|
The South American experience with confidence-building measures has been markedly different from the Central American one for the obvious reason that South America did not live through the protracted conflict and peacemaking process which dominated Central America in the 1980s and early 1990s. Thus, there was no UN peace-keeping presence in South America, and there was no overarching treaty or Contadora/ Esquipulas Treaty framework in which to ground specific CBMs. Nevertheless, CBMs have been of considerable significance in South America in this period, especially when linked to schemes for economic and political integration. The explicit use of CBMs in this connection may well turn out to have as significant long-term effects as in Central America. Of particular interest is the notion that CBMs and shifts in strategic geopolitical thinking can change the role of the military and assist in strengthening the democratic process. The most dramatic shifts have occurred in the Argentine-Brazilian relationship, which has the potential of driving most of the other political, strategic and economic arrangements in southern South America. However, there are other equally significant changes, such as in the Argentine-Chilean and even the Argentine-British relationship which have been positively affected by CBMs in the past decade. Put in other words, CBMs can assist in shifting the strategic paradigm from one based on hostility and conflict-laden geopolitics to one which stresses "geo-economics" and the geopolitics of cooperation and integration with neighbors. ==The conflict possibilities== Although often ignored outside of the region, South America has a series of historic strains between pairs of bordering states which have always had the potential of flaring up and reaching the conflict stage. Because the military establishments of many of the South American nations have considerably greater potential than the Central American ones, any inter-state armed conflict would be far more damaging than in Central America (the example of the 1982 Anglo-Argentina war over the Falklands/Malvinas is illustrative). Furthermore, the military establishments of the nations involved have a vested interest in using these possible conflicts as justifications for their budgets, troop levels, and influence. Their use of classical "war hypotheses" based on geopolitical thinking and historic animosities with neighbors is an enduring feature which has shaped military roles and missions. Thus, CBMs can have considerable potential if they serve to reduce these animosities, diminish the credibility of the "war hypotheses", and make the possibilities of conflict less likely. A short list of potential bilateral conflict situations would include: Guyana-Venezuela; Venezuela-Colombia; Ecuador-Peru; Peru-Chile; Bolivia-Chile; Chile-Argentina; Argentina-Brazil; Argentina-United Kingdom. Conflicts which are multilateral would include Argentine-Brazilian competition for influence in the South American "buffer states" (Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia); attempts to exercise control over extensive economic or patrimonial maritime zones (such as the Chilean effort to claim a "Mar Presencial"); and issues of sovereignty and resources in the quadrant of Antarctica which is associated with South America, and which is claimed by Argentina, Chile and Great Britain, despite the presence of scientific bases of some 18 nations, including the U. S. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Confidence-building measures in South America」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|