Search

There has been a change in international politics since the 2008 financial crisis, thanks to a greater spread of economic resources and military capabilities. For many, it is a radical transformation that could spell the end of US hegemony in Latin America. This paper examines the proposition, beginning with a review of the concept of hegemony, which rather than being viewed as a structural characteristic is conceived of here as a "nuanced hegemony", in other words a network of asymmetric and hierarchical relations. We can observe not just one transformation then, but the emergence of a hemispheric context that could be described as "differentiated hegemony". The United States still occupies a central position, but its foreign policy is marked by subregional fragmentation and the externalisation of electoral priorities. The paper explores the effects at subregional level, focusing on the opportunities and challenges it presents to Latin American countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ostensibly, Joe Biden's victory over Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential elections should have placed United States international policy back on a familiar path. However, despite the prevalence of a highly traditional vision of US foreign policy, the Biden administration has maintained significant continuities with the previous administration, as reflected in the policy towards China and the withdrawal from Afghanistan. In part, this is due to the constraints produced by the deep divisions that exist at domestic level. This paper aims to unravel the fundamental elements of Biden's foreign policy, focusing on possible ideological and doctrinal elements, strategic priorities, and any continuities and changes relative to his predecessor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines secondary sanctions as part of the triangular relations between the United States, the European Union and Cuba. The analysis - built on Dittmer's (1981) strategic triangle theory and Womack's (2016) studies of asymmetric relationships - questions the evaluation of sanctions carried out by the US Departments of State, Commerce and the Treasury, noting that, by prioritising the impact on the target's economy, the evaluation ignores other fundamental effects of the sanctions in terms of triangular relations with allies and alternative powers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Official Development Assistance (ODA) received a new boost at the start of the 21st century, but this did not translate into a meaningful decrease in poverty and inequality on the periphery. In Latin America, under the leadership of governments called progressive or post-neoliberal, significant advances were observed to this effect, with the Movement for Socialism (MAS) in Bolivia paradigmatic in terms of socioeconomic development and the political and cultural inclusion achieved. Beginning with a critique of US ODA to Latin America, and considering the case of Bolivia, this paper seeks to open up potential ways of underpinning a theoretical line in the political praxis of development that maintains a positive sense of this notion, and which is at the same time able to break with the neoliberal perspective and dispute the scepticism of post-structuralist radicalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]