Search

This paper analyses Latin America’s role in an international system in flux, with high levels of uncertainty and transformations that signal a shift in the geoeconomic and geopolitical landscape across the world. Against this backdrop, the paper examines the challenges (both old and new) the region must face, focusing on the impact of global changes on regional dynamics and the capacity of the different countries to find answers both to the international situation and old and new internal problems. In addition, as an introductory paper to this monograph entitled “Geopolitics from Latin America: a change of cycle and multipolarity”, it identifies the fulcrums of these changes, their impact, the main actors involved and the processes underway.

There has been a change in international politics since the 2008 financial crisis, thanks to a greater spread of economic resources and military capabilities. For many, it is a radical transformation that could spell the end of US hegemony in Latin America. This paper examines the proposition, beginning with a review of the concept of hegemony, which rather than being viewed as a structural characteristic is conceived of here as a “nuanced hegemony”, in other words a network of asymmetric and hierarchical relations. We can observe not just one transformation then, but the emergence of a hemispheric context that could be described as “differentiated hegemony”. The United States still occupies a central position, but its foreign policy is marked by subregional fragmentation and the externalisation of electoral priorities. The paper explores the effects at subregional level, focusing on the opportunities and challenges it presents to Latin American countries.

It has been seven decades since the six founding member states of what would become the European Union (EU) sought to integrate their armies into a common defence force through the European Defence Community. Today, while ever more European decision makers allude to the need to create such a force, it remains a distant prospect. What is it that is really hampering progress towards a common European defence model based on a shared army? What is the position of the main EU actors – society, political parties and institutions – on the subject? Using a variety of methodological approaches, this paper seeks to provide empirical evidence of the social, political party and institutional complexities hindering its realisation. Although the EU is not currently working on the creation of a common, single army, events such as the invasion of Ukraine could put it on the political agenda, and neither society, nor the elites, nor the major parties would be opposed.

New crises that have erupted this decade, such as COVID-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, have led the European Union (EU) to wake up to the need to expedite certain decision-making processes. This would allow it to play a more geopolitical role on the international stage and move past the traditional European approach of soft power as a means of influence. To do so, it is essential to advance towards greater geopolitical capabilities that enable true strategic autonomy in areas such as security and defence: new challenges must be met with different strategies and instruments. This paper examines the functioning, potential institutionalisation and capacities of the European Political Community (EPC) as a driver of a geopolitical Europe.

The evolution of the European Union (EU) Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) raises questions about whether societies in member states share a common or convergent defence culture. Conceptual and methodological problems in the existing literature, however, make it difficult to measure this phenomenon. That is why this paper proposes a new model to measure the political culture relative to European defence, using a mixed factor analysis. In addition, drawing on a series of Eurobarometer surveys, it charts current attitudes towards defence in European citizenship and the impact of the war in Ukraine. The findings point to the existence of several political subcultures regarding defence in the EU. They also indicate various methodological strengths – and limitations – arising from the available Eurobarometer data.

The new defence policy of the European Union (EU) is forcing the defence industry in Europe to adjust its strategies, especially since the invasion of Ukraine. Both the European Commission and the European Defence Agency (EDA) are pushing for a European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), taking account of factors that include the fragmentation of supply chains, the significant efficiency gains that can be made and the prospect of greater EU strategic autonomy. In the industrial field, particularly in the area of technology, it will change the shape of the European defence industry. But what direction will this new industry take? Will national oligopolies be reinforced at the same time as other European oligopolies emerge? Drawing on an empirical analysis based on interviews with experts, this paper focuses on Spain as a case study and explores the repercussions it will have on the country’s defence industry.

The aim of this paper is to interpret the political discourse employed in the process of integrating foreign nationals into Spain’s Armed Forces (2002-2017) and collate it with a wide range of primary sources. The sources include statistics from the Spanish Ministry of Defence, legislation, opinion polls conducted by the public research institute the Centre for Sociological Research (CIS) and data series from Spain’s official statistics agency (INE). The study takes a constructivist approach that seeks to uncover the implicit elements underlying the discourses of public policies, ideas and ideological concepts. It offers a view that is complemented by a historical reconstruction of the facts and an institutional analysis that combines formal elements (laws, policies and opinion polls) with informal components (non-codified practices or ideas and shared meanings).

This paper presents an analysis of the internationalisation of intermediate cities in Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. Framed in the field of the paradiplomacy studies, it takes a critical stance on the use of the concept and returns to alternative theoretical-methodological tools, such as subnational international policy and the international participation index. Taking a quantitative-qualitative approach, it notes a significantly higher internationalisation profile of these cities recently, with increasing levels of institutionalisation and a pre-eminence of unilateral and bilateral strategies. The originality of the work lies in its focus on a realm that has received relatively little attention in the speciality in Latin America, and in the study of general trends, going beyond the single case studies that dominate the field.

This paper analyses the repercussions that the war in Ukraine since 2022 has had on the European Union (EU) policy of economic globalisation. The Union’s comprehensive response to the conflict is examined from different angles, taking in energy insecurity, economic shocks, geopolitical shifts, humanitarian challenges and technological vulnerabilities. In this context, the EU’s adaptive resilience is evident on several fronts, such as the integration of its economic policies with security (particularly in critical sectors), its role in the European security architecture and its commitment to incorporating Ukraine into the West. The study expands to include the flexible management of mass migration, tech vulnerabilities, energy resilience, economic stability, geopolitical alliances, humanitarian response action and technological reinforcement.

In a world of growing international competition and rivalry between China and the United States, Latin America and the European Union (EU) are caught in the same thorny dilemma. Positioned between these global giants, both regions are facing a retorn to a Westphalian system of nation-states, which undermines their roles as emerging regional players. In view of these new global challenges in Latin America and the EU, this paper uses a qualitative and comparative approach to explore foreign policy discourses on autonomy in both regions. It examines their goals and priorities and assesses the potential regional and interregional consequences.

This paper examines the ties between Latin America and Asia by moving beyond the homogenisation of the two regions through elevating the importance of opposition to a third party, in this case an “imperialist” and developed North. In contrast to normative analyses based on outmoded conceptions of world history, it proposes an intellectual exercise that problematises the interregional bond by placing the emphasis on heterogeneities rather than broad bush approaches that ignore the complex and diverse national and regional realities.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, better known as the RCEP, is a free trade agreement signed by 15 countries from the Asia-Pacific region in November 2020. It took effect in January 2022. After presenting an overview of the agreement, this paper looks at the negotiations and the current state of the RCEP. It then focuses on its basic content, particularly from a legal standpoint, as it analyses the institutional framework, the decision rule, its legal sources and the dispute settlement system, without omitting to look at the agreement from an economic perspective.