The national interests of Chile and Chileans

Indulging in ideological preferences in foreign relations that are not aligned with what is important and prioritized is neither beneficial nor advisable.

On this occasion, we will develop the concept of national interests in order to review whether what the State of Chile is currently doing, and particularly its government in matters of international relations, aligns with protecting the national interests of Chile.

In simple terms, the national interest or interests are what benefits Chile and Chileans. The problem is that, obviously, since there are many Chileans, there can be many versions or ways to understand what is best for Chile and Chileans.

To avoid getting lost in the topic, one must ask whether what is being done is good for Chile and Chileans and what objectives it pursues. It is accepted that Chile’s international relations are under presidential authority, but this does not preclude examining the objectives of the actions and decisions taken in this area, as in this and previous governments, means are often confused with objectives, a very current example being the foreign policies feminist and the turquoise , where means become objectives.

There is nothing wrong with Chile’s foreign policy being grounded in feminist or environmental principles, but it is another matter for them to become objectives in themselves, objectives that must be measured against what is good for Chile and Chileans.

For example, if one looks at the presidential trip to Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and France, the question arises whether it contributes to the national interest. We all agree that we should have good foreign relations and that peace in Ukraine is something that matters and benefits everyone, but it remains uncertain whether the important aspect of the visit to Germany is the expropriation of the lands of the former Colonia Dignidad, or what both political leaders publish as a column in El Mercurio on Tuesday regarding the climate club, something that matters to many but does not resolve any of our current problems.

If one looks at the recently published survey of perceptions on foreign policy and security from AthenaLab, now in its fifth version, it will be seen that Chileans care about and define as objectives 1) combating drug trafficking, 2) protecting borders, and 3) regulating migration, with combating climate change in fourth place. Experts in these matters agree with public opinion, as they believe the top three objectives should be regulating migration, 2) protecting borders, and 3) combating drug trafficking. The fourth priority for experts is the defense of maritime interests.

When asked about the national interest, Chileans establish that the priorities are 1) maintaining a level of security that enables development, 2) maintaining the integrity of national territory, and 3) controlling the seas of Chile. Experts, in turn, opine that the most important are 1) maintaining national territorial integrity (land, maritime, and air), 2) maintaining political independence, and 3) controlling the seas of Chile.

If one reads the AthenaLab survey in detail, it will be evident that many current actions are not aligned with foreign policy objectives and even less with national interests. The current trip of the President is a good example. There is nothing inherently wrong with traveling and developing relations with other countries, but I would prefer that it be focused on what Chileans and experts consider a priority.

That said, and also as an example, there is nothing wrong with maintaining relations with Venezuela , if the objectives regarding that country are to continue having access to information about the many Venezuelans we have in Chile, and even more so if we want to repatriate the undocumented and those who are criminals. Cutting diplomatic relations may not be a good idea in light of the previously stated objectives. Indulging in foreign relations is not advisable when national interest is at stake, and therefore, other ways must be chosen to convey messages in response to situations or actions that we dislike or find inconvenient.

It is time for the Government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to read the AthenaLab survey. It will help them understand what concerns Chileans and experts, and to realize that indulging in ideological preferences in foreign relations that are not aligned with what is important and prioritized is neither beneficial nor advisable.

It is time to understand that applying the debatable socialist principles of equality and community by Gerald Cohen is not useful for establishing guidelines when formulating Chile’s foreign policy, as the world is much more complex and guided by a different logic than that of the summer camp that Cohen uses to defend and develop his neosocialist principles, which may sound desirable and feasible to many on the left, in what is a clear demonstration of not understanding how international relations work, which in practice are much more realistic and capitalist in nature than some believe they should be socialist. Applying Cohen’s socialist ideology to foreign relations is not a good idea.

Richard Kouyoumdjian
Vice President of AthenaLab

Source: El Líbero