IRGN 490 SPRING 2014 PETER H. SMITH LATIN AMERICA IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD

CONTACT INFO Social Science Building 364 Wednesday 2-4

Key Questions How have Latin American countries responded to shifting balances of global power? With what results? What shifts have had the most significant implications for nations of the region? What has been the range of policy choice? What accounts for convergence and/or divergence? How do major power centers view Latin America? Do they see it as important? Why and to what extent? What is the current state of U.S. relations with Latin America? Is American power on the decline?

Course Design INTRODUCTION Apr 03: Queries and Concepts Apr 10: Sizing Up the Neighborhood (David Mares) LATIN AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICIES Apr 17: Brazil—An Emerging Giant? (Riordan Roett) Apr 24: Venezuela—After Chávez, What? (Javier Corrales) May 01: Mexico—Jockeying for Position (Rafael Fernández de Castro) May 08: Cuba—What Now? (Michael Erisman)

Course Design (cont) MAJOR POWER CENTERS May 15: The European Union May 22: What Does China Really Want? (Richard Feinberg) May 29: Rogues and Other Contenders Jun 05: International Organizations—UN, WTO, OAS

Policy Analysis 101 Formation (Gardini and Lambert): 1. Ends and purposes 2. Means and capabilities 3. Agency 4. Process 5. Structure and context Results: Output vs. outcome Cause-and-effect

Gardini and Lambert Tension between pragmatism and ideology –but coexistence makes them “complementary,” not mutually exclusive “A pragmatic foreign policy is a foreign policy based on the principle that the usefulness, workability, and practicality of ideas, policies, and proposals are the criteria of their merit. It stresses the priority of action over doctrine, of experience over fixed principles…. An ideological foreign policy emphasizes principles and doctrinaire solutions over adaptability and the practical consequences of assertions and actions.”

Additional Perspectives “Grand strategies” vs. ad hoc reactions Regimes and “rules of the game” Geopolitics vs. geoeconomics Hard and soft power

Structures of Global Power Unipolarity (Krauthammer + Brzezinski)  Ending of Cold War  Economic and military primacy  U.S. as “balancer of last resort”… “still peerless” Multipolarity (Kissinger)  “… the new order will be more like the European state system of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries than the rigid patterns of the Cold War. It will consist of at least six major powers—the United States, Europe, China, Japan, Russia, and probably India—as well as a multiplicity of medium-sized and smaller countries.”  Goal: acceptable balance of power among competing states; stability and moderation

Structures (cont.) The World as Flat (Friedman)  “It is now possible for more people than ever to collaborate and compete in real time with more other people on more different kinds of work from more different corners of the planet and on a more equal footing than at any previous time in the history of the world…” The World as Pyramid (Gelb)  U.S. “alone at the pinnacle, with formidable and unique global powers of leadership, but not the power to dominate”  The Eight: BRIC + UK, Japan, France, Germany  Enablers, especially 0il and gas-producing states  Regional Players (e.g. Mexico and South Africa)  Responsibles (N ~ 50, such as Chile)  Bottom Dwellers or Problem States (N~75)

Questions Do these (or other) scenarios coexist in differing combinations? In what way? What would be the implications of each scenario for which countries of Latin America? Do they call for long-term strategies? Of what kind?

ASSIGNMENTS AND DATES May 8: Policy Memo #1 June 05: Policy Memo #2 Debates: TBA

READING GROUPS AND DEBATES

POLICY MEMOS

A CAST OF CHARACTERS