A Left Turn after Chavez?

Interview

In recent years, Latin America has acquired a significantly greater role in Russian foreign policy, as the region is gradually coming out of the U.S. shadow to become an independent center of global politics. RAS Full Member Vladimir Davydov, Director of the RAS Institute for Latin American Studies, discusses the latest trends in Latin American politics and Russia's prospects in the region.

Interview

In recent years, Latin America has acquired a significantly greater role in Russian foreign policy, as the region is gradually coming out of the U.S. shadow to become an independent center of global politics. RAS Full Member Vladimir Davydov, Director of the RAS Institute for Latin American Studies, discusses the latest trends in Latin American politics and Russia's prospects in the region.

When socialists came to power in countries across Latin America several years ago, experts talked about the region’s “left turn.” Due to demise of Hugo Chavez and approaching parliamentary and presidential elections in many leading countries in the region, this trend may change. Is Latin America’s left turn likely to give way to liberal-rightist policies, and what could this mean for Russia?

The death of Hugo Chavez definitely poses a critical challenge to Venezuela, since the country has no comparable figure to replace him and inherit his political capital. Nevertheless, it was not Chavez who launched the left turn, and it is unlikely to end simply as a result of his departure. Although this phenomenon hinges on certain prominent historical figures, it also results from fundamental factors. The leftist culture is deeply rooted in Latin America as a result of the inherent contradictions in its societal and economic structure.

Photo: REUTERS/Gerardo Garcia

The shift to liberal-rightist policies is by no means inevitable. There are numerous instances of leftist Latin American governments handling difficult tasks with great efficiency. At the same time, rightwing governments in many countries have failed to weather the crisis and have been forced to step down. This goes beyond Latin America; there are similar examples to be found in Europe. I am not sure Angela Merkel will win the coming elections, while experts say that the Social Democrats are on the rise. And recent events in France seem to bear this out.

In contrast to Europe, during the crisis, Latin America performed well. Take Brazil, where Lula (Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, 2003-2011 president) completed his term in office and was replaced by Dilma Rousseff, another charismatic representative of this leftwing political milieu. In February’s elections in Ecuador, President Rafael Correa was reelected for a second term with impressive figures. The point seems to be different, that the leftwing politicians have themselves become more responsible. They now admit the need for a balanced pragmatic policy with parallel handling of social issues. As a result, even during the crisis, Latin America saw poverty levels fall and the unemployment rate hold steady.

Currently, almost half, maybe even two-thirds of countries (by population and GDP) remain in this left-turn zone. Even Peruvian President Ollanta Humala is a left-leaning Indian nationalist. The left in Latin America is, arguably, different. Usually, it is the moderates and radical left that are mentioned, mostly due to a limited understanding of Latin American realities, but in fact seven or eight trends are discernable. There is the Catholic left, the Indian left, the social democrats, and the left radicals. One should also differentiate between, say, Rafael Correa and Bolivian President Evo Morales.

With the 31st anniversary of the Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina approaching, the dispute over the islands remains unresolved. In recent years, both sides have visibly sharpened their rhetoric. Further, a referendum on sovereignty was held on the archipelago on March 10-11. Is this worsening of relations between the two countries connected with the growing competition for the South Atlantic resources, and is there a threat of another war?

Photo: thaiphong.wordpress.com
Crosses placed to pay homage to fallen British
servicemen of the Falklands War are seen at
the Liberation Monument in Port Stanley

In fact, this territorial dispute is not a purely bilateral issue. It relates to the broader South Atlantic. Dominant in the North Atlantic, NATO is stepping up efforts to extend its influence to the south. At the same time, Brazil, Argentina and South African Republic have their own plans and interests. Even Obama's seemingly moderate military spending envisages increased financing activities in the Pacific and South Atlantic.

The global struggle for resources is becoming more acute, while the Falklands area is reportedly quite rich in hydrocarbons. As a result, London has stepped up its military presence there in the absence of any direct threat from Argentina, whose army and navy are inferior to Britain’s.

However, India, Brazil and South Africa, associated through the IBSA dialog forum, support Argentina and have their own interests in the region. Therefore, in recent years, they have been holding large-scale joint navy exercises in the South Atlantic. So, the Falklands should be regarded not just as an Argentinean-British conflict, but as an issue of South Atlantic control.

Let’s turn to Russia's relations with Latin America. They do not seem very developed, how would you assess their current status?

In terms of the economy, that is quite true. To a certain extent, this situation can be explained by the distances involved, as transportation costs form an important factor in the global market. Besides, Russia is a Eurasian country with huge European and Chinese markets in its more immediate proximity. And most countries do tend to develop economic relations with their affluent neighbors. Take Mexico and the United States. Whatever their broader feelings about the United States, Mexico trades energetically with the country, chiefly because of its high level of solvency.

Photo: topwar.ru
Dmitry Medvedev visits Brazil

However, in recent years Russia has made significant efforts in this area, which peaked in 2007-2008, when relations were elevated to the top political level and Russian leaders Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev joined the relations-building process.

We are extremely compatible when it comes to the solution of major international problems. The Russian Federation and Latin America interact fruitfully in international organizations. We often have matching positions in the United Nations, despite continuing U.S. influence on its southern neighbors.

The fact that the U.S. hold on the region is weakening is very important for Latin America. We can see this in trade, investment, and official development assistance. Other actors are appearing on the scene in Latin America, and the Latin Americans are doing their best to diversify these external links – in the economy and elsewhere. Chile and Mexico are the world leaders in this field, with dozens of bilateral agreements. To a certain extent, this is the reason why Latin America’s losses were comparatively low.

What areas of the Russia-Latin America relationship are most advanced and promising?

The current volume of Russia-Latin America trade is quite formidable, with a record level, 16 billion dollars, reached in 2008. Then the figures dropped but we have now restored pre-crisis levels and I hope we make further progress. Russia's problem lies in strengthening the relationship's foundations. Our trade should not boil down to mere buying-and-selling but rise to a truly modern level, by which I mean long-term ties, cooperation and investment. One should note that, for a long time, trade between us grew sporadically, without government influence. We had no export support mechanisms, and even the ones we have today are less than workable.

I believe that Russia is not sufficiently creative or constructive in its employment of state resources.

However, there are some promising trends. We have capable, professional diplomats specializing in Latin America, and we have managed to retain our foreign missions, even in the hardest years. And we are now starting to sense the fruits of the long and persistent efforts.

Photo: ITAR-TASS

Our largest regional partner, Brazil, is where President Medvedev recently held highly productive talks. We have reached the high-tech level, including the GLONASS system, and this platform is going to be installed in Brazil. Brasilia will purchase our helicopters to support operations on the Atlantic shelf, where huge oil deposits have been discovered. There are also plans for cooperation in the aviation sector. Brazil is the world's third largest manufacturer of medium-size regional aircraft, with an output reaching 200 a year. At that, the industry was built up from scratch over a period of 20 years. Brazil is also advanced in biotech and genetics. Brazil, the largest soybean producer, is ousting the U.S. from the agricultural market. Brazilian meat accounts for about 40 percent of the Russian meat market, whereas almost 40 percent of the Brazilian mineral fertilizer market is controlled by Russian suppliers.

Dr. Davydov, the Russia-Brazil cooperation is going ahead quite smoothly within the BRICS framework. Are there BRICS prospects for other Latin American countries, say for Argentina and Mexico?

Not immediately, as there is a tacit BRICS agreement: first develop a common platform and mechanisms to influence decision-making in other international organizations within the five-member format, and only then to think of expansion. This fundamental stance seems quite reasonable. A lot will come out at the South Africa summit this March. BRICS may extend observer or dialog partner status to certain countries, so as not to cold-shoulder friends who have expressed an interest in joining. But so far the international association is has yet to mature, which means it also needs to become stronger and finesse its operational model – as having more members means a more complex decision-making process, as is vividly shown by the European Union.

Interviewers: Natalia Evtikhevich, RIAC Program Manager,

Nikolay Markotkin, RIAC Program Assistant