Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T09:13:16.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can Mercosur Survive? Domestic and International Constraints on Mercosur

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Mario E. Carranza
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mercosur has survived several crises by resorting to presidential diplomacy, but it risks becoming an empty shell unless member states work to coordinate macroeconomic policies. Its survival depends on the outcome of domestic political struggles in Brazil and Argentina and on the harmonization of exchange-rate policies between the two countries. This article examines the Argentine-Brazilian “trade wars” provoked by successive devaluations of the Brazilian currency, aggravated in 2001 by the Argentine economic crisis. The social explosion in Argentina in December 2001 showed that domestic actors can successfully challenge proglobalization policies. To consolidate, Mercosur will have to address the democratic deficit while building supranational institutions and an effective dispute-settlement system.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , Summer 2003 , pp. 67 - 103
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acuña, Carlos H. 1994. Politics and Economics in the Argentina of the Nineties (Or, Why the Future No Longer Is What It Used to Be). In Democracy, Markets, and Structural Reform in Latin America: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico, ed. Acuña, William C. Smith, and Eduardo, Gamarra. New Brunswick: Transaction. 31–73.Google Scholar
Alimonda, Hector. 2000. Brazilian Society and Regional Integration. Latin American Perspectives 21, 4 (Fall): 21–33.Google Scholar
Anderson, Kym, and Richard, Blackhurst, eds. 1993. Regional Integration and the Global Trading System. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Bernier, Ivan, and Martin, Roy. 1999. NAFTA and MERCOSUR: Two Competing Models? In The Americas in Transition: The Contours of Regionalism, ed. Gordon, Mace and Louis, Bélanger. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. 69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhagwati, Jagdish. 1999. Regionalism and Multilateralism: An Overview. In Trading Blocs: Alternative Approaches to Analyzing Preferential Trade Agreements, ed. Bhagwati, et al. Cambridge: MIT Press. 3–32.Google Scholar
Bienefeld, Manfred. 1996. Is a Strong National Economy a Utopian Goal at the End of the Twentieth Century? In States Against Markets: The Limits of Globalization, ed. Boyer, R. and Drache, D.. London: Routledge. 415–40.Google Scholar
Bouzas, Roberto. 1997. Mercosur's Economic Agenda: Short and Medium-term Policy Challenges. Integration and Trade 1: 57–79.Google Scholar
Broad, Robin, and John, Cavanagh. 1999. The Death of the Washington Consensus World Policy Journal 16, 3 (Fall): 79–88.Google Scholar
Burbach, Roger, and William, I. Robinson. 1999. The Fin de Siècle Debate: Globalization as Epochal Shift. Science and Society 63, 1 (Spring): 10–39.Google Scholar
Business and Information Community. 2001. Se acentua caida en intercambio entre Argentina y Brazil. October 10. http:www.mercosur.cominfoarticuloimp.jsp ?noticia.Google Scholar
Carranza, Mario. 2000. South American Free Trade Area or Free Trade Area of the Americas? Open Regionalism and the Future of Regional Economic Integration in South America. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Cason, Jeffrey. 2000. On the Road to Southern Cone Economic Integration. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 42, 1 (Spring): 23–42.Google Scholar
Cimadamore, Alberto D. 1997. La integración regional y los límites de la cooperación militar: reflexiones desde el Mercosur. Paper presented at the second interdisciplinary conference on Mercosur, sponsored by the Economics and Statistics School, University of Rosario, Argentina.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2000. El comercio en el Mercosur: los autos deberan tener más piezas argentinas. August 1.Google Scholar
Conger, Lucy. 1998. A Fourth Way? the Latin American Alternative to Neoliberalism. Current History (November): 380–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Robert. 1992. Global Perestroika. In Socialist Register 1992, ed. Ralph, Miliband and Leo, Panitch. London: Merlin Press. 26–43.Google Scholar
DeMelo, Jaime, Arvind, Panagariya, and Dani, Rodrik. 1993. The New Regionalism: A Country Perspective. In New Dimensions in Regional Integration, ed. deMelo, and Panagariya, . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 159–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Economist. 1999. Mercosur: Becalmed. December 11: 34.Google Scholar
Economist . 2001a. Sticking Plaster for Mercosur: Brazil and Argentina Have Patched up Their Row over Trade and the Real. October 13: 38.Google Scholar
Economist . 2001b. Argentina's Economy: Patience Wears Thin. December 22: 35.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, Barry. 1994. International Monetary Arrangements for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Eichengreen, Barry. 1998. Does Mercosur Need a Single Currency? Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Encuesta, Latinobarometro. 1996. Press Report. October.Google Scholar
Ferrer, Aldo. 1997. Los dos modelos de Mercosur: integración sostenible o consenso de Washington?Encrucijadas, University of Buenos Aires. 9–25.Google Scholar
Foreign Broadcast Information Service—Latin America (FBIS-LAT). 1991. Text of Mercosur Common Market Treaty Released. March 25: 2.Google Scholar
Frankel, Jeffrey. 1999. No Single Currency Regime Is Right for All Countries or at All times. Essays in International Finance 215. Princeton University.Google Scholar
Friedman, Thomas. 1999. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.Google Scholar
Garnaut, Ross. 1994. Open Regionalism: Its Analytical Basis and Relevance to the International System. Journal of Asian Economics 5, 2: 273–90.Google Scholar
George, Susan. 2000. Carte Blanche, Bête Noire: Brave New Globe. Dissent (Winter): 13–15.Google Scholar
Giambiagi, Fabio. 1999. Mercosur: Why Does Monetary Union Make Sense in the Long Term Integration and Trade 3, 9 (September-December): 59–81.Google Scholar
Gills, Barry K. 1997. “Globalization” and the “Politics of Resistance.” Editorial. New Political Economy 2, 1 (March): 11–15.Google Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 2000. The Challenge of Global Capitalism: The World Economy in the 21st Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Joshua. 1999. International Relations. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Gourevitch, Peter. 1978. The Second Image Reversed: the International Sources of Domestic Politics. International Organization 32, 4 (Autumn): 881–911.Google Scholar
Grandi, Jorge, and Daniel, Schutt. 1996. El Mercosur: consolidación o incertidumbre Archivos del Presente 2, 6 (October-December): 83–105.Google Scholar
Grandi, Jorge, and Lincoln, Bizzózero. 1997. Toward a Mercosur Civil Society: Old and New Actors in the Sub-regional Fabric. Integration and Trade 1, 3 (September-December): 31–46.Google Scholar
Grieco, Joseph. 1990. Cooperation Among Nations: Europe, America, and Non-tariff Barriers to Trade. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Haines-Ferrari, Marta. 1998. MERCOSUR: Individual Access and the Dispute Settlement Mechanism. In Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization, ed. James, Cameron and Karen, Campbell. London: Cameron May. 270–85.Google Scholar
Hirst, Monica. 1993a. A reaçào do empresariado argentino frente a formaçào do Mercosul. FLACSO Report no. 143 (May). Buenos Aires: FLACSO.Google Scholar
Hirst, Monica. 1993b. La dimensión política del Mercosur: especificidades nacionales, aspectos institucionales y actores sociales. FLACSO Report no. 148 (December). Buenos Aires: FLACSO.Google Scholar
Hirst, Monica. 1996. La dimensión política del Mercosur: actores, politización e ideología. In Democracia, seguridad e integración: América Latina en un mundo en transición. Buenos Aires: Grupo Editorial Norma. 189–231.Google Scholar
Hirst, Paul, and Graham, Thompson. 1996. Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean (INTAL). 2000. MERCOSUR Report No. 6: 1999–2000. Buenos Aires: Inter-American Development Bank/INTAL.Google Scholar
Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean (INTAL). 2001a. MERCOSUR Report No. 7: 2000–2001. Buenos Aires: Inter-American Development Bank/INTAL.Google Scholar
Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean (INTAL). 2001b. Carta mensual no. 59 (June). Buenos Aires: Inter-American Development Bank/INTAL.Google Scholar
Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean (INTAL). 2002. Monthly Newsletter no. 67 (February). Buenos Aires: Inter-American Development Bank/INTAL.Google Scholar
Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). 2002. Integration and Trade in the Americas: A Preliminary Estimate of 2002 Trade. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
Jameson, Kenneth P. 2001. Latin America and the Dollar Bloc in the Twenty-first Century: to Dollarize or Not Latin American Politics and Society 43, 4 (Winter): 1–35.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Barbara. 1999. Assessing the “New” Integration: The MERCOSUR Trade Agreement. In Racing to Regionalize: Democracy, Capitalism, and Regional Political Economy, ed. Kenneth, P. Thomas and Mary Ann, Tétrault. Boulder: Westview Press. 33–56.Google Scholar
Lake, David, and Patrick, Morgan, eds. 1997. Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 1999a. Argentina: Budget Cuts Trigger Dual Response. May 11: 206.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 1999b. Brazilian Threat is Changing Stances of Argentine Businessmen on Key Policies. August 24: 385.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 1999c. Brazil Escalates Tit-for-Tat Measures: Latest Restriction Affects 400 Argentine Products. September 21: 434.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 1999d. After Seattle Fiasco, Brazil Shifts Priority Back to Strengthening Mercosur. December 21: 589.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 2001. Argentina: First Default Hurdle Cleared. Production, Meanwhile, is Still in Free Fall. December 18: 590.Google Scholar
Latin American Weekly Report (LAWR) . 2002. De-coupled, but Still at Risk: Argentine Crisis Threatens Brasilia's Mercosur Strategy. January 2: 4.Google Scholar
Lavagna, Roberto, and Fabio, Giambiagi. 1998. Mercosur: hacia la creación de una moneda común. Archivos del Presente 3, 12 (April-June): 45–61.Google Scholar
Lawrence, Robert. 1996. Regionalism, Multilateralism, and Deeper Integration. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Luttwak, Edward. 1990. From Geopolitics to Geoeconomics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce. The National Interest (Summer): 17–23.Google Scholar
Luttwak, Edward. 1999. Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global Economy. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Mander, Jerry, and Edward, Goldsmith, eds. 1996. The Case Against the Global Economy, and for a Turn toward the Local. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
Manzetti, Luigi. 199394. The Political Economy of Mercosur. Journal of Inter-american Studies and World Affairs 35, 4 (Winter): 101–41.Google Scholar
Markwald, Ricardo, and Joào Bosco, Machado. 1999. Establishing an Industrial Policy for Mercosur. in Roett 1999. 63–80.Google Scholar
Marshall, D. 1996. Understanding Late-Twentieth-Century Capitalism: Reassessing the Globalization Theme. Government and Opposition 31: 193–205.Google Scholar
Mastanduno, Michael. 1991. Do Relative Gains Matter? America's Response to Japanese Industrial Policy. International Security 16 (Summer): 73–113.Google Scholar
Milner, Helen. 1991. The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: a Critique. Review of International Studies 17 (January): 67–85.Google Scholar
Milner, Helen. 1998. Rationalizing Politics: the Emerging Synthesis of International, American, and Comparative Politics. International Organization 52, 4 (Autumn): 759–86.Google Scholar
Mistry, Percy. 1995. Open Regionalism: Stepping Stone or Millstone toward an Improved Multilateral System? In Regionalism and the Global Economy: The Case of Latin America and the Caribbean, ed. Jan, Teunissen. The Hague: Forum on Debt and Development. 11–31.Google Scholar
Mittelman, James. 1994. Rethinking the “New Regionalism” in the Context of Globalization. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, Washington, Dc, March.Google Scholar
Motta Veiga, Pedro. 1999. Brazil in Mercosur: Reciprocal Influence. in Roett 1999. 25–33.Google Scholar
Nader, Ralph, et al. 1993. The Case Against Free Trade: GATT, NAFTA, and the Globalization of Corporate Power. San Francisco: Earth Island Press.Google Scholar
New York Times . 1999. Argentines Suffering from Brazil Crisis. February 8.Google Scholar
New York Times . 2001a. South American Trade Bloc under Siege: Mercosur Faces Internal Disputes as Well as External Pressures. March 24: B2.Google Scholar
New York Times . 2001b. From No Aid to a Bailout: in the End U.S. Felt It Had to Help Argentina. August 23: A1, A6.Google Scholar
Nofal, María. 1994. Mercosur and Free Trade in the Americas. In Integrating the Americas: Shaping Future Trade Policy, ed. Sidney, Weintraub. New Brunswick: Transaction. 137–67.Google Scholar
Panitch, Leo. 1994. Globalization and the State. In Socialist Register 1994: Between Globalism and Nationalism, ed. Ralph, Miliband and Panitch, . London: Merlin Press. 60–93.Google Scholar
Pereyra, Lia V. 1999. Toward the Common Market of the South: Mercosur's Origins, Evolution, and Challenges. in Roett 1999. 7–23.Google Scholar
Pion-Berlin, David. 2000. Will Soldiers Follow? Economic Integration and Regional Security in the Southern Cone. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 42, 1 (Spring): 43–69.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: the Logic of Two-level Games. International Organization 42, 3 (Summer): 427–60.Google Scholar
Regúnaga, C. M. 1997. Seguridad jurídica in Mercosur. Comments on Argentine Trade 79, 5 (December): 27.Google Scholar
Roett, Riordan, ed. 1999. Mercosur: Regional Integration, World Markets. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Sandholtz, Wayne, et al. 1992. The Highest Stakes: The Economic Foundations of the Next Security System. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schott, Jeffrey. 2001. Prospects for Free Trade in the Americas. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Gilson. 1996. Brazil, MERCOSUR, and SAFTA: Destructive Restructuring or Pan-American Integration? In Cooperation or Rivalry? Regional Integration in the Americas and the Pacific Rim, ed. Shoji, Nishijima and Peter, H. Smith. Boulder: Westview Press. 129–49.Google Scholar
Soares deLima, Maria R. 1996. Brazil's Response to the “New Regionalism”. In Foreign Policy and Regionalism in the Americas, ed. Gordon, Mace and Jean-Philippe, Thérien. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. 137–58.Google Scholar
Solingen, Etel. 1998. Regional Orders at Century's Dawn: Global and Domestic Influences on Grand Strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Soros, George. 1999. The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered. New York: Public Affairs Press.Google Scholar
Thurow, Lester. 1992. Head to Head: The Coming Economic Battle among Japan, Europe, and America. New York: Warner Books.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State. International Information Programs. 2001. Quebec Summit: Remarks by Fox, Pastrana, Cardoso, Arthur. http:usinfo.state.govregionalarsummitexcerpts22.htm.Google Scholar
VanKlaveren, Alberto. 1993. Why Integration Now? Options for Latin America. In The Challenge of Integration: Europe and the Americas, ed. Peter, H. Smith. New Brunswick: Transaction. 115–45.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1950. The Customs Union Issue. New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
Wade, Robert. 1996. Globalization and Its Limits: Reports of the Death of the National Economy Are Greatly Exaggerated. In National Diversity and Global Capitalism, ed. Suzanne, Berger and Ronald, Dore. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 60–88.Google Scholar
Weiss, Linda. 1997. Globalization and the Myth of the Powerless State. New Left Review 225 (September-October): 3–27.Google Scholar
Van Whiting, R. Jr. 1993. The Dynamics of Regionalization: Road Map to an Open Future? In The Challenge of Integration: Europe and the Americas, ed. Peter, H. Smith. New Brunswick: Transaction. 17–49.Google Scholar
Williamson, John. 1990. The Progress of Policy Reform in Latin America. Policy Analyses in International Economics no. 28. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Wise, Carol. 2000. Argentina's Currency Board: The Ties that Bind? In Exchange Rate Politics in Latin America, ed. Wise, and Riordan, Roett. Washington DC: Brooking Institution Press. 93–122.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2001. World Development Report 2000–2001: Attacking Poverty. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wyatt-Walter, Andrew. 1995. Regionalism, Globalization, and World Economic Order. In Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organization and International Order, ed. Fawcett, L. and Andrew, Hurrell. New York: Oxford University Press. 74–121.Google Scholar
Yeats, Alexander. 1997. Does MERCOSUR's Trade Performance Raise Concerns About the Effects of Regional Trade Arrangements? Working Paper no. 1729. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
Zysman, John. 1996. The Myth of a “Global” Economy: Enduring National Foundations and Emerging Regional Realities. New Political Economy 1, 2: 157–84.Google Scholar