Conclusion: The Americas and Regional Dis-Integration

  • Mónica Serrano


Or so one might think.


Foreign Direct Investment Free Trade Regional Integration Regional Idea Continental Drift 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    This is the “exclusive” definition of a region adopted by Barry Buzan and Ole Waever, Regions and Powers The Structure of International Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 80 — one, however, that raises more problems in their area of security complexes.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sekiguchi Sueo, “Introduction,” Road to ASEAN-10 Japanese Perspectives on Economic Integration (Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange, 1999), p. 3: “Among the new entrants [to ASEAN]… Myanmar’s military dictatorship targets economic stability and development, Vietnam’s official aim is to construct a socialist market economy, and Cambodia remains politically unstable…”Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    David R. Mares, Violent Peace: Militarized Interstate Bargaining in Latin America (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), p. 45.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Thomas E. Skidmore and Peter H. Smith, Modem Latin America (New York: Oxford University Press; 2nd edition, 1989), p. 349.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    See Guy Gosselin and Jean-Philippe Thérien, “The Organization of American States and Hemispheric Regionalism,” in Gordon Mace, Louis Bélanger, and contributors, The Americas in Transition: The Contours of Regionalism (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1999), pp. 175–93. They conclude that “it would be easy — and tempting — to overestimate the OAS’s accomplishments.”Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    This paragraph draws on Jaime Serra, “Ten Years of NAFTA,” presentation at El Colegio de México, May 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    Robert A. Pastor, Toward A North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2001), pp. 29, 30.Google Scholar
  8. Just how internally solidaristic, as opposed to committedly liberalizing the EU is, receives an interesting treatment in Alberta Sbragia, “The European Union as Coxswain: Governance by Steering,” in Jon Pierre (ed.), Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy (Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 219–36. On her interpretation, the “deep” structural function of the funds is to limit further redistribution.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Jean Grugel, “Latin America and the Remaking of the Americas,” in Anthony Payne and Andrew Gamble (eds), Regionalism and World Order (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996), p. 142.Google Scholar
  10. 14.
    Björn Hettne, “Regionalism, Security and Development: A Comparative Perspective,” in B. Hettne and A. Inotai (eds), Comparing Regionalisms: Implications for Global Development and International Security (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001), p. 33.Google Scholar
  11. 16.
    Stephan Haggard, “The Political Economy of Regionalism in Asia and the Americas,” in Edward D. Mansfield and Helen V. Milner (eds), The Political Economy of Regionalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997), pp. 33–4.Google Scholar
  12. 21.
    See, for example, Victor Bulmer-Thomas, “Trade Relations in the Americas,” in Victor Bulmer-Thomas and James Dunkerley (eds), The United States and Latin America: The New Agenda (Institute of Latin American Studies, University of London, 1999), p. 91: “If US views on these sensitive issues prevail within the proposed FTAA, there is much more chance that they will be adopted globally within the WTO. Thus, the FTAA — from the US perspective — can be seen as a pioneer in US efforts to shape the next generation of WTO agreements.”Google Scholar
  13. 22.
    See Nicola Phillips, “US Trade Strategies and the FTAA Process,” Focal Point (Canadian Foundation For The Americas) 3 (1) (January 2004), 3: “the increasing prioritization of bilateral agreements arises from their much greater utility in serving key US priorities: obtaining access to services markets in exchange for some exports but, at the same time, avoiding significant concessions on agricultural subsidies or modification of domestic laws on trade remedies (particularly anti-dumping); entrenching a range of disciplines in such areas as intellectual property rights and investment rules; and initiating changes to legal and regulatory structures in partner countries in order to enhance their congruence with US rade and investment interests.”Google Scholar
  14. 23.
    Sheila Page, Regionalism among Developing Countries (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000), pp. 503, 506.Google Scholar
  15. 24.
    See Monica Hirst, “Strategic Coercion, Democracy, and Free Markets in Latin America,” in Lawrence Freedman (ed.), Strategic Coercion: Concepts and Cases (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 153–62.Google Scholar
  16. 26.
    Edward D. Mansfield and Helen V. Milner, “The New Wave of Regionalism,” International Organization 53 (3) (Summer 1999) p. 607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 32.
    Stephen Clarkson, “The View From The Attic,” in Peter Andreas and Thomas J. Biersteker (eds), The Rebordering of North America: Integration and Exclusion in a New Security Context (New York: Routledge, 2003), p. 83.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Monica Serrano 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mónica Serrano

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations