Bolivarian Globalization? The New Left's Struggle in Latin America and the Caribbean to Negotiate a Revolutionary Approach to Humanitarian Militarism and International Intervention

Abstract

Within a critical globalization theory framework, this article analyses the military dimension of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America–Peoples' Trade Agreement (ALBA-TCP) and its agenda of ‘peacekeeping’ and ‘humanitarian intervention’ in Haiti. Since its launch in 2004, the ALBA-TCP has established itself as an increasingly institutionalized, multidimensional, and pluriscalar counter-hegemonic Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) regionalism and globalization project. Integral to the pursued transformation of world order is the launching of a counter-hegemonic military agenda. Grounded in the Bolivarian philosophy of regional union, the article explores the ALBA-TCP collective defence policies, institutionalized in the Permanent Committee of Sovereignty and Defence, and the ALBA-TCP-Haiti cooperation before and after the earthquake of January 2010. By interrogating the nature of the military alliance and its humanitarian agenda, I propose that the ALBA-TCP's revolutionary approach to internationalism, peacekeeping, and intervention may be understood as employing an ‘enlarged conception’ of humanitarianism that means neither militarized humanitarianism nor humanitarian assistance as isolated, short-term technical disaster relief, but as long-term emancipatory structural transformation. Military alliance, however, is necessary to defend the project against imperialist aggression.

Dentro del marco de una teoría de globalización crítica, este artículo analiza la dimensión de la Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América - Tratado de Comercio de los Pueblos o (ALBA-TCP) y su agenda de ‘mantenimiento de la paz’ y ‘la intervención humanitaria’ en Haití. Desde su lanzamiento en 2004, la ALBA-TCP se ha establecido como un creciente proyecto institucional, multidimensional, de varios niveles, contra-hegemónico latinoamericano y del Caribe (LAC) regionalista y de globalización. El lanzamiento de una agenda militar contra-hegemónica, es parte integral del seguimiento del orden de la transformación mundial. Basado en la filosofía bolivariana de la unión regional, este artículo explora las políticas de defensa colectivas de ALBA-TCP institucionalizadas en el Comité Permanente de Soberanía y Defensa, y la cooperación de ALBA-TCP-Haití antes y después del terremoto de enero de 2010. Mediante la interrogación de la naturaleza de la alianza militar y su agenda humanitaria, yo propongo que el enfoque revolucionario de ALBA-TCP al internacionalismo, mantenimiento de paz e intervención, pueda entenderse como una ‘concepción aumentada’ de humanitarismo, que no significa humanitarismo militarizado ni asistencia humanitaria, ni una ayuda técnica de desastres a corto plazo, pero como una transformación estructural emancipadora a largo plazo. Sin embargo, la alianza militar es necesaria para defender el proyecto contra la agresión imperialista.

在批判性的全球化理论框架内，本文分析了美洲玻利瓦尔联盟-人民贸易协定（ALBA-TCP）的军事因素以及其在海地的“维和”议程与“人道主义干预”。自2004年启动以来，美洲玻利瓦尔联盟—人民贸易协定已将自身建立为一个越来越制度化、多层面、多梯次反霸权的拉美和加勒比地区（LAC）的地区主义与全球化项目。对于实现世界秩序的转变，发起一场反霸权的军事议程是不可或缺的。基于地区联合的玻利瓦尔哲学，本文探讨美洲玻利瓦尔联盟-人民贸易协定的集体防御政策（它制度化为主权和防务常设委员会）以及2010年1月地震前后美洲玻利瓦尔联盟-人民贸易协定与海地的合作。通过质疑其军事联盟和人道主义议程的本质，我提出美洲玻利瓦尔联盟-人民贸易协定对国际主义、维护和平以及干预的革命性方式也许可理解为利用一种人道主义的“扩展构想”，这种构想指的不是军事化的人道主义，也不是人道主义援助——孤立、短期、技术的灾难救助，而是一种长期、解放性的结构转变。然而，军事联盟对保卫该项目免受帝国主义入侵是必要的。

이 논문은 비판적 세계화 이론 틀에서 볼리비아 민중동맹-민중무역협약(ALBA-TCP)의 군사적 차원을 분석하고 하이티 ‘평화유지’와 ‘인도주의적 개입’ 의제를 분석한다. 2004년 시작 이래 ALBA-TCP는 스스로 제도화된, 다차원적인 반헤게모니적인 라틴 아메리카와 카리브 지역주의와 세계화 프로젝트가 되었다. 반헤게모니적인 군사적 아젠다를 출범시킨 것은 의도적으로 세계 질서를 변형시키려는 것이다. 이 논문은 볼리비아 지역 노조의 철학에 근거하여 <주권과 국방 상설위원회>로 제도화된 ALBA-TCP의 집합적 국방정책과 2010년 1월 지진 전후의 ALBA-TCP 하이티 협력을 분석한다. 나는 군사동맹과 인도주의 의제의 속성을 탐구하여 국제주의, 평화유지와 개입에 대한 ALBA-TCP의 혁명적 접근이 인도주의의 ‘확대된 개념’ 적용으로 이해될 수도 있다고 주장한다. 확대된 인도주의 개념은 군사화된 인도주의도 아니고 별개의 단기적인 기술적 재난 구호도 아닌 장기적인 해방적 구조적 변환을 의미한다. 그러나 군사적 동맹은 그 프로젝트를 제국주의적 공격으로부터 방어하는 것이 필요하다.

Keywords:

• ALBA
• counter-hegemony
• globalization
• humanitarian intervention
• internationalism
• peacekeeping
• revolution
• socialism

Notes

This article is grounded in an interdisciplinary doctoral and post-doctoral research programme made up of discrete projects, funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC, PTA-030-2003-00417; PTA-026-27-1902). Within a critical theory research approach (rather than problem-solving, Cox, 1981), I use Michael Burawoy's reflexive science research model and extended case method (Burawoy, 2009). A set of data gathering tools, including participant observation, were employed during a total of 16 months of fieldwork in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and El Salvador. Critical discourse analysis techniques (Fairclough, 2003) were used on policy strategy papers, 400+ ALBA-TCP-related cooperation and integration documents (2000–2010), and 67 semi-structured open-ended interviews with officials, coordinators, legal advisors, academics, and civil and organized society actors. In accordance with the objective of the extended case method, I seek theory reconstruction—extension of pre-existing theory, in this case (counter-)globalization theory—through multiple dialogues (intervention, process, structuration, reconstruction). Each study (ALBA-TCP country and policy cases) on its own only provides a ‘slice’ of the larger picture, and has to be linked with the other studies in search for common patterns in the region (around the world) and the forces that create them. Therefore, this article only gives partial answers to the many questions that arise from this complex and under-researched phenomenon. See Muhr (2008b; 2011) for the application of Burawoy's methodology to this research field and the attempt of extending the extended case method to global ethnography, and Muhr (2008a, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c) for other case studies. References and quotations from primary sources serve to underscore key analytical findings. They are carefully selected and should be understood as a counter-colonizing practice, rather than unreflective romanticization, to counter effects of power: domination, silencing, objectification, normalization. Translations from originals in Castilian are my own.

I follow Robert Cox's (1981) argumentation that hegemony is constructed and reconstructed through the dialectical interaction of forces—material capabilities, ideas, and institutions—that are both products and facilitators of a particular world order. Counter-hegemony involves offering a new commonsense, i.e. new understandings and practices capable of replacing the dominant ones (Santos and Rodríguez-Garavito, 2005). Traditional imperialism principally exercises direct control over foreign states through territorial conquest; the neo-imperialist global capitalist governance regime relies on Gramscian hegemony (rule by consent and only exceptionally by force) and seeks control over spaces, resources, and specified people through a dialectical relationship between territorial and capitalistic logics of power (Callinicos, 2009; Harvey, 2003).

‘ALBA-TCP’ (rather than ‘ALBA’) has been adopted in the official documentation especially since the 7th ALBA-TCP Summit in October 2009. Honduras joined ALBA in 2008, but was withdrawn in January 2010 by the unconstitutional regime following the military-entrepreneurial coup d'état against President Manuel Zelaya on 28 June 2009.

This article is not concerned with providing empirical evidence of the significant social, cultural, and economic democratization (necessary for the exercise of political democracy) of the societies within the ALBA-TCP space. For example, in 2009, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua were declared illiteracy-free in accordance with United Nations standards (Muhr, 2010a).

Also see the announcement of joint Venezuelan–Nicaraguan military manoeuvres (Aporrea, 2009a).

Bolivian and Colombian 1998 values are SIPRI estimates. Cuban figures are not available. For comparison, the USA government allocates 4.7% of the gross domestic product to defence.

Figures are in constant 2009 United States dollars. Cuba is the 2009 value (2010 figure not available), and refers to Defence and Internal Order. The Venezuelan value is the adopted budget rather than the actual expenditure and may be higher due to extra-budgetary expenditure.

For this argument with respect to Cuba, see Klepak (2005).

In international law, ‘humanitarian intervention’ is associated with coercive force by a state or group of states without the consent of the state in question in order to prevent or end grave and widespread violations of fundamental human rights (Holzgrefe, 2003, p. 18; see Duffield, 2007, for a critique grounded in the liberal civilized/barbarian dichotomy and its contemporary effective/ineffective state variant). Coercion, obviously, was not necessary in the case of Haiti, where the coup installed an imperialist-friendly regime in the first place.

On 31 December 2009, contributions to MINUSTAH's force level were: Bolivia, 208 contingent troops; Ecuador, 67 contingent troops. Total troops and military experts in UN missions were 441 (Bolivia) and 82 (Ecuador) (UN Peacekeeping, n.d.). Both countries started participating in MINUSTAH prior to their membership in the ALBA-TCP. While the apparent contradiction is interesting, it has not been possible to investigate the issue within the scope of this article (Bolivia, Ecuador, Haiti).