The Distinctiveness of the Latin American Security System—Why Is It so Different? Public International Law Perspective

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter highlights the distinctiveness of international law as applied and formed by the Latin American States with regard to the security issues. Following the concept pursued in this book, the chapter will be divided into four parts. The first one, ideas, discusses the principles of non-intervention and commitment to democracy as the fundaments of the Latin American security system; the second one, interests, concerns the Latin American States’ security interests; the third part, institutions, is focused on the Latin American institutional security framework; and finally, interactions show the relations between the Latin American and universal security systems from the perspective of international law. The thesis advanced in this paper is that Latin American security system is distinct from the universal one not only in terms of important security issues, history and pursued policies, but also because of the specific application and understanding of principles and institutions of international law, which underline the autonomy of the Latin American region from the rest of the international community.

Keywords

Democracy Non-intervention Public international law 

References

Literature

  1. Alvarez, Alejandro. 1909. Latin America and International Law. American Journal of International Law 3 (2): 269–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Caminos, Hugo. 1988. The Latin American Contribution to International Law. In The American Society of International Law Proceedings of the 80th Annual Session, 157–161, Washington.Google Scholar
  3. Chayes, Abram. 1962–1963. Law and the Quarantine of Cuba. Foreign Affaires 41: 550–557.Google Scholar
  4. Doswald-Beck, Louise. 1985. The Legality of Military Intervention by Invitation of the Government. The British Year Book of International Law 56 (1): 189–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duxbury, Alison. 2011. The Participation of State in International Organization: The Role of Human Rights and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Epstein, William. 2001. The Making of the Treaty of Tlatelolco. The Journal of History of International Law 3 (2): 153–179.Google Scholar
  7. Espiell, Hector Gros. 1977. U.S.A. e denuclearizzazione nell’America Latina. Rivista di Studi Politici Internazionali 44 (4): 565–578.Google Scholar
  8. Espiell, Hector Gros. 1978. The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (The Tlatelolco Treaty): Present Situation and Future Prospects. AEA Bulletin 20 (5): 25–34.Google Scholar
  9. Farah, Douglas. 2015. The Advance of Radical Populist Doctrine in Latin America How the Bolivarian Alliance is Remaking Militaries, Dismantling Democracy and Combatting the Empire. PRISM 5 (3): 91–105.Google Scholar
  10. Farer, Thomas. 1996. Collectively Defending Democracy in the Western Hemisphere: Introduction and Overview. In Beyond Sovereignty: Collectively Defending Democracy in the Americas, ed. Thomas Farer, 1–28. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fitch, John Samuel. 1998. The Armed Forces and Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
  12. Fox, Donald T. 1968. Doctrinal Development in the Americas: From Non-intervention to Collective Support for Human Rights. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 1 (1): 44–60.Google Scholar
  13. Henkin, Louis. 1991. The Invasion of Panama Under International Law: A Gross Violation. Columbia Journal of Transnational 29: 503–515.Google Scholar
  14. Jácome, Francine. Security Perspectives in Latin America. THINK PIECE 04: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 1–6. www.library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/12103.pdf.
  15. Kanakaratne, N.T.D. 1965. US Intervention and the UN Charter. Guild Practitioner 24: 106–116.Google Scholar
  16. Macdonald, Ronald St. J. 1963–1964. The Organization of American States in Action. University of Toronto Journal 15 (2): 359–429.Google Scholar
  17. Meeker, Leonard C. 1963. Defensive Quarantine and the Law. American Journal of International Law 57: 515–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pearce Higgins, Alexander. 1924. The Monroe Doctrine. British Year Book of International Law 5: 103–118.Google Scholar
  19. Sorj, Bernardo. 2005. Security, Human Security and Latin America. Sur—International Journal on Human Rights 3: 39–55.Google Scholar
  20. Thomas, A.J., Jr. 1959. Non-intervention and Public Order in Americas. In Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at Its Fifty-Third Annual Meeting, April 30–May 2, 72–80.Google Scholar
  21. van Wynen Thomas, Ann, and A.J. Thomas Jr. (eds.). 1956. Non-intervention. The Law and Its Import in the Americas. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press.Google Scholar
  22. van Wynen Thomas, Ann, and A.J. Thomas Jr. 1959. The Organization of American States and Collective Security. Southwestern Law Journal 13 (2): 177–214.Google Scholar
  23. Varas, Augusto. 1998. Cooperative Hemispheric Security after the Cold War. In Regional Mechanisms and International Security in Latin America, ed. Olga Pellicer, 10–44. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Vasiliki, Saranti. 2011. A System of Collective Defense of Democracy: The Case of Inter-American Democratic Charter. Goettingen Journal of International Law 3: 675–714.Google Scholar
  25. Wedgwood, Ruth. 1991. The Use of Force in International Affairs Self-Defense and the Panama Invasion. Columbia Journal of International 29: 609–628.Google Scholar

Material Sources

  1. Additional Protocol Relative to Non-intervention. In United States Treaties and International Agreement, Compiled by Charles I. Bevans 3 (1931–1945). Washington: Department of State 1968.Google Scholar
  2. The Caracas Declaration of Solidarity of March 28, 1954. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/intam10.asp. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  3. Declaration of Principles of Inter-American Solidarity and Cooperation. In Report of the Delegation of the United States of America to the Inter-American Conference for the Maintenance of Peace, Buenos Aires, Argentina, December 1–23, 1936. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office 1937.Google Scholar
  4. Inter-American Reciprocal Assistance and Solidarity Act. In United States Treaties and International Agreement, Compiled by Charles I. Bevans 3 (1931–1945). Washington: Department of State 1968.Google Scholar
  5. International American Conference, Historical Appendix. The Congress of 1826, Panama, and Subsequent Movements Towards a Conference of American Nations: Reports of Committees and Discussion Thereon, Vol. IV. Washington: Government Printing Office 1890.Google Scholar
  6. Letter dated 29 April 1965 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America Addressed to the President of the Security Council/Presidential Statement on the Dominican Situation, issued at 9 p.m., 28 April 1965, S/6310.Google Scholar
  7. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgement, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 14.Google Scholar
  8. Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. League of Nations Treaty Series (1933): 165–119.Google Scholar
  9. OAS General Assembly Resolution 1080, AG/RES. 1080 (XXI-O/91), Adopted at the Fifth Plenary Session, Held on June 5, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. Report of Secretary—General: An Agenda for Peace: Preventing Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping. Replies Received from Intergovernmental Organizations: The Organization of American States, S/25996.Google Scholar
  11. Resolution on the Adoption of Necessary Measures to Prevent Cuba from Threatening the Peace and Security of the Continent, 23 October 1962 [w:] American Republics Act to Halt Soviet Threat to Hemisphere: Text of Resolution, The Department of State Bulletin November 12, 1962, Vol. XLVII, no. 1220.Google Scholar
  12. Resolutions Adopted at the Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Punta del Este, Uruguay, January 22–31, 1962. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/intam17.asp. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  13. UN Security Council, 1196th Meeting, Official Records, 3 May 1965, S/PV.1196.Google Scholar

Internet Sources

  1. ALBA Info. What is the ALBA? https://albainfo.org/what-is-the-alba/. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  2. Central American Integration System. Historical Overview of SICA. http://www.sica.int/sica/resena_sica_en.aspx. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  3. Charles, Jeanette. OAS Fails to Reach Consensus on Venezuela Suspension in Latest Extraordinary Session. https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13009. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  4. Hirst, Joel D. What is the Bolivarian Alternative to the Americas and What Does It Do? Americas Quartlerly. http://www.americasquarterly.org/HIRST/ARTICLE#hirst. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  5. Holder, Frank. Public Insecurity in Latin America, March 2014. FTI Consulting. http://www.fticonsulting.com/~/media/Files/us-files/insights/reports/2014-latin-america-security-index.pdf. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  6. Human Rights Watch. Venezuela: OAS Should Invoke Democratic Charter. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/05/16/venezuela-oas-should-invoke-democratic-charter. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  7. Munton, Don. Cuban Missile Crisis. In Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. http://opil.ouplaw.com.
  8. Sanders, Ronald. Commentary: OAS Dysfunctionality Requires Charter Review. http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Commentary%3A-OAS-dysfunctionality-requires-Charter-review-33968.html. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  9. Telesur. Venezuela at OAS: If US Really Wants to Help, Stop Attacking Us. http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Venezuela-at-OAS-If-US-Really-Wants-to-Help-Stop-Attacking-Us-20170328-0032.html. Accessed on 25 July 2017.
  10. Venezuela Plans a Million Strong ‘Guerrilla Army’ against US Invasion. The Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/9471752/Venezuela-plans-a-million-strong-guerrilla-army-against-US-invasion.html. Accessed on 25 July 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Polish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations