Search

This paper explores the challenges and opportunities of regionalization and globalization in the context of North America vis a vis Latin America. While many argue that North America is the best example of integration, the results are not evenly spread and the resistance increasing. Canada, Mexico and the United States may agree in some areas but disagree in many as well and the relation of the bloc with the rest of the continent is definitely an issue to solve since Mexico belongs to both regional frameworks. This paper at the end presents scenarios for the further integration and their parameters for the relationship with Latin America, as well analyses the reasons of the current state of affairs and oportunities with the current administration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will explore some of the general political and economic dynamics of contemporary border management in North America from a comparative perspective. It operates both in terms of some basic policy analysis but mostly offers commentary on theoretical and research approaches to these issues. The paper will take as its framework the events of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent actions by some national governments around the world to reinforce their borders (re‐territorialization). In this regard, the paper pays particular attention to the issue of securitization of borders and mobility, both at the state's frontiers and within it, as a method of counter‐terrorism policy, migration control, and for other exclusionary ends. The securitization process will be traced through several key examples, particularly in North America and Europe. While noting the emergence of new forms of border management such as cross‐border policing in the European Union and bi‐lateral border management in North America, it will also acknowledge the persistence of more traditional border control efforts in many parts of the globe—particularly in the developing world—which are generally less technologically‐driven and often are much less strict as they deal with different security concerns. As such, the paper argues the emerging politics of border management remains differentiated and complex. The paper surveys several of the more interesting conceptual attempts to describe what is going on. To add my voice to this dialogue, I suggest that in order to have more meaningful and robust analysis of these developments, border scholarship needs to move beyond the de/re‐territorializing duality and consider a hierarchy of border security threats. Given the complexity of this picture, the paper ends by calling for a reinvigorated interdisciplinary approach to research on border security. I also suggest we need to think in terms of "risk management" rather than traditional "border security" as such. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the September 11 terrorist attacks, in response to the Bush Administration that strongly accused Canada of being an Heaven for asylum seekers and a Club Med for terrorists, amazing emergency measures were hastily taken in order to increase the inner and boarder Security. American calls for a greater cooperation between the US (exchange of information and harmonization of immigration policies) have been heard: firstly, some traditional rights and freedoms of every Canadian were significantly reduced; secondly, there has been a quick 180-degree turn in the immigration and refugees procedures in order to strengthen them. All this created frustrations and oppositions from everywhere within the country. For many reasons, there is a greater concern regarding the commitment to detain more and more people as a measure of security and deterrence, in part as the response to September 11 terrorist attacks. Fist of all, although Canada’s detention and practices are less draconian than those of our neighbours, the detention process has in itself always had systemic weaknesses that have not been improved until yet. As Canada often looks good by comparison (i.e. horror stories on detention conditions in France, Australia, Great Britain or United States), its international reputation as a very best Country for migrants makes it somehow difficult to change the inner system. If there is no place for improvement, the system is bound to regress, as a consequence: the willingness to detain more and more people longer and longer with broader powers given to immigration agents, whereas past and current problems have not been solved yet, appears as problematic. Detention in Canada is a grey zone, not well known, thus misunderstood and then underfunded. In this special context, the erosion of the migrants’ fundamental Human Rights is bound to happen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, the author analyzes how North America has emerged as a security region. Based on security governance theories, the paper argues that North America has become a real region due to reasons of security, economic advantages and political interests, generating the idea of consolidating a North America Community by means of the deepening of NAFTA. The events of 9/11 put pressure on the countries of North America to seek a shared viewpoint about security issues and the regional vision is gradually being acquired. The three countries recognize common problems regarding security and the existence of transnational threats that cannot be treated independently. Security has become an important element of integration; the main question is if North America is building a security community or an identity in security issues after 9/11? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the role of security in the context of new forms of regionalization in North America. Each country in North America has its own concept of national security, yet, the United States has placed its own model to the Canadian and Mexican f ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the approach of security governance, this paper presents the evolution of North America from as a region guided it by an economic rational, namely NAFTA, to an area in which security concerns have played a more relevant role in the regional agend ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nexus between migration and security have never been easy to study, partly because of the great variations in the forms of migration. Perceptions differ widely regarding the security implications of economic migration, temporary or frontier work, the quest for asylum, illegal migration, etc. But the greatest difficulties stem from conflicted values and preferences among all concerned: those in the countries of origin and the countries of destination, as well as the migrants themselves. Many types of entrants are perceived as security threats by some people and collective actors, while curtailing the same sorts and levels of migration would be considered tantamount to a threat for others. Agreement on what forms and numbers of migration challenge security is elusive at all levels of analysis: individuals, households, local communities, substate regions, countries, interstate regions, and globally. This paper is a comparative consideration of the impact ? or the lack of it ? of heightened concerns with foreigners and security in the post-9/11 era in three regions where increased cross-border movement is a significant issue for governments, publics and economic and human rights actors. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the end of the 1990s, different visions have been proposed to guide future North American defense integration. In 2000, the word ?community? was frequently use by policymakers, especially in Mexico and Canada. The US seemed to prefer the concept of ?security perimeter?, a notion that gained popularity after 9/11, even if Canadian and Mexican governments explicitly rejected it. Since 2004, the concept of ?community? seems to have caught policymakers? and politicians? attention again, even in the US. This semantic debate reflects a competition between two world views which are based on very different assumptions and have different implications. While the notion of perimeter carries a power-based (realist) logic, the concept of ?community? remains a ?shared values? (liberal) approach. This paper seeks to clarify the distinction between the two concepts and assess their relevance in the current North American context. It concludes that even if Canada and Mexico are united in their rejection of the perimeter approach and have used the same ?community? language, a gap remains between their values. This explains why a bilateral (Canada-US) perimeter approach is the more likely approach in the short term, despite recent initiatives. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent accounts of North American “border security” have tended to periodize bordering practices along the lines of pre- and post-2001. Currently, as some argue, the border has become a location for sovereign exceptionalism, mobility governance, and the p ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its trilateral format, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) has been criticized for reinforcing a “double-bilateral” structure more conducive to deepening Canada-U.S. ties at the expense of a more egalitarian inclusion of ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of globalization has opened up new opportunities for countries like Chile, small and distant from the centres of power, yet committed to international integration, cooperation and multilateralism based on the principles of liberty and democracy. Since 1990 Chile has undertaken an active foreign policy focussed on its integration in the international arena. Its foreign relations with North America have undergone a series of important advances which began under the Coalition of Parties for Democracy government (Concertación) first led by president Patricio Aylwin, then by president Eduardo Frei, followed by president Ricardo Lagos (2000-2006) and since March 2006 led by president Michelle Bachelet. Chile has stretched bilateral relations with each of the North American countries by signing into Free Trade Agreements with Canada (1997), Mexico (1999) and the United States (2004). Bilateral relations with Canada today have reached a more solid level. As “like-minded countries” they share common values and principles and aspire towards a similar international agenda. Both countries have joined efforts on issues of peace and stability in the Hemisphere, in particular with regards to Haiti. Chilean relations with the United States focus on increasing regional and multilateral cooperation on issues such as democracy, the opening up of markets, governance and the promotion of Human Rights. Diplomatic relations with Mexico date back to 1910 and were severed from 1974 to 1990. Today, Mexico and Chile celebrate several bilateral agreements including the Strategic Association Agreement (AAE, 2006) which covers the political, cooperation and comercial areas. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the post September 11, 2001 terrorist attack rise of expansive security ministries in North America. The internal organization and central function of the security departments show the link between national security and population health and safety. The most important line of defense for the detection of and protection against threats is said to be intelligence. Security mechanisms were accompanied by the erosion of civil liberties and the heightened policing of people to detect risk areas and groups.

Prior to September 11, scholarly discussions concerning multilateral regimes to govern the movement of people among states in North America centered on the desire to facilitate flows. Common macro-economic interests for more open migration among NAFTA countries press for a more Ricardian approach to migration management similar to that utilized for trade and capital flows. Although dialogue regarding migration regimes has been most rigorous in the European Union, strong interests exist among North American countries to craft policy in the EU mold. However, the events of September 11 not only served to table existing plans for multilateral negotiations regarding migration, but also appeared to completely alter the strategic environment. After 9/11, recognition among policy makers in the U.S. and Canada of the close link between migration control and counter-terrorism prompted widespread acceptance of the view that increasing security is a precondition for openness to migration. Yet, as an inherently global phenomenon it would appear that security could be increased not only through new domestic policies, but also through increased multilateral cooperation. Is such cooperation likely in the area of migration and border control in North America, and are NAFTA countries moving toward a more European approach toward migration and border management? Early evidence shows us that although some cooperation has already been initiated, disparity of interests among North American states presents a significant political obstacle to regime formation, as do the logistical challenges facing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. National Security structure is outdated and outmoded, and is in need of significant reform. Although this is the case with much of the U.S. interaction vis-à-vis the rest of the world, it is particularly so with its institutional structures deal ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Security is one of the priority topics in the internacional agenda. It is also a current issue for the European Union. It takes more relevance when it comes to do a comparative analysis between European Union and North America religionalisation process. Compering similarities, differences and experiences will allow us to have better tools to set security strategies for Mexico. That is in order to gain more and better benefits in the security project of North America ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]