Elites in the developing world are very vulnerable to movements that occur beyond their national borders; this, added to other factors (inability to organize, excessive dependence on the State or even the lack of elites) makes these same elites unable to formulate a consistent and sustainable action strategy. act, most of the time, in a way for this, seeking to adapt to constantly changing conditions.
The core countries, by controlling part of the main formatting factors of international relations (economic-financial processes, dominant ideologies and discussion agenda) can develop an action strategy based on the medium term and, in some rarer cases, long-term. This is possible because there is a very close proximity between national elites (especially those creators of the aforementioned formative factors of international relations) and the government with all its bureaucratic structure.
In these countries, how it is possible to stipulate sustainable action strategies, elites and the government can (even should, if they want to sustain their power) establish an agreement in which the strengthening of one implies the strengthening of the other. In the commercial area, we can understand this “agreement” more clearly: while central countries exert strong pressure for trade liberalization, practice the most varied forms of protectionism and subsidies for agriculture (area in which they are, to put it in the same terms that they use, less competitive). It is important to note that the examples are not restricted to agriculture (the issue of Brazilian steel, and the Embraer clashes versus Bombardier are also going in this direction).
Given this situation in which relationships are already beginning to be unequal,, it was up to the developing world to strive to find loopholes in the system or fight to delay the process as much as possible. However, a change is operating in this field. Mercosur, that at the beginning of the decade of 90 was thought of as a way to delay the FTAA, is now understood as an important source of political power. Why would such a transformation occur??
It seems, ainda não conseguimos agir num sistema internacional no qual podemos estabelecer estratégias de ações sustentáveis. Entre outras, podemos encontrar duas razões: (1) o drástico processo de modernização do Estado e da sociedade brasileira – ainda em curso – fez com que as elites tradicionalmente dependentes do Estado fossem forçadas a buscar a preservação de seu poder em outros campos. Thereby, quebrou o círculo vicioso no qual vivíamos, segundo o qual o fortalecimento de um implicava no enfraquecimento do outro, num jogo geralmente de soma negativa. Essa quebra força elites e governo a buscarem um apoio mútuo benéfico a ambos (basta vermos o aumento das vendas de carne brasileira no mercado internacional após as suspensões de compra, alleging contamination by “mad cow”).
Added to this, (2) developing countries are discovering that their union can generate mutual strength. With the exception of the Non-Aligned Movement – which occurred at a very particular moment in history – developing countries strive to demonstrate that they strictly follow the developed model, seeking to ingratiate themselves with these latter. In this effort, individual action gains prominence. The hardening of the American republican government, added to the establishment of an action strategy based on the sustainability of continuous and condensed gains, hampered the action that developing countries experienced in the international system.
Originally published in:
magazine Author
Pol & iacute; tica
Year II – N. 8 – February of 2002
No Responses