translated from Spanish: The foreign policy we need

Foreign policy is an essential component of any national development strategy. If this changes, external political and trade relations will have to be modified. Thirty years of a neoliberal strategy have led to an undid trade opening to the world economy, while our diplomacy approached the developed countries with enthusiasm, distancing itself from Latin America and the countries of the South. The presidential candidate of the left, Gabriel Boric, announces that this must change.
The free market logic that prevails within our economy has been fully deployed in the field of external relations. A radical opening to the world was thus imposed, without protection of the internal market and without regulations in favor of sectors of productive transformation. Thus, trade policy has exacerbated export extractivism, closing opportunities for productive diversification.
Politics has been subordinated to big capital, and not only within our country, but in our relations with the outside. The economic policy of “save who can”, which destroyed Chilean industry and closed the doors to the entrepreneurship of small entrepreneurs, was complemented by an indiscriminate external opening
Consequently, the incorporation of our country into the global economy has not helped development. Growth, which businessmen, politicians and establishment economists have deified, has generated precarious employment, extreme inequalities, environmental depredation and the depletion of our natural resources. Foreign policy has been functional to that perverse growth. And this kind of growth has slowed development.
 
After a few brief years, in the early nineties, where Chile strengthened its economic and political ties with Latin America, the governments of the Concertación became dizzy with the height. They chose to privilege relations with developed countries and the Asia Pacific. Not to discuss the substantive political issues on the international agenda, but to establish economic-trade commitments in free trade agreements (FTAs). Foreign policy was subordinated to FTAs.
Thus, thanks to FTAs, developed countries and transnational corporations have secured their interests through the indiscriminate liberalization of goods and services, as well as with the expanded protection of their investments and intellectual property; and, this in exchange for the access of our exports to the big markets. This logic was also imposed in our negotiations with intermediate development countries, in the Asia Pacific, and was installed as the indisputable common sense in international organizations.
It is true that it is in the interests of small countries to open up economically to the world. The narrow internal space makes it difficult to reproduce the economy widely. But in the case of Chile, economic expansion, through FTAs with developed countries, has not been a good deal (I say for the country, for the people of Chile). By the way, the first responsibility lies not in trade policy, but in economic policy.
Indeed, our economic policy does not encourage productive transformation or help diversify exports and, at the same time, trade opening without regulations through FTAs has favoured the attraction of external investment, but it has done so towards the primary and service sectors. Thus, FTAs have served to stimulate extractivism, multiplying exports, but those of natural resources.
 
In short, our country has consolidated a productive matrix that exports natural resources and this has been favored by trade policy. Thus, foreign policy, especially since the 2000s, has supported rapprochement with developed countries, moving us away from our neighbors. Thus, this policy, together with the commitments contained in the FTAs, hinder possible common efforts with the countries of the South to act together with the world powers on issues that determine the international agenda: uncontrolled financial flows, intellectual property, state-owned controversies, the environment, among others.
 
Consequently, if the Boric government pushes for a change in the productive structure of our economy, it will also have to modify foreign policy and, in particular, foreign trade policy. It will have to introduce substantive changes. Whether unilaterally or negotiated (FTA), it will be necessary to regulate the movements of goods,In favour of the productive and social priorities proposed in the new development strategy. This has been well highlighted by Petersen and Ahumada, in reply to Ignacio Walker, who unconditionally defends the type of globalization promoted by Chilean governments (La Tercera 02-09-2021).
If effective productive diversification is carried out, both unilateral foreign trade policies and trade agreements cannot be neutral in tariffs, financial capital, foreign investments, intellectual property. Discrimination should be made in favour of industrial sectors or those production processes, which add value and knowledge to the new productive matrix.
The Boric Programme also proposes to review existing trade agreements to assess their relevance to productive diversification. It is not an easy task, but neither is it impossible. This will force renegotiations that will require goodwill and mutual respect between our country and its counterparts.  This was highlighted by the presidential candidate in his meeting with the ambassadors of the European Union (07-09-2021).
On the other hand, in the face of the reality of globalization, and the uncertainties that have arisen with the new protectionism, our country must recover multilateralism, which constitutes the best defense of small countries against powerful countries. But this policy will be effective if we are able to act together, together with the countries of Latin America and eventually with other regions of the south.
Consequently, a new government of transformations has the difficult task of strengthening the negotiating force of the “developing countries” to support the international agenda on issues of our concern: protection of ecosystems, feminism, demilitarization, peace, solidarity with migratory processes, among other issues.
At the same time, multilateralism at the economic level should aim to promote a fairer international trading and financial system, which includes: the regulation and control of financial transactions and tax havens; flexible and less expensive forms for access to state-of-the-art technologies, the reduction of deadlines in the protection of intellectual and industrial property, among other issues.
Our country project, and the possibility of influencing with greater presence in the international context, is linked to Latin America and the developing world. Chile must have a foreign policy of rapprochement and economic and diplomatic cooperation with that part of the world with which it shares interests and problems, even in the midst of the difficulties presented by regional institutions. And, it must do so, moreover, independent of the political changes of the governments of Latin America. It is true that the matter is complex. Relations with the countries of the region and, in particular, with our neighbours, are not easy.
 
Determined efforts will have to be made to address with particular concern the political and economic relations with neighbouring countries. The security and stability of Chile and, consequently, our own democracy, are linked to the need to eliminate all sources of tension with its neighbors. This is of first importance.
Diplomatic, political and economic conflicts with neighbouring countries exalt chauvinism and stimulate arguments in favour of armamentism in certain sectors of our society, with high financial costs. That is why it is necessary to deploy renewed bilateral efforts to promote mutual trust and, above all, to advance in simultaneous demilitarization initiatives.
Chile’s mid-nineties border understandings with Argentina have recently been obscured around the controversy over the sea shelf in continental ice. At the same time, the disputes with Peru and Bolivia, resolved in the Hague Court, do not diminish the historical resentments of Bolivians and Peruvians and Chileans. This must be overcome. A determined path must be embarked on that will put an end to tensions in order to ensure diplomatic closeness and peace between our countries.
Finally, there is the complex issue of regional integration, where serious difficulties have presented themselves in recent years. This sets limits on the deepening of Chile’s relations with the countries of the region and other times uncomfortable disputes occur.
Consequently, it might be necessary to give priority to subnational integration initiatives, between regions of Chile with Argentina, Bolivia and Peru. This can be more effective and in coincidence, with the decentralizing interest, which would allow interesting citizen and territorial links between neighboring countries. This, at the same time, would favour the desarThere is a roll of mutual trust between our countries, based on regional governments and social organizations.
This does not mean renouncing plurinational integration schemes.
First, we must revalue the LAIA, which has allowed tariff liberalization among all the countries of the region, especially in the nineties; but, unfortunately, in recent years, it has had little political support.
Secondly, Chile has the opportunity to play an interesting role in converging plurilateral integration initiatives between the Atlantic (Mercosur) and Pacific schemes (the Andean Development Community and the Pacific Alliance).
Finally, the new government should support CELAC, as an instance of political integration of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. And, as Mexican President López Obrador has recently proposed, CELAC will become a replacement project for the OAS.
Foreign policy and trade policy are indispensable instruments to promote a new development project in our country. Both must intelligently accompany the productive changes, as well as the economic and social policies, of rupture with neoliberalism.

The content expressed in this opinion column is the sole responsibility of its author, and does not necessarily reflect the editorial line or position of El Mostrador.

Original source in Spanish

Related Posts

Add Comment