INTERVIEW | Unasur, Prosur, Mercosur: Why Does a "European Union" Fail in South America?

Radio Biobío, January 12, 2022

When it comes to international alliances, the European Union is the most significant current example in the world. Since its founding after World War II, it has grown to encompass 27 countries from the “old continent,” which have ceded part of their sovereignty for this project in exchange for commercial and diplomatic benefits. South America has not been exempt from projects that move in the same direction, albeit with much less ambition, but they have been severely limited in achieving their objectives, and even more so in transcending beyond the governments that founded them. Why?

With the arrival of Gabriel Boric to the presidency of Chile, and the expectations in the international left regarding a potential victory of Lula da Silva in Brazil and Gustavo Petro in Colombia, questions are growing about the possibility of attempting to form an organization that encompasses the countries of South America.

The situation seems ideal, with Luis Arce in Bolivia, Alberto Fernández in Argentina and Pedro Castillo in Peru, this political sector appears to be experiencing a sort of resurgence in the region, but is this enough?

History has already shown that it is not, as explained by the executive director of AthenaLab Juan Pablo Toro, who notes that in South America and Latin America there have been several attempts that stumble due to various factors. None of them come close to the achievements of regional integration benchmarks such as the European Union.

This organization has gone much further than South American initiatives, having opened borders in what is known as the “Schengen Area,” with its countries ceding sovereignty to this supranational entity, which has not only summits but also its own legislative, executive, and judicial powers.

“There has been no shortage of integration initiatives in Latin America,”the specialist explains, highlighting that “the number of organizations is enormous, some more political, others more economic.” As examples, he lists CELAC, Unasur, Prosur, Mercosur, the Pacific Alliance, Aladi, CAN, and Caricom. But despite the proliferation of entities, “most of these initiatives can end up failing due to problems that are quite well identified.”

In his experience, he has observed that “integration, for it to work, must produce results. And I believe that the proliferation of groups speaks to the lack of results and that every so often someone comes up with a new organization.” Incompatible Economies and Trade

The first problem has been most evident in initiatives focused on trade or economics, as it becomes clear that some countries present “very large development differentials.”

“There are countries that are more developed, such as Chile or Uruguay, and less developed countries, like those in Central America. So those development differentials mean that countries have different interests and priorities,” Toro explains.

In other cases, the economy is simply not “complementary,” so the countries attempting to integrate “end up producing the same things.” “Think about it: we could try to integrate economically with Peru, but both of us basically export copper and fishmeal as commodities, so we won’t be selling those things to each other,” he exemplifies.

Additionally, Toro points to other key differences that complicate integration: “The economies in Latin America that face the Pacific are open to the world and full of opportunities for trade. In contrast, the economies in part of America that look to the Atlantic are more protectionist,” he distinguishes.

“The truth is that we have several differences, and sometimes this integration can be positive, but in the long run, the results are meager. Think about Mercosur, which was founded in 1991, but since then, countries trade among themselves less than before.”

Political Myopia

“Another problem in Latin America is that the current governments are unable to maintain long-term policies,” criticizes the analyst. “Basically, the color of the government changes, and the incoming governments try to do something completely different from the previous one and discard all previous projects.”

This has been proven many times, he indicates, which translates to “the interest given to various international organizations rises or falls depending on the political color of the president at any given moment and the rapport they have with their peers.”

Connected to the previous point, Toro highlights the

“over-ideologization” of governments in the region. “Many integration projects are perceived as initiatives of the left or right,” he notes, exemplifying with Unasur, “which was basically created at the behest of Lula and initially funded by Chávez, and think about Prosur, which is seen as something right-wing.”

This trait, then, prevents these organizations from “transcending beyond.”

Therefore, regarding the hypothesis of whether a dominant presence of leftist governments would make this integration feasible, the specialist remains skeptical. “What happens if there is no political change in those governments? What happens, for example, if Bolsonaro is re-elected or if someone who is not Petro comes to power?” he questions.

And even going further, there remains the question of whether these governments would be able to maintain their agendas beyond the years of their terms.

But how did the European Union do it?

“The truth is that for integration to be effective, it should transcend both the political color of governments and the duration of their terms. In that sense, the European Union is quite different because it was created as a political project that essentially sought to help Germany and France avoid falling into another war after World War II,” Toro recounts, appealing to the origins.

In the case of the EU, the existence of prior economic integration also plays a role, with the key antecedent being the Community of Steel and Coal.

“But the European Union is the product of decades of long work where issues like development differentials have been gradually reduced,” for which, he explains, stabilization funds granted to new members have been key: “Every time a country joined the European Union and did not meet the economic or financial conditions for various reasons, the EU provided a fund that helped stabilize, prosper, and correct any imbalances to meet the goals.”

This benefit causes countries to join and cede sovereignty, as well as create long-term policies and integrate into the market with the freedom of movement of goods, people, and capital. “It is a long-term project, but it surpasses all others. It achieves more even development, ensuring that regardless of the political color of the government, policies and agreements transcend and remain independent of any changes,” summarizes the expert.

Another softer problem present in Latin America is that, in a way, its borders have a cultural angle that does not necessarily align with official demarcations. How far does Latin America extend? Because if you have 50 million people who speak Spanish in the United States, it is much larger than just reaching the border with Mexico,” Toro suggests.

“Another aspect is that it has very distinct dynamics. For example, Central America is a reality quite different from that of South America, and within South America, for instance, you have the Andean region, which has certain dynamics that are unique and very different from those of the Southern Cone.”

What do the United States and China think? Do they influence?

“The United States

has long abandoned the idea of intervening here or seeking these regional designs,” he responds, referring to the foreign policies that characterized the power, especially during the last century, such as the “Truman Doctrine.” “The U.S. is rather looking for certain privileged relationships with some countries and not with others,” usually based on how friendly the historical ties have been.Currently, he maintains, the U.S. resolves “on a case-by-case basis,” primarily maintaining closeness with

Mexico -its southern neighbor-, with Brazil -due to its relevance and size- and with Colombia -which would be its main partner in security matters. Chile and Costa Rica also maintain “good relations” with the superpower, he adds. “On the other hand, China

has always liked having Latin American organizations that can speak with one voice. In fact, it has always promoted that China-CELAC dialogue,” he explains, emphasizing that the Asian giant has sought the presence of “regional interlocutors that allow it to speak with someone representative and not have to engage with this wide range of countries.” Meanwhile, the European Union

“has also tried to seek some type of relationship with Latin American organizations, but the EU-Mercosur agreement has been stalled for some time.” “So, the truth is that I do not believe that foreign powers are intervening; what happens is that integration works when it yields results, and that is what happened with the Europeans, which is why they continued to advance. If the European Union had been a bad idea, it would have disbanded,”

Toro argues, recalling that one of the fears that arose from Brexit was that other countries would also begin to leave the organization. “And did anyone leave? No, and there are many English people who are very regretful.” Source: BioBioChile.