The Inter-American Security System: Changes and Challenges

Beginning in the mid to late 1980’s, democracy took root in most countries in the Western hemisphere. This development in conjunction with the end of the Cold War led to a revival of the OAS and the initiation of new regional securityinstitutions. The strategic framework of the Cold War had consisted in the perception of a threat outside the hemisphere and the monopoly of the U.S. government in defi ning and identifying the enemy. As these structures lost relevance, a new security agenda came to the fore, encompassing both traditional security threats like territorial disputes and nontraditional security threats, such as terrorism and drug-traffi cking. Additionally, security was increasingly defi ned as the establishment of improved civil-military relations and the collective defense of democracy. However, the war against terrorism initiated by the U.S. after September 11, 2001 led to a revitalization of strategic framework of the Cold War. Hence, the paper analyzes how the regional security system in the Americas has changed since the early 1990s. It traces the major innovations with respect to its legal and institutional framework, the impact of the hegemonic position of the United States in the hemisphere and the challenges posed by the emergence of sub-regional organizations

The Inter-American Security System: Changes and Challenges

Beginning in the mid to late 1980’s, democracy took root in most countries in the Western hemisphere. This development in conjunction with the end of the Cold War led to a revival of the OAS and the initiation of new regional securityinstitutions. The strategic framework of the Cold War had consisted in the perception of a threat outside the hemisphere and the monopoly of the U.S. government in defi ning and identifying the enemy. As these structures lost relevance, a new security agenda came to the fore, encompassing both traditional security threats like territorial disputes and nontraditional security threats, such as terrorism and drug-traffi cking. Additionally, security was increasingly defi ned as the establishment of improved civil-military relations and the collective defense of democracy. However, the war against terrorism initiated by the U.S. after September 11, 2001 led to a revitalization of strategic framework of the Cold War. Hence, the paper analyzes how the regional security system in the Americas has changed since the early 1990s. It traces the major innovations with respect to its legal and institutional framework, the impact of the hegemonic position of the United States in the hemisphere and the challenges posed by the emergence of sub-regional organizations

Persistence and Change in Regional Security Institutions: Does the OAS Still Have a Project?

This article follows the recent trend of bringing the Organization of American States (OAS) back into the debate on regional security, previously dominated by the accomplishments of European institutions and the shortcomings of their Asian and African counterparts. The study of the OAS is advanced here through application of an analytical framework derived from institutionalist theory. A security organization may change its form during its lifetime and pursue different kinds of tasks. The oldest regional security institution, the OAS was designed for collective security. This yielded to collective defence during the Cold War, and to cooperative security in the 1990s. After 11 September it returned to collective defence, but the contradictory reassertion of United States leadership and the emergence of South American regional power made hemispheric cooperation more difficult again. The OAS's main achievement is the extension of essential principles – democracy, human rights, and peaceful conflict resolution – to the entire hemisphere. As a diversified institution addressing a wide variety of security challenges, however, the OAS must find a coherent project alongside more focused sub-regional organizations such as the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR)

How regional organizations cope with recurrent stress: the case of South America

Barely 15 years after the 2008 financial crisis and in a context of rising nationalism, regional organizations are facing multiple challenges. This article introduces an analytical framework that systematizes stressors and identifies characteristics that might help regional organizations to cope with stress. It draws on psychological models of how individuals cope with stress to explore how regional organizations grapple with a sequence of stress situations. Stress factors can aggravate pre-existing problems in regionalism and contribute to regional disintegration. But they can also trigger counter-reactions and strengthen the resilience of regionalism. To substantiate our arguments, we study the repercussions of two recent crises for South American regionalism: the political crisis in Venezuela and the Covid-19 pandemic

China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Curse or Blessing for Democracy in Eurasia?

This chapter sets the stage for the debates addressed in this volume’s special section on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its effects on democratization or autocratization processes in recipient countries and societies since its establishment in 2013. After providing a brief overview of the expansion of the BRI and Chinese influence in Eurasia, it subsequently reviews core assumptions and preliminary findings on the implications of the BRI for the political regime type in countries across Eurasia that receive BRI investments. Furthermore, it gives an outlook on the contributions to the special section and outlines questions for future research on the political effects of the BRI

Autocracia, populismo e nacionalismo: desafiando a democracia, perturbando as relações internacionais? [Autocracy, Populism and Nationalism: Challenging Democracy, Disturbing International Relations?]

Democracia, autocracia, populismo e nacionalismo são conceitos importantes para entender a dinâmica dos sistemas políticos em todo o mundo. Eles têm estado na vanguarda dos desenvolvimentos políticos recentes. A democracia é um sistema de governo em que o poder é detido pelo povo por meio de eleições livres e justas. A autocracia, por outro lado, é um sistema de governo em que o poder é detido por um único indivíduo ou por um pequeno grupo de indivíduos. O populismo é uma ideologia política que busca apelar para os interesses e as emoções das pessoas comuns, geralmente por meio do uso de uma retórica que critica o establishment político. O nacionalismo enfatiza a importância da identidade nacional e promove os interesses do próprio país acima de todos os outros. Este relatório examina esses conceitos e reflete sobre suas implicações para as relações internacionais. O objetivo é equipar o leitor com uma caixa de ferramentas conceituais para entender como as tendências recentes de declínio democrático e a ascensão do populismo e do nacionalismo afetaram as relações entre o Brasil e a União Europeia. Democracy, autocracy, populism, and nationalism are important concepts in understanding the dynamics of political systems around the world. They have been at the forefront of recent political developments. Democracy is a system of government where power is held by the people through free and fair elections. Autocracy, on the other hand, is a system of government where power is held by a single individual or a small group of individuals. Populism is a political ideology that seeks to appeal to the interests and emotions of ordinary people, often through the use of rhetoric that is critical of the political establishment. Nationalism emphasizes the importance of national identity and promotes the interests of one's own country above all others. This report examines these concepts and reflects on their implications for international relations. The aim is to equip the reader with a conceptual toolbox to understand how recent trends of democratic decline and the rise of populism and nationalism have affected the relationship between Brazil and the European Union

The deterioration of South America’s security architecture: from cooperation to coexistence?

While South America made significant strides in regional security cooperation since the 1990s, more recently the region seems to have entered a process of backsliding from its cooperative achievements and towards mere coexistence. This article proposes that an English School approach allows for a nuanced assessment of regional security cooperation. It contributes to the analysis of regional international societies and regional organisations as markers of fundamental institutional change. While scholars have studied how regional organisations shape the fundamental institutions of regional international societies as they emerge and evolve, little research has been done on whether a decline in regional organisations can lead to changes in the fundamental institutions of regional international societies. Using a set of indicators for coexistence and cooperative international societies, we analyse whether there is evidence of backsliding from cooperation to coexistence in South America with regard to three different types of security challenges: interstate conflict and militarisation; inter-mestic repercussions of internal conflict and violence; and extra-regional influences. We argue that a decline in regional organisations exacerbates those challenges, as they are no longer mitigated through institutionalised diplomatic procedures. However, despite the organisational decline, fundamental institutions in South America have so far proven relatively resilient

Securitization and Democracy in Eurasia

This open-access book presents cutting-edge research on securitization and democratic development in the OSCE Region. Gathering contributions by practitioners and researchers from various disciplines, it presents case studies and highlights recent activities of proactive engagement in democratic institution-building and responding to security threats from the Balkans to Central Asia. The volume is divided into three parts, the first of which focuses on security-related matters, armed conflicts, minorities, and women’s safety, as well as the roles that civil society, foreign governments, social media, and external donors play in this area. These contributions illustrate how the OSCE’s informal approach to peace, security, and securitization as norm entrepreneur is closely linked to the level of democracy among its member states. The second part presents a special section on the political implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), assessing the impact of this infrastructural program on the levels of democracy and/or autocracy in Eurasia. The third part consists of short chapters outlining future research and debates. The book will appeal to students and scholars of international relations, security studies, and the human rights-politics nexus. This is the 2022 instalment in a series of books released by the OSCE Academy in Bishkek. The OSCE works to promote Minority Protection, Security, Democratic Development and Human Rights, guided by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), and to enhance securitization and development policies in Eurasia, Europe, Central Asia and North America. Since being founded in 1993, the OSCE and its agencies and departments have attracted a wealth of academic research in various fields and disciplines, ranging from economic development and election monitoring to enhancing global principles of human rights and securitization