as of Mexican origin, of which a third are first-generation immigrants born in Mexico. Carlos González Gutiérrez, ‘Decentralized Diplomacy: The Role of Consular Offices in Mexico's Relations with its Diaspora’, in Rodolfo O. de la Garza and Jesús Velasco (eds.) Bridging the Border: Transforming Mexico–United States Relations, Langley, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1997, pp.49–57. Thomaz Guedes da Costa, ‘Strategies for Global Insertion: Brazil and its Regional Partners’, in Joseph S. Tulchin and Ralph H. Espach (eds.) Latin America and the New International System, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2001, pp.91–116. Paulo Roberto de Almeida and Denise Gregory, ‘Brazil’, in Growth and Responsibility: The Positions of Emerging Powers in the Global Governance System, Berlin: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung Foundation, 2009, pp.11–30. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars-Brazil Institute, New Directions in Brazilian Foreign Relations, Washington, DC, Brookings Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2007, p.5. Wendy Hunter, Eroding Military Influence in Brazil: Politicians Against Soldiers, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1997. See Beatriz Magaloni, Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. See Thomaz Guedes da Costa, ‘Brazil's SIVAM: As it Monitors the Amazon, Will it Fulfill its Human Security Promise?’, The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars' Environmental Change and Security Project Report, 7 Jan. 2001, pp.47–58. Guedes da Costa, (n.16 above), pp.223–37. See João R. Martins Filho and Daniel Zirker, ‘The Brazilian Military Under Cardoso: Overcoming the Identity Crisis’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, Vol.52, No.3, 2000, pp.143–70. Eliézer Rizzo de Oliveira and Samuel Alves Soares, ‘Brasil: Forças armadas, direção política e formato institucional’ [Brazil: Armed Forces, Political Direction and Institutional Format], in Maria Celina D'Araujo and Celso Castro (eds.) Democracia e Forças Armadas no Cone Sul [Democracy and the Armed Forces in the Southern Cone], Rio de Janeiro: Editora FGV, 2000, pp.112–16. Hunter (see n.38 above); Arturo C. Sotomayor, ‘Civil–Military Relations and Security Institutions in the Southern Cone: The Sources of Argentine–Brazilian Nuclear Cooperation’, Latin American Politics and Society, Vol.4, No.6, 2004, pp.29–60. Fontoura, (n.13 above), p.210 and Clóvis Brigagão, ‘Contribuição Brasileira às Missões da Paz da ONU’ [Brazilian Contributions to UN Peace Missions], Cadernos Grupo de Análise de Prevenção de Conflitos Internacionais III [Working Papers on the Analysis of International Conflict Prevention], Rio de Janeiro, Candidos Mendes University, 2008. João R. Martins Filho and Daniel Zirker, ‘The Brazilian Military Under Cardoso: Overcoming the Identity Crisis’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs. Vol.42, No.3, 2000, pp.143–70. For an analysis of Brazil's military economic crisis see Wendy Hunter, ‘The Brazilian Military after the Cold War: In Search of Mission’, Studies in Comparative International Development, Vol.28, No.4, 1994, pp.31–49. Similar international peacekeeping strategies have been used by other South American countries, including Argentina. See Deborah L Norden, ‘Keeping the Peace, Outside and In: Argentina's UN Missions’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.2, No.2, 1995, pp.330–49. ‘Brazil's Foreign Policy: A Giant Stirs’, The Economist,10 June 2004 (at: www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2752700). See Luiz Felipe Lampreira, ‘O Brasil e a reforma das Nações Unidas’ [Brazil and the Reform of the UN], O Estado de Săo Paulo, 21 Aug. 1995, p.A.2; Alcides Costa Vaz, ‘Brazilian Foreign Policy under Lula: Change or Continuity?’, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Briefing Paper, April 2004, pp.1–4 (at: www.fes.de/globalization). For an analysis of President Lula's defence policies see Felipe Kern Moreira, ‘A politica de defesa do governo Lula’, [Lula's Government Defence Policy], in Clovis Brigagão and Domício Proença (eds.) O Brasil e os Novos Conflitos Internacionais, [Brazil and the New International Conflicts], Rio de Janeiro: Gramma, 2007, pp.99–116. Jack Child, Geopolitics and Conflict in South America: Quarrels among Neighbors, New York: Praeger, 1985, p.34. For analysis of contemporary Brazilian geopolitical thinking see Clovis Brigagão and Domício Proença (eds.) Panorama Brasileiro de Paz e Segurança, [A Brazilian Panorama of Peace and Security], Rio de Janeiro: Editora Hucitec, 2004. Ludovico Cunha Velloso, ‘Brazil and the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations in the 21st Century’, unpublished Master's Dissertation, Marine Corps University, Quantico, VA, 2002, p.50. Jorge Alejandro Arellano, ‘Entrenan para misiones de paz a militares mexicanos’, [The Mexican Military Trains for Peace Missions] El Universal [Mexico City], 13 May 2004, p.12. Clara Ramírez and Andrea Merlos, ‘Chocan Los Pinos y SRE’ [The President's Office and the Foreign Ministry Collide], Reforma [Mexico], 30 July 2005 (at: www.reforma.com). See, for instance, Roderic Camp, Generals in the Palacio: The Military in Modern Mexico, New York: Oxford University Press, 1992; Mónica Serrano, ‘The Armed Forces Branch of the State: Civil-Military Relations in Mexico’, Journal of Latin American Studies, Vol.27, 1995, pp.423–48. Raúl Benítez and Stephen J. Wager, ‘National Security and Armed Forces in Mexico: Challenges and Scenarios at the End of the Century’, Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 1995. See Ian Johnstone and Ethan Corbin, ‘The US Role in Contemporary Peace Operations: A Double-Edged Sword?’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.15, No.1, 2008, pp.1–17; William Flavin, ‘US Doctrine for Peace Operations’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.15, No.1, 2008, pp.35–50. Personal interviews with military officers who requested anonymity, Mexico City, 17 Feb. 2005. See Randal Archibold, ‘Mexican Drug Cartel Violence Spills Over, Alarming U.S.’, New York Times, 22 Mar. 2009 (at: www.nytimes.com). Mansfield and Pevehouse; Pevehouse (both n.1 above).
Publication Year: 2009
Publication Date: 2009-06-01
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 6
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot