From antagonistic autonomy to relational autonomy: A theoretical reflection from the southern cone

Relational autonomy extends to all areas of state action, including military action. It is interesting to mention the experience of European countries, given that they have compromised their military autonomy through accords and commitments that bind them tightly together. In these cases, autonomy is achieved by means of an internationalization or "regionalization" strategy more than through one of nationalization (Held et al. 1999, 147).14 The steps taken by the members of MERCOSUR (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) in matters of defense and security (that is, generation of confidence, transparency, reciprocity, verification) suggest a first major advance in the sense proposed here. Neither of the two main countries in MERCOSUR believes that these policies imply abandoning its autonomy, but rather that they are indispensable for affirming its relational autonomy, as a condition as well as an objective national interest.

The same holds true for autonomy in economic matters. Something similar existed in the past, but in another political sense. There is an important qualitative difference between classic Latin American integration and that witnessed today. The former was a logical derivation of the import-substitution industrialization model; given the increasing tightness of national markets, integration was conceived as a key instrument for maintaining and deepening that model on a regional or subregional scale, always under the shield of protectionist barriers and active participation by the state (Munoz 1996, 102).

In brief, Latin American countries sought integration in order to strengthen their autonomy, based on the assumptions of "realism of the periphery." The second orientation is closely linked to the structural reform and economic liberalization policies that have conditioned the region's current international situation. Less rhetorical than in the past, this regionalism can be credited with concrete advances reflected in an increasing level of intraregional interdependence, in terms of both physical and energy-resources integration, as well as political convergence (Van Klaveren 1997, 216-23; Pizarro 1995, 199).

The various integration mechanisms currently operating in Latin America exhibit a notable diversity that attests to the heterogeneity of the continent itself. These processes nonetheless share two important traits: they seek to strengthen commercial, financial, and investment links with the centers of world economic power; and they are considered to be compatible with the world trade order. This certainly does not imply, however, that Latin America has renounced the use of regional strategy as a policy instrument for strengthening its bargaining power in regard to other external actors, such as the United States and the European Union.

Relational autonomy contains a strong democratic component; it is based on a system of beliefs that respects and foments human freedom; it is founded on civic identities as opposed to sectarian and exclusive national identities; it favors the practice of commitment and negotiation; it implies a pattern of activity sustained by growing participation and influence of national societies in decisions related to international matters; and it requires the surrender of areas of de jure sovereignty (in economic, political, and security matters) that can be considered and carried out only in the context of democracy. Unlike other viewpoints in vogue today that assert that the present "context for action" reduces the autonomy of the state while preserving sovereignty, relational autonomy involves a voluntary, increasing surrender of sovereignty that translates mainly into the creation of diverse international regimes.