By Juan Martin G.Cabañas
The aim of this review is to examine the historical frames of Ibero-American Geopolitical thinking
Considering the historical course of the Ibero-American countries, of which most of them have already reached two centuries of their respective independence processes, or are close to reaching such dates (in the case of Brazil this September 2022, and Bolivia in 2025), as well as the reflections that arise from the recent bicentenary of the resounding Guayaquil Conference[1], and considering also to the current global context of strategic instability, makes necessary a geopolitical review of the historical frames which conditioned the leaders and thinkers of this region.
Surely the greatest paradigm of Latin or Ibero American political, and geopolitical thinking, is that of the quest for a proper identity, a discourse, and practice that can be amalgamated into an autonomous praxis of its own character, considering its own baroque, syncretic, mestizo, „criollo“ culture, with its corresponding strategic imperatives.
Also, and in addition to the previous cardinal aspect, the resistance and the pursuit of autonomy against the influence of extra-regional powers would be the common denominator and constant of such definitions, being the variant of such definitions the Hegemonic Power of its respective period, which presents the strategic challenge of the moment (Spain, Great Britain, USA).
This brief review also seeks to highlight the elements of the „originality“ of Latin American Geopolitical Thinking (LAGT). Therefore, the historical periods of Latin America and its respective Geopolitical Thinking will be briefly highlighted:
- the period of Independence (1810-1825)
This period arises with the ideas and actions that promoted the independence of Hispanic America in the 19th century,as a curious precedent in 1791 the“Carta a los españoles americanos” [2] by the Peruvian Jesuit Juan Pablo Vizcardo y Guzmán is cited, which, according to some experts, constitutes the birth certificate of Latin American political thinking by proposing for the first time the unity of Hispanic America.
Other significant doctrinal contributions as foundations of the LAGT are the “Carta de Jamaica” [3](1815) by Simón Bolívar and the essay Ensayo sobre la necesidad de una Federación general entre los Estados Hispanoamericano [4] by Bernardo de Monteagudo in 1825.
The main „Founding Fathers“ of independent Hispanic America (Miranda, San Martín, Bolívar, Artigas, Monteagudo, etc) will follow such principles in thought and action.
The greatest material expression of such reflections will be the realization of the Congress of Panamá (1826) promoted by Simon Bolivar.
- The idea of the Continental Confederation (1826)
In the newly independent territories (former Viceroyalties, General Captaincies, provinces, intendencias, of the Spanish empire in America) the idea of grouping themselves into large regional confederations arises. As examples of this historical period of Latin American geopolitical thinking, it’s worth mentioning the Bolívar Confederation project at the Panama Congress, the idea of the Central American Union of Francisco Morazán, and the „Liga de los Pueblos Libres“ [5] of José Gervasio Artigas.
As a particular aspect of this period, it is noteworthy to mention that some leaders -like Simon Bolivar himself- conceived the United States (the first independent country of the continent) as a plausible ally in the face of the constant threats of the European monarchies grouped in the Vienna Conference and the Holy Alliance.
Despite the establishment of the Monroe Doctrine (1824) the relationship and perception of the United States would be relatively cordial, until the war with Mexico (1846) that would generate the first fundamental „schism“ between Anglo-Saxon America and Hispanic America in the face of the advance of the USA towards its southern border, with the consequent several interventions in the region, especially in the area of Central America and the Caribbean.
On the contrary, the newly independent Brazil, established as a separate empire from the Portuguese, will be perceived as a threat, as an „outpost“ of the European monarchies in South America, until its establishment as a Republic at the end of the 19th century.
- The generation of the „900“ and anti-imperialism (1890-1900)
Due to the constant and different imperialist interventions in the region (both European and North American), an anti-imperialist and regional unity consciousness re-emerged among the Ibero American political and intellectual classes. This trend will emerge with particular vigor in the last decade of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th century.
The most representative thinkers of the ideas of this period are: José Enrique Rodó, Rubén Dario, José Marti and Manuel Ugarte.
The generation of the ‘”900” can be understood, in principle, as a cultural and literary movement that proposes Latin American unity based on opposition to North-American geopolitical and ideological expansionism.
That will be the stance of José Enrique Rodó in his work „Ariel“(1900) which proposed to „rescue“ and renew the Greco-Latin and Catholic tradition in Latin America against the North-American-Anglo-Saxon ideological arrogance, materialism, utilitarianism.
Although in this period the continental Latin-American spirit of unity of Bolivarism was restored, some substantial differences are evident concerning the thinking of the former: first, a strong re-valorization of the Hispanic past is observed while also the claim of the indigenous and mestizo elements of the „Latin American civilization“, as in the case of the work of Manuel Ugarte. The work of this last thinker would have a great influence, even today, among the Ibero-American leadership. His work enjoyed great importance by „rescuing“ the concept of Patria Grande[6], updating it by incorporating Brazil to it, as a constituent part of Ibero-America.
- the quest for an appropriate framework for the interpretation of Latin American reality (1914)
The transition period between the generation of the 900 and the establishment of the national-popular governments.
A prosperous period of debates arises in Latin America in the early decades of the 20th century due to the global boiling moment such as the context of the First World War, with the consequent first wave of decolonization, the notion of self-determination of peoples, the resurgence of nationalism, the emergence of socialist revolutions and the presence of the „social question”. Intellectuals and political movements will experience broad debates about how to approach these topics from an appropriate frame for Latin America as a region, and for each particular country.
Thinkers and leaders will gravitate to the main debates of the inter-war period: „the national question“ and the „social question“. The stances and relations between these 2 questions will mark the characteristics of the different ideological tendencies, some more linked to nationalism, and others more linked to socialism.
This period counts among its greatest exponents the Peruvians José Carlos Mariátegui[7] and Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre[8] and the Mexican José Vasconcelos[9].From different ideological frameworks (the first Marxist, the others from a mixed and syncretic ideological framework), there were outstanding efforts from such prominent thinkers to make an original interpretation of the reality of the region.
- National-Popular political (and social) movements and governments (1918-1980)
They were political leaderships and governments of diverse ideological orientation but which had some common denominators, representing attempts -some deeper than others- of national resistance and peoples emancipation, postulating autonomous models of regional political and economic organization, as well as the quest for joint regional action on the international stage to reduce the influence of global powers in the region.
– First stage (1915-1930): the Mexican revolution, the actions of Augusto César Sandino in Nicaragua, the Peruvian APRA, and the Argentine Radicalism.
– Second stage (1930-1970): the governments of Lázaro Cárdenas (México), Getúlio Vargas (Brazil), Juan Domingo Perón (Argentina, influenced by Christian Humanism and Personalism), Carlos Ibañez (Chile), Juan Velasco Alvarado (Peru), Jacobo Arbenz (Guatemala), Víctor Paz Estensoro (Bolivia), Juan Bosch (Dominican.Rep), among others.
At this moment[10] (1953) Perón would propose the “Continentalismo” (Continentalism) that would be originated from the geopolitical core of the second ABC agreement (Argentina, Brazil and Chile) as basic axis for a South American continental pole.
- National-Popular governments and leaderships of the Post-Washington Consensus period (2000- )
Period of renewal and revitalization of the previous political movements, as well as the emergence of new ones, after two decades of neoliberal predominance (the 1980s and 1990s) in the region.
This trend is sometimes named in the press -and then in different fields- as the „Pink Tide“ of the 2000s.
The heterogeneity of their governments and leaders also stands out as a characteristic of this period, which in some cases implied important socio-economic achievements.
The influences of the scholar sphere and thinkers of this period will also be varied:
ECLAC’s Latin American Structuralism (Prebisch, Furtado, Ferrer), Dependency Theory (Cardoso, Faletto, dos Santos), the South American „Autonomist School“ (Jaguaribe and Puig), Liberation Theology(Gutiérrez Merino, Boff, Dussel), Theology of the People (Methol Ferré, Scannone), just to mention some of those intellectual traditions.
In the geopolitical dimension of this period, the proposals to establish and revitalize platforms of joint regional action would re-emerge, materializing with the establishment of UNASUR, CELAC, and ALBA as its most outstanding examples.
The most prominent leaders of this period will be Néstor and Cristina Kirchner (Argentina), Lula da Silva (Brazil), Bolivia (Evo Morales), Paraguay (Fernando Lugo),Tabaré Vázquez and José “Pepe” Mujica (Uruguay), Hugo Chávez (Venezuela), Rafael Correa (Ecuador), Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua).
Due to endogenous and exogenous reasons, this period would be diluted within the end of the first decade of the 2000s. Such a retroversion process (2010- ) would be called the „Conservative Wave“ or –Conservative Restoration-.
Nowadays, both in the press and in the scholar and intellectual sphere, the debate on the possibility of a present „Second Pink Tide“ (2019), a renewed progresist cycle exists. Such a debate exceeds this review.
Conclusions
Beyond the influence of the „imported“ ideas and conceptions from Europe (such as Liberalism, Socialism, Positivism, Nationalism) there is a long tradition of Latin American self-reflection on regional integration and cooperation.
This early and profound geopolitical self-awareness of shared space, history and culture -as well as shared interests- is the most prominent element of „Latin American Continentalism“ as a process of Regionalization, having even its own centralizer, centripetal concept: “La Patria Grande” (The Great Homeland).
From those autochthonous meditations, which had a continental vision that seeks to answer specific problems of its geography and identity, the existence of a Latin American Geopolitical Thinking for Integration is affirmed.
The discussion on Latin American Unity it’s not just a topical debate that arises or re-emerges in different areas depending on the ideological harmony between governments in the region at certain times, is a major strategic imperative, one of particular interest in the context of the present trends of structural changes in the international system, such as the hypothetical transition to a multipolar, multi-civilizational and „Post-Western“ order.
Ibero-America is a totality -an entity- whose totalization is still potential, and as major part of the global polyhedral reality, has numerous contributions to offer.
September 14, 2022
References:
[1] between the major „Libertadores“: Simón Bolívar and José de San Martin, in July 1824, in Guayaquil, present-day Ecuador.
[2] (ENG) Letter to the American Spaniards
[3] (ENG) Letter from Jamaica
[4] (ENG) Essay on the need for a general federation among the Spanish-American states
[5] (ENG) The League of Free Peoples also known as the “Federal League”: a “geopolitical project” that would consist of a Federation -or Confederation– of peoples and territories located in the former Southern Cone of the Spanish empire in America. Such a notion would encompass the present territories of modern Argentina and Uruguay, also having followers in Paraguay. As a historical process it was an alliance between the provinces of the aforementioned territories which sought to consolidate independence and establish a Confederal organization.
[6] Great Homeland or Great Motherland (both as tentative translations of the concept into English language).
[7] His main postulate was the proposal for the establishment of a vernacular Marxism for Latin America (considering its historical course through the World-System, with their respective economic and social structures, mostly outdated, inherited from the era of Spanish colonization), a national Marxism for Peru that could approach the „indigenous question“ properly.
[8] His postulate was the proposal for a nationalist, popular, and continental Indo-American movement.
[9] His postulate it’s a philosophical renewal of Hispanic America, which according to him, is the highlight of humanity, incorporating elements of all cultures and peoples of the world, in a synthesis: „La Raza Universal“ –the universal race-.
[10] at his speech entitled „Unidos o Dominados“ (United or Dominated) delivered at the National War School of Argentina on November 11, 1953. available version in Spanish:
https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/GEOP/article/view/70009/4564456553720