Resumo em Inglês:

A scholarly debate is emerging on how recent regional trends in Latin America and South America have impacted the meanings and practices of sovereignty. This debate pits two groups engaged in regionalist analysis against each other: the optimists and the skeptics. Optimists argue that recent changes in regionalism are having a transformative impact on sovereignty. Skeptics acknowledge that changes in regionalism have occurred, but that they have been accompanied by persistent and traditional sovereignty meanings and practices. The article employs a tripartite conception of sovereignty regime-sovereign, space, and authority-to sketch the parameters of the debate. Given the recent origins of ALBA, CELAC, and UNASUR, as well as the post-hegemonic regionalism which they reflect and promote, this debate can only be resolved through ambitious qualitative empirical research, especially in South America, the regional experience upon which many of the contending claims are made. Such a research agenda on the regionalism-sovereignty nexus has both significant theoretical and practical implications for understanding Latin America's and South America's unique regional, institutional, and sovereignty patterns, as well as the limits and possibilities for regional governance.

Resumo em Inglês:

This paper introduces the idea of the EU as a 'model' of regional integration, linking it to the literature on Europe as a normative power. The second part discusses the influence of the EU model on regional cooperation and integration in South America. In particular, it focuses on the discursive use of the model in Brazilian foreign policy during the two tenures of President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva as a dominant rhetoric for the promotion of regional integration, especially in the case of the Mercado Común del Sur(Common Market of the South, MERCOSUR) and the Unión de Naciones Suramericanas (Union of South American Nations, UNASUR). The last part looks at the impact of the financial crisis on the 'deconstruction' of this ideal model of European integration and attempts to discern how this will influence the future discourse on regional cooperation integration in South America, and primarily in Brazil. To illustrate the shift that has occurred in Brazilian views of regionalism, this part also discusses the Brazilian support of a new form of regional integration, as embodied in the creation of CELAC, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.

Resumo em Inglês:

This paper aims to explore the consequences of institutionalization in regional integration processes. More specifically, it explores the creation of representative regional institutions which strengthen integration, while at the same time affecting the distribution of sovereign and representative powers among the players involved in the policy-making process within member states. The premise is that institutionalization at a regional level brings gains in strategic actions and more efficient mechanisms of collective international action, on one hand, but on the other, it can have a democratic cost, in terms of a society's participation and control over collective decisions which impact the national decision-making process. In the case of the Latin American integration process, the initiative of setting up a regional parliament for MERCOSUL, the PARLASUL, must be understood within the problematic context of the effects of regional representation on national sovereignty. Thus, although with some limitations, the European experience serves as a parallel to the initiatives of establishing regional parliaments. The paper is divided into three sections: the first is historical and theoretical; it covers the origin and transformations of the modern sovereign state system, along with the changes that have occurred over time from regional integration events and their differences. Some concepts and classic theoretical approaches on the topic are reference sources, such as the contributions of Schmitter (1970), Mattli (1999) and Fawcett and Hurrell (2003), for example. In the second section, one of the characteristics of the new regionalism is explored: institutional innovation (HURRELL, 1995). In this case, the aim is to further verify the impact of regional integration on national politics, the role of the regional parliaments and the purpose of extra-state representation, its different models and its consequences for national sovereignty of states involved in the integration process. The dialogue with different points of view will be fundamental, especially in order to draft analytical dimensions of the impact of the changes that occurred with the emergence of a new form of regional representation (FAWCETT; HURRELL, 2003; MALAMUD; SOUZA, 2005; DRI, 2009; 2010; LINDBERG, 1963). Could an extra form of representation come at a cost of the suppression of less opportunity for participation? In the third section, the relation between representation and sovereignty is evaluated, as well as the role of representative institutions in policy making (KEOHANE; HOFFMANN, 1991; RITTBERGER, 2012; JACOB, 2007). In this section, the experience of the European Parliament will shed light on the analysis of the constitution of a representative institution on a regional level, such as the one expected by the PARLASUL. Finally, the article traces a few conclusions on representation in the context of regional integration processes and the importance of information and social awareness of such processes as a measure of democratic legitimacy.

Resumo em Inglês:

At the same time during which the European Union is passing through one of the worst crises in its history, the attempts to promote regionalism in South America are also beset by grave problems, with some commentators suggesting that 'regionalism is out, sovereignty back in', in the words of Andrés Malamud. This article aims to respond to the question whether there is a connection between the problems confronted in Europe and the difficulties here in the region. In other words, what has been the impact of the European crisis on the prospects for highly developed regionalism in South America. Based on interviews with policy-makers and representatives of Brazilian industry, as well as an analysis of the existing literature, the article argues that, even though both have suffered as a consequence of the general global political and economic trends - and both suffer from similar problems in terms of their strategic thinking - the particularities of each case does not allow for a direct causal link between the European and South American case.

Resumo em Inglês:

This paper shows, from an interdisciplinary perspective, the incidence of lack of "stateness" and its construction process in Latin American states, as well as showing the reluctance on the part of Latin American states to transfer sovereignty to regional integrational organizations. First, classical and contemporary ideas of sovereignty are contrasted, in order to understand the development of the sovereignty concept in Latin America and Europe. Second, we interpret how the sovereignty concept has been conceived through Latin American states' formation process. Third, the sovereignty process is adressed within integration thinking and its three big waves: the developmental, neoliberal and post-hegemonic waves. Fourth, the concept of sovereignty in Latin America and its impact on the region are discussed critically. Fifth, current regionalism perspectives are explained. Sixth, the current relationship between sovereignty and regionalization in South America is described. And finally, throughout this paper, we maintain that it is the weakness of "stateness" in the Latin American states which has had an important influence on their reluctance to transfer national sovereignty to regional integration institutions.

Resumo em Inglês:

There is an inherent contradiction between the regional integration projects in Latin America, albeit rhetorically conducted, and the staunch defense by most countries of their national sovereignty, which restricts and opposes many liberalization mechanisms implicit in, and necessary to, the integration processes, based on the rendition of sovereignty in some areas of economic relevance, including, and especially, trade and industrial policies, as well as other sectorial measures. The dilemma is historically compounded by a juridical tradition that places the retraction into an introverted version of the sovereignty principle into the context of conceptual elaborations well known in the international law, such as Calvo doctrine and the Drago principle. Brazil is one of the most resolute promoters of the national sovereignty principle among Latin American countries, clearly expressed in its constitutional chart and foreign policy stances, since the Second Hague peace conference of 1907. Other Latin American countries, mainly in Central America and the Caribbean, are much more motivated by real concerns over recurrent United States interventionism in the regional, in some cases by military means. This framework has somewhat infringed on integration projects, which is also hindered by economic nationalism and state interventionism.

Resumo em Inglês:

The article provides an outlook of the regional relations concerning nuclear technology in Latin America. For that purpose, we initially discuss the historic relationship of the Latin American countries with the set of rules, norms, principles and organizations involved in nuclear governance. The article provides an analysis of the connection between the multilateral institutional framework and the bilateral arrangements aimed at curbing the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region. The current state of nuclear cooperation among the countries of the region is also mapped. In addition, the article assesses the peaceful use of nuclear technology in the region and the potential expansion of the use of nuclear energy by the Latin American countries. Considerations on the trends for nuclear cooperation among the countries of Latin America are also offered.

Resumo em Inglês:

This article explores the history of regional integration in the Americas, drawing lessons from the diverse ways that people have sought to unite the hemisphere. It begins at the point when most of the modern nation-states of Latin America came into being: the nineteenth-century wars for independence. From there, it traces various attempts at regional integration, keeping in mind three fundamental questions: How does regional integration compromise sovereignty? Does it have to? Is it worth sacrificing sovereignty to increase integration? The article concludes that while every attempt at regional integration in the Americas has required the participants to voluntarily sacrifice some measure of their sovereignty, the most successful efforts have been those that either kept the sacrifice to a minimum or offered significant enough rewards to offset the loss of sovereignty.

Resumo em Inglês:

BRICS, an abbreviation for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, a group of five influential and emerging economies successfully completed its fifth annual summit in Durban during March 26-27, 2013. A significantly unique feature of the group is its geographical spread as evident from the location of these five constituent states which are situated in four continents. The paper seeks to explain the phenomenon of the disparate group BRICS through literature in Critical Geography as it is understood that the recent phase of globalization has created spatial patterns which were hitherto not experienced and therefore not clearly recognized in the literature on International Relations and traditional geography. Such spatially variegated groupings like the BRICS could be analyzed and interpreted in Critical Geography and Critical Geopolitics literature through three important concepts: a) Space b) Geographical and Geopolitical Imaginations and c) Region. The paper seeks to explain BRICS through these conceptual tools.