“Does insecurity has an influence in the failure or success of regional integration?” comparing the european union and mercosur

Universität Mannheim
Professor: Bettina Trueb
_______________________________________________________

“Does insecurity has an influence in the failure or success of regional integration?”
Comparing the European Union and Mercosur

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………2
2. REALIST THEORY ……………………………………………………………………3
a. “REGIONAL INTEGRATION POLICIESFORMULATED IN “WARRIOR” STATES ARE MORE LIKELY TO SUCCED THAN THE ONES FORMULATED IN ´PEACEFUL´ STATES”: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK …………………………………………………………………4
3. “REGIONAL INTEGRATION POLICIES FORMULATED IN “WARRIOR” STATES ARE MORE LIKELY TO SUCCED THAN THE ONES FORMULATED IN ´PEACEFUL´ STATES”: COMPARING MERCOSUR AND EUROPEAN UNION CASES ………………………………………………………………………………….6
b. Mercosur………………………………………………………………………..6
c. Relating Mercosur´s failure to its´ members warrior history …………………...8
d. European Union ………………………………………………………………...9
4. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………10

1. INTRODUCTION
Failure of regional integration in Latin America is undeniable. Although there has been a lot of research in this topic, the reasons for the failure of regional integration inLatin America lack of consensus or are still unclear. The aim of this paper is to explain regional integration´s failure from the security point of view. The research question for this paper is therefore: “Does insecurity has an influence in the failure or success of regional integration?”
Security, from my point of view, can be classified in 1) national security and 2) interior security. Whentalking about national security, we mean national security at the international level regarding military power. By interior security we understand society´s perception of security regarding life standards, delinquency and the “new threats of security”, such as terrorism, narcotrafic or organized crime. (Marcela Donadio, GOBERNABILIDAD Y SEGURIDAD EN EL PROCESO DE INTEGRACIÓN HEMISFÉRICA: DESAFÍOSDESDE EL CONO SUR, Documento presentado en el Summer Institute, York University, Toronto, Canada, Julio 2001) http://www.resdal.org/Archivo/d0000190.htm
In order to do a complete explanation of the failure of regional integration in Latin America from the security point of view it is necessary to deepen in both aspects of security, the international level security (“national security”) and thenational level security, the (“interior security”). But as this would exceed the length of this paper, I will focus on explaining regional integration in Latin America´s failure from the 1st perspective, the “national security” as one of the two variables that explain the issue integrally. The hypothesis I will work with in this paper is: “Regional integration policies formulated in ´warrior states´are more likely to succeed than the ones formulated in ´peaceful states´”. My cases of study will be the European Union and Mercosur.
I will use as a framework the realist theory, which emphasizes the importance of security to States. Therefore, I will explain why the realist theory is the one I chose for this paper and will deepen in the aspects of the theory that are important to my point. Iwill then put forward how I got to my hypothesis and, finally, I will compare the Mercosur case with the European Union case, contrasting the failure and success of each project and the “warrior history” of each region.
2. REALIST THEORY
In realist theory States are the main actors. The international scenario is international anarchy, which makes “States be States wolf”. As there is nosupranational instance to regulate relations, the only way to dissuade is having their own capacities: this is what is called “self-help” of the States. Waltz describes this as follows:

“If you don't do it for yourself, you cannot count on anybody else doing it for you. They may help; they may not. You don't know. You can't count on that. You're on your own.”
(Conversation with K. N....