|
Today's world is more populated and connected than ever. As we have
pointed out on other occasions, these are features that will tend to become
more pronounced in the future. In a world with these characteristics Argentina
can, if it so wishes, develop regular and eventually intense trade relations
with all countries, especially those with which it shares specific interests.
In this perspective, questioning ourselves (the Argentineans) and the
world around has today a growing significance.
A strategy of active insertion in all areas of the international trade
system -that is, of multiple alliances- requires a diagnosis of the factors
that anticipate significant changes, both globally and in the different
regions. In particular, it requires effective organization at the governmental
level and of society as a whole, and an active policy of cooperation with
other countries, especially those in the Latin American region. Technological,
climatic and cultural changes, among others, will impact the shift of
competitive advantages and, therefore, the development of trade in goods
and services between countries and regions. There is also a great diversity
of empowered consumers, resulting from the growth of the population in
many countries, and a well-informed middle class that is aware of the
array of options to procure the resources, goods and services of their
preference
As with any international crisis of the magnitude of the 2020 pandemic,
it is difficult to anticipate the future scope of its effects. Precisely,
it has been characterized by precarious diagnoses and prognoses, which
require constant updating. Thus, it is not easy at the outset of 2021
to predict the impacts on economic development, foreign trade and political
stability of Latin American countries. These are times that demand great
caution both in terms of the continuously changing diagnostics and in
terms of the strategies and actions that are undertaken
At least in what can be assumed to be the post-pandemic period, three
issues appear relevant for Argentina's foreign trade. They will not be
the only ones, but in the current perspective, they are among the ones
that will demand more attention from the protagonists that are interested
in Argentina's future insertion in the world.
The first issue is to establish ambitious and flexible goals for the
development of our foreign trade and to pursue them with a solid institutional
organization, involving the national government, provincial and local
governments, and all sectors of society, especially business, labor and
the younger generation, that is, those most sensitive to creating reasonable
and sustainable conditions for the future. These should be ambitious goals,
both in a quantitative and qualitative sense, meaning that they involve
substantial leaps in the quantity and quality of the goods and services
that can be sold to the world but that, at the same time, they reflect
a significant incorporation of intelligence and technology in the productive
processes of the goods and services that are exported. They will demand
good organization, which leads to increased efficiency and effectiveness
in the management of all the layers involved in the execution of a strategy
for Argentina's insertion in international trade.
The second issue refers to Argentina's contribution to strengthen the
multilateral world trade system, including its capacity to facilitate
innovative mechanisms in terms of regional cooperation, trade and integration
initiatives in which the country might have an influence, especially in
the Latin American region and among developing countries.
The third priority issue should be to contribute to the possibility that
all Latin American countries members of the WTO have an active and relevant
role in the continuous task of building an international trade system
that is efficient and effective and, at the same time, functional to the
interests of the region. This is linked to the need to promote different
modalities of association agreements with relevant countries for Argentina's
foreign trade, such as the one currently in its final phase of concretion
between Mercosur and the EU, and those that are in the pending agenda
for development with other countries and regions. At the same time, there
is a need to ensure that the next Ministerial Conference of the WTO allows
for the conclusion of viable and effective agreements in spite of the
growing divergences between the interests of its member countries and,
in particular, between its most relevant actors both in world trade and
in global geopolitics
The bi-regional association agreement between Mercosur -conceived as
a negotiating unit- and the EU, will require priority attention in the
coming months, not only because of its magnitude and potential impact
on the economies and foreign trade of both regions, but, above all, because
it is an agreement whose negotiating phase, at least in its commercial
component, was concluded more than a year ago and which should have already
entered the signing and parliamentary ratification stages. From an Argentine
perspective, as well as from that of its partners in Mercosur and those
in the EU, after almost thirty years in which the idea of an agreement
began to be explored and twenty years of negotiations, it would be difficult
for the respective political leaders to explain to the public the consequences
of an eventual failure. As we have pointed out on other occasions, the
main phase of the bi-regional association agreement will begin after it
enters into force. This "day after" stage is when governments
and companies must do what is required to meet the commitments they have
made within the established timeframes and what is necessary to harness
the full potential of the expanded markets.
Accuracy in the diagnostics and effectiveness in the courses of action
that are set, as well as its continuous renewal, are the conditions required
to face the current global systemic crisis. They will be necessary for
each of the countries affected by the crisis, which is likely to be all
of them. They must be addressed, in turn, from the perspective of each
stakeholder, whether it be, for example, a government, a company, or an
institution or social actor. In addition to the national approaches, visions
of a more global scope are also needed, for example, in the case of international
organizations, and of each of the regions, for example, the EU, Mercosur,
the Pacific Alliance, or ASEAN.
Understanding the factors that have led to the current global systemic
crisis is essential when seeking to overcome it. It would be difficult
to limit the genesis of the process to a single factor. In order to address
it from a country specific perspective in a timely and successful manner,
it would be necessary to have access to reliable and high-quality information
on how other countries and regions are coping. It is also necessary to
acknowledge that such information probably reflects different perspectives
that result from the rich cultural, political and economic diversity that
is today an inescapable feature of international reality. It implies having
a great capacity for coordinating interests that can be displayed at all
the levels involved in a crisis such as the current one, which are the
global, regional and each country's own. Each one of them may require
various approaches, if one aspires to understand the current developments
of this systemic crisis and, in particular, the future ones.
It is not, therefore, a crisis that lends itself to simplistic, one-dimensional,
static approaches. Its approach will require understanding the multiple
and deep complexities, even when they involve setting aside concepts and
theoretical frameworks from other historical moments. It implies, therefore,
placing the analysis of the current global crisis and the courses of action
that will eventually be favored, within the framework of a correct interpretation
of the profound changes that are taking place in the international system.
It is possible that the current pandemic makes necessary certain changes
in the functioning of institutions (decision-making systems, management
and development of rules) of global and regional governance, the scope
of which will be defined based on the accumulated experience. This is
also valid in the case of integration processes. If something stands out
of the integration methodology originally applied in Europe, is that it
requires operating in three dimensions simultaneously: the political,
the economic and the legal. To imagine a process of integration between
sovereign nations which aspire to remain so, that are neighboring and
diverse, and have unequal relative power, without the consent and support
of the people (political dimension), without a sustainable articulation
of their economic and productive systems (economic dimension), and without
being based on common rules and institutions (legal dimension), would
be to condemn it to failure, or just a circumstantial existence.
Integration processes such as the European or Mercosur are not necessarily
centered on a predetermined end product, consisting of the transformation
of autonomous units of power into a new "supranational" unit,
although that has been an apparent objective at the initial stages. They
are not based on the objective of overcoming pre-existing independent
national spaces and their markets, through rigidly conceived formulas
such as those of a"customs union" or a "free trade area".
They do not suppose the disappearance of national identities. They do
suppose greater connectivity, appreciation of cultural diversity and interests
among partners and greater collective solidarity. In other words, their
aim is to achieve conditions that favor prosperity and peace between neighboring
nations. On the contrary, the pooling of resources and markets, with an
intent for permanence; the collective disciplines resulting from the enforcement
of common rules and institutions; ties that make it costly to withdraw
from the joint work agreement and the enhanced power to operate effectively
in the international system, are some of the positive effects that explain
why this method of integration has had a prevalence that exceeds its original
time and geography.
From this perspective, several issues stand out in the agenda of priorities
for Argentina's foreign trade. These imply renewing the strategies for
the projection to the world of high quality goods and services that the
country can produce and provide efficiently, due to its natural resources,
talents and creativity. It is a necessary renewal in view of the changes
that are taking place at a global and Latin American level. These changes
mirror an era in which a large number of players (countries, companies,
consumers, workers and social organizations) are competing for world markets,
with multiple options for buying and selling the goods and services they
need and value. These are changes that make the interaction between the
different cultures that characterize countries, and therefore international
trade, more intense. Understanding the scope and effects of cultural diversity,
with its impact on the priorities of consumers, is a crucial factor for
the international competitiveness of our country and its businesses.
Economic integration between sovereign nations implies the development
of a permanent construction of conditions and rules that allow and encourage
joint work. These are the cases of the EU and Mercosur, despite their
methodological differences. In this type of process, the semester in which
a country holds the presidency of its governmental representative bodies
provides an opportunity for leadership through relevant initiatives of
a joint work agenda. This year, in the case of Mercosur, such an opportunity
corresponds to the presidency that Argentina and then Brazil will exercise.
It is a propitious moment then to reaffirm the idea that the two countries
can play a relevant role in the construction of Mercosur, to the extent
that they effectively share diagnoses and strategies on how to do it.
Among other factors, at least three provide an incentive to seek strategic
leadership from Mercosur promoted by Argentina and Brazil (as was the
understanding between Presidents Alfonsín and Sarney at the time
of its founding), and with an even enthusiastic participation from Paraguay
and Uruguay. These factors are the presidential renewal in the USA; the
creation of the RCEP in the Asia-Pacific region, and the need that seems
to be perceived in the EU to play a leading role in re-establishing a
weakened international order.
The fact that Joe Biden will be the next occupant of the White House
is not a minor fact. Perhaps it is the main factor. It may involve a profound
change in the vision and style of Washington's international strategy.
It is then possible to anticipate a more positive moment for the construction
of a world order that will require much joint action, especially between
large and medium powers. The Biden Presidency could facilitate a sustainable
strategic agreement with Latin American countries, including those of
Mercosur, to the extent that the idea of trying to build an international
order based on solidarity and cooperation among all is affirmed.
At the same time, the recent signing of the RCEP, which involves developing
a preferential trade and investment process compatible with WTO rules
among 15 Asia-Pacific countries (the ten ASEAN countries and China, Japan,
Korea, Australia and New Zealand, open to the incorporation of India),
creates a precedent for joint work among countries with a common regional
membership and also with enormous potential to develop value chains that
affect trade and reciprocal investment.
And the third factor is the interest observed in the EU that perceives
the potential for joint action that the aforementioned factors are opening
up. In this perspective, the costs of a failure of the association agreement
with Mercosur should be evaluated.
A common strategic approach of Mercosur, in order to face, in view of
its interests, the new stage of international trade relations that the
factors mentioned above would be anticipating, would require asking about
the potential for joint action that could result from belonging to international
institutional spheres such as LAIA and the WTO, among others.
Working together is a challenge for countries in the Latin American region,
a challenge that has been compounded by the experience of the COVID-19
pandemic. In a more populated and connected world, Argentina and the countries
of the region would be in a position to develop, based on accumulated
experience and their competitive advantages, strategies of multiple alliances
with all the countries of the world, especially with those that share
specific interests. However, is this really so? And, if so, what would
be the steps to take that would allow for a more active and effective
participation in the development of world trade that works for their needs
and interests? What contributions could we make to increase solidarity
and efficiency in the operation of global trade agreements, especially
the WTO? This organization is undergoing a crisis due to the current situation
of its dispute settlement mechanism, among other factors. In what way
could the countries of the region that are members of the WTO increase
the effectiveness and efficiency of the multilateral world trading system?
Regionalism is viewed in the area of trade and economic development as
a complement to global trade multilateralism, and also as a result of
the efforts of the countries in a region to advance processes that are
convergent with the global process. Is this a realistic view of regional
integration? If so, how can it be made effective? How can the different
Latin American integration processes be effectively coordinated, with
a strategy of "convergence in diversity" that takes into account
the different realities, visions and interests present in the countries
of the region? What role can existing regional organizations such as LAIA,
SELA and CELAC, among others, play in this regard?
Both from the point of view of the organization of production and trade
(regional and global value chains), as well as from the point of view
of strengthening the institutional spaces for commercial negotiation,
there is a certain consensus that in the post-COVID-19 scenario, the "regional"
will tend to become more profound. Is this a realistic view? If so, what
are the steps that should be taken to strengthen, both from an existential
point of view (why work together) and a methodological point of view (how
to work together), the regional integration processes in Latin America,
in a way that is compatible with the rules of the multilateral system
of global trade, especially Article XXIV of the GATT and the WTO's Enabling
Clause?
How can the necessary efforts to develop physical connectivity between
the countries of the region and each of its sub-regions be strengthened,
especially in terms of strategies to connect the different national markets
and their respective productive systems? What role can international financing
agencies in which Latin American countries participate continue to play?
A strategy of active insertion in the international trade system requires
a permanently updated diagnostic of the factors that make it possible
to anticipate changes that may be significant, both at the global level
and at the multiple and diverse regional levels. How could more efficient
cooperation be developed among the institutions in the region that are
in a position to offer such diagnostics? What role can the different spaces
of action-oriented thinking play?
|
