Since the return to democracy in 1983, Argentina’s foreign policy has been tied to the changing patterns of its political system and development model. In the 80’s, the main problem was the country’s democratic stability and the political control of the military. Foreign policy reflected these concerns, seeking to increase regional cooperation to strengthen democracy and seeking to diminish conflict hypotheses to reduce the weight off the military. In the 90’s, the aim was more focused on state and market reform, leaving aside state interventionism and protectionism in order to move to a strategy of openness, stability and privatization. Foreign policy became in part a strategy to secure domestic changes and to project Argentina as a “normal” country fully integrated to the world. The 2002 crisis put an end to the political and economic cycle. Foreign policy was again a manifestation of this domestic transformation. Nestor Kirchner sought to regain presidential power, recover state power, and put Argentina back into the South American concert. Foreign policy reflected these changes, seeking enhance Argentina’s autonomy from the International Monetary Fund, adopting a position rather distant from the United States and rebuilding ties with South America, particularly with Brazil’s Lula and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. The ‘return’ of the state, however, placed natural resources back again in the agenda. Uruguay and Bolivia entered through this window, the first starting a conflict with Argentina over the installation of a pulp paper mill on the banks of the Rio Uruguay, the second becoming simultaneously a problem (for its political instability) and a solution ( for its rich gas resources)
