Search

Copyright of Relações Internacionais is the property of Relacoes Internacionais and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, we analyse the content of the speeches delivered by Brazilian Presidents, Foreign Ministers and Ambassadors at annual Ordinary Sessions of the United Nations General Assembly in the period between 1946 and 2019. Our primary objective is to find out how often and under what circumstances Brazilian diplomats mentioned the subject of American regionalism and whether the mention was made in reference to specific projects or to abstract concepts of regional integration and cooperation. Based on this analysis, we highlight the great deal of importance that was given to MERCOSUR - and, to a lesser extent, UNASUR - to the detriment of other regional integration projects, as well as the preference, by Brazilian diplomats, for a flexible, low-profile, abstract and low-cost discursive approach. In short, we found that cooperation and integration have frequently been discussed, although little attention has been devoted to the limits and possibilities of each project under construction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conjuntura Internacional is the property of Conjuntura Internacional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper aims to: (i) investigate whether Republican legislatures were more inclined than Democratic ones to uphold laws of national sovereignty and whether Democratic legislatures were more likely than Republican ones to prioritise bills linked to the post-national perspective; (ii) assess the US migration laws by considering how state-level legal systems affect migrants' lives. Using data from the National Conference of State Legislatures and Legiscan and techniques like clustering, statistical, and geospatial analysis, we found that bills sponsored by the Democratic Party are indeed more likely to belong to the post-national category than bills by the Republican Party. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]