Running Head DB Forum Three South American RTA1DB Forum Thre

Running Head Db Forum Three South American Rta1db Forum Three So

Analyze the trade agreements in South America, specifically MERCOSUR and the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), discussing their distinctions, benefits, disadvantages, and their impact on regional trade. Include an examination of why some South American countries choose to remain outside these agreements, considering their internal politics and economic priorities.

Paper For Above instruction

South America has historically been characterized by economic and political fragmentation, with many nations exhibiting cautious approaches to regional integration and international trade. Over recent decades, however, the continent has moved toward greater economic cooperation through two prominent trade agreements: MERCOSUR and the Andean Community of Nations (CAN). These regional trade agreements aim to foster economic growth, stability, and political cooperation among member states, yet they also embody distinct philosophies, structures, and challenges that influence their effectiveness and the decisions of individual nations to participate or remain independent.

MERCOSUR, established officially in 1991, emerged from the 1988 free trade agreement between Argentina and Brazil, aiming to create a common market and enhance economic integration among its members. The core members include Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay, with Venezuela joining later, making it one of the world's largest trading blocs. Its objectives encompass the free movement of goods, services, and factors of production, as well as the adoption of common external tariffs and trade policies. Although member countries have succeeded in quadrupling trade among themselves, serious challenges have persisted. Economic disparities, differing national interests, and political disagreements have hampered the bloc’s progress toward deeper integration, such as establishing a true customs union or a common currency (Downey, 2014). The ambitious goals of MERCOSUR are further complicated by internal differences, with some members advocating for greater openness and others preferring higher tariffs to protect local industries, leading to slow policy harmonization.

In contrast, the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), which originated from the Andean Pact of 1969 and was renamed in 1996, has aimed to foster regional economic integration and political stability among Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and initially Chile. CAN has historically been more institutionalized and strictly enforced its regulations, including adherence to policies overseen by the Andean Tribunal of Justice (Phelan, 2015). The organization has achieved some success in resolving disputes, integrating policies, and encouraging collective decision-making, especially concerning trade and political issues. Nonetheless, economic disparities among member nations, coupled with reliance on agriculture and poverty levels, constrain the inland scope of integration. Many members, such as Bolivia and Ecuador, depend heavily on their agricultural sectors and face challenges in developing diverse economies, which limits their capacity for full economic convergence with more advanced members.

While both MERCOSUR and CAN aim to promote regional economic strength, their structures and policies reflect contrasting philosophies. MERCOSUR leans toward economic liberalization, though its progress has been sluggish due to internal disagreements and uneven development. Conversely, CAN is characterized by strict enforcement and strong institutionalism, which can stifle flexibility but also provide stability. Both organizations face criticism regarding inefficiencies and slow progress, leading some nations to opt out of regional agreements altogether.

Several South American countries, including Chile, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guyana, have chosen to remain outside of MERCOSUR and CAN. Chile opted for its own trade agreements, notably with the United States and through its participation in the Pacific Alliance, driven by a desire for more liberal and less bureaucratic trade frameworks (Morles, 2012). These countries often perceive either the slow progress or the rigid institutionalism of MERCOSUR and CAN as impediments to their economic growth and sovereignty. Additionally, internal political considerations, economic priorities, and historical context influence their decisions to stay independent from the regional organizations.

Drawing an analogy to Christian denominational choices, the decision of some nations to remain outside of MERCOSUR and CAN reflects a similar preference for autonomy amidst perceived weaknesses within existing structures. Non-denominational Christians often favor flexibility and personal development over the bureaucratic and hierarchical nature of denominational churches. Likewise, some South American countries favor bilateral agreements or more flexible regional setups over the sluggish or overly rigid processes of MERCOSUR and CAN. They seek economic and political frameworks that align better with their national interests, emphasizing sovereignty and tailored development pathways.

The effectiveness of regional trade agreements hinges upon their ability to balance integration with sovereignty, maintain internal cohesion, and adapt to economic realities. MERCOSUR and CAN, despite their ambitions, illustrate the difficulties in aligning diverse national interests, especially when economic disparities and political discontent are prevalent. Their weaknesses, including slow policy implementation, internal disagreements, and enforcement challenges, prompt some nations to pursue more independent policies or alternative agreements that better serve their strategic interests. The political and economic landscape of South America underscores the importance of flexible, cohesive, yet adaptive regional arrangements that can promote sustainable growth without sacrificing national sovereignty.

References

• Downey, C. (2014). MERCOSUR: A cautionary tale. The International Business & Economics Research Journal (Online), 13(5), 1177.
• Gomezâ€Mera, L., & Molinari, A. (2014). Overlapping institutions, learning, and dispute initiation in regional trade agreements: Evidence from south america. International Studies Quarterly, 58(2). doi:10.1111/isqu.12135
• Morles, G. (2012). CATASTROPHE LURKS IN SOUTH AMERICA: TAINTED FOOD AND INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE IN THE ANDEAN COMMUNITY OF NATIONS. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce, 39(2). Retrieved from
• Phelan, W. (2015). Enforcement and escape in the andean community: Why the andean community of nations is not a replica of the european union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 53(4). doi:10.1111/jcms.12222
• Lynch, D. A. (2010). Trade and globalization: An introduction to regional trade agreements. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Additional scholarly articles relevant to South American trade agreements and regional integration (up to date references to be added as per research).