A cooperative Global South? Brazil, India, and China in multilateral regimes
ResumoDifferently from the Cold War, emerging powers currently have chances to put forward their foreign policy goals. In their rise, countries such as Brazil, India, and China opted to follow similar sets of strategies within multilateral regimes. Ranging from blocking, and free riding, to cooperative behaviors, such states have enhanced their ability to promote topical changes in existing institutional settings. It does not mean, however, that their developing condition will necessarily prompt them to cooperate. As this paper will point out by means of a comparative analysis of the regimes of nuclear non-proliferation, peace and security, and climate change, such countries have more chances to cooperate when their interpretations of the principles and norms that compose a regime converge. Relying on how a country interprets normative frameworks and on the degree of membership a state has in a regime, this article challenges the notion that these three leaders of the so-called Global South would be relying on an all-encompassing cooperative multilateral behavior.
Addler-Nissen, Rebecca; Pouliot, Vincent. 2014. Power in practice: negotiating the international intervention in Libya. European journal of international relations, 20 (4), pp. 889-911.
Agarwal, Anil. 2002. A Southern perspective on curbing global climate change. In: Schneider, Stephen H.; Rosencranz, Armin; Niles, John O. (eds.). Climate change policy: a survey. Island Press: Center for Resource Economics.
Alden & Vieira. 2005. The new diplomacy of the South: South Africa, Brazil, India and trilateralism. Third world quarterly, vol. 26, n. 7, pp. 1077-1095.
Audet, René. 2013. Climate justice and bargaining coalitions: a discourse analysis. Int. Environ. Agreements, 13, pp. 369-386.
Brasil. 2015. Ministério das Relações Exteriores. Nota 188. Conclusão da IX Conferência de Exame do Tratado de Não Proliferação Nuclear (TNP), 25 de maio de 2015.
Breakey, Hugh Edmond. 2012. Protection norms and human rights: a rights-based analysis of the responsibility to protect and the protection of civilians in armed conflict. Global responsibility to protect, vol. 4(3), pp. 309-333.
Burges. 2012. Strategies and tactics for global change: democratic Brazil in comparative perspective. Global society, 26:3, pp. 351-368.
Carvalho, José Antônio Marcondes de; Azeredo, Raphael; Lucero, Everton Frask. 2015. Cadernos de política exterior, ano I, n. 2 (out. 2015). Instituto de Pesquisa de Relações Internacionais. Brasília: FUNAG.
Cox. 1981. Social forces, states and world orders: beyond international relations theory. Millenium – Journal of international studies, vol. 10, pp. 126-155.
Destradi, Sandra. 2010. Regional powers and their strategies: empire, hegemony, and leadership. Review of international studies, volume 36, issue 04, october, pp. 903-930.
Dunne, Tim; Teitt; Sarah. 2015. Contested intervention: China, India, and the responsibility to protect. Global governance, 21, pp. 371-391.
Evans, Gareth; Thakur, Ramesh. 2013. Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect. International security, vol. 37, n. 4 (Spring), pp. 199-214.
Finnemore, Martha. 1996. Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention. In: Katzenstein, Peter J. The culture of national security: norms and identity in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Furmann, Matthew. 2009. Spreading temptation: proliferation and peaceful nuclear cooperation agreements. International security, vol. 34, n. 1 (Summer), pp. 7-41.
Garwood-Gowers, Andrew. 2013. The responsibility to protect and the Arab Spring: Libya as the exception, Syria as the norm? University of New South Wales Law Journal, 36(2), pp. 594-618.
Haas, Ernst B. 1982. Words can hurt you; or, who said what to whom about regimes. In: Krasner, Stephen D. (ed.). International regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Hall, Ian. 2013. Tilting at windmills? The Indian debate over the responsibility to protect after the UNSC resolution 1973. Global responsibility to protect 5 (2013), pp. 84-108.
Hallding, Karl; Olsson, Marie; Atteridge, Antto Vihma; Carson, Marcus; Román, Mikael. 2011. Together alone: BASIC countries and the climate change conundrum. Copenhagen: Tema Nord.
Hallding, Karl; Jürisoo, Marie; Carson, Marcus; Atteridge, Aaron. 2013. Rising powers: the evolving role of BASIC countries. Climate policy, 13:5, pp. 608-631.
Hochstetler, Kathryn Ann. 2012. The G-77, BASIC, and global climate governance: a new era in multilateral environmental negotiations. Rev. Bras. Polít. Int., vol. 55 (special edition), pp. 53-69.
Hochstetler, Kathryn Ann; Milkoreit, Manjana. 2014. Emerging powers in the climate change negotiations: shifting identity conceptions. Political research quarterly, vol. 67 (I), pp. 224-235.
Hurrell, Andrew. 2006. Hegemony, liberalism and global order: what space for would-be great powers? International affairs, 82, I, pp. 1-19.
Hymans, Jacques E. C. 2012. Achieving nuclear ambitions: scientists, politicians, and proliferation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ikenberry, John G. (ed.). 2014. Power, order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jesus, Diego Santos Vieira de. 2012. Noites tropicais: o Brasil e a nova era da não proliferação e do desarmamento nucleares (2003-2010). Rev. Sociol. Polít. Curitiba, v. 20, n. 43, pp. 43-57.
Kassenova, Togzhan. 2014. Brazil’s nuclear kaleidoscope: an evolving identity. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Keohane, Robert O. 1982. The demand for international regimes. International organization, vol. 36, issue 02, Spring, pp. 325-355.
______. 1990. Multilateralism: an agenda for research. International Journal, XLV (4), pp. 731-764.
Krasner, Stephen D. (ed.). 1983. International regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
______. 1982. Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables. International organization, vol. 36, issue 02, Spring, pp. 185-205.
Kratochwil, Friedrich; Ruggie, John Gerard. 1986. International organization: a state of the art on the art of the state. International organization, vol. 40, n. 4 (Autumn, 1986), pp. 753-775.
Mallea, Rodrigo; Spektor, Matias; Wheeler, Nicholas J. (eds.). 2015. The origins of nuclear cooperation: a critical oral history. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and FGV.
Masters, Leslie. 2012. What future for BASIC? The emerging powers dimension in the international politics of climate change negotiations. Policy brief. Institute for global dialogue, issue 95, March.
Mohan, Garima. 2014. India and the responsibility to protect. Asia-Pacific Center for the Responsibility to Protect. AP R2P Brief, vol. 4, n. 3.
Nye, Joseph. S. 2015. Is the American century over? Cambridge: Polity press.
Oran, Young. 1982. Regime dynamics: the rise and fall of international regimes. International organization 36 (2), Spring, pp. 277-297.
Pang, Zhongying. 2009. China’s non-intervention question. Global responsibility to protect journal, 1 (2), pp. 237-252.
Perkovich, George; Acton, James M. (eds.). 2009. Abolishing nuclear weapons: a debate. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Puchala, Donald J.; Hopkins, Raymond F. 1982. International regimes: lessons from inductive analysis. International organization, vol. 36, issue 02, Spring, pp. 245-275.
Roberts, J. Timmons; Parks, Bradley C. 2007. A climate of injustice: global inequality, North-South politics, and climate policy. The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Rotmann, Philipp; Kurtz, Gerrit; Brockmeier, Sarah. 2014. Major powers and the contested evolution of a responsibility to protect. Conflict, security & development 14:4, pp. 355-377.
Ruggie, John Gerard. 1992. Multilateralism: the anatomy of an institution. International organization, vol. 46, issue 03, Summer, pp. 561-598.
Seawright, Jason; Gerring, John. 2008. Case selection techniques in case study research: a menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political research quarterly, June, vol. 61, n. 2, pp. 294-308.
Schweller, Randall. 2011. Emerging powers in an age of disorder. Global governance, vol. 17, pp. 285-297.
Stein, Arthur A. 1982. Coordination and collaboration: regimes in an anarchic world. International organization, vol. 36, issue 02, Spring, pp. 299-324.
Stuenkel, Oliver; Tourinho, Marcos. 2014. Regulating intervention: Brazil and the responsibility to protect. Conflict, security & development, vol. 14, n. 4, pp. 379-402.
Terhalle, Maximilian. 2011. Reciprocal socialization: rising powers and the West. International studies perspectives, vol. 12, pp. 341-361.
Tourinho, Marcos. 2015. O acordo nuclear com o Irã: o papel e as contribuições das sanções internacionais. Política externa, vol. 24, n. 1 e 2, jul./dez.
United Nations. 2000. 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. NPT/CONF.2000/28. Final Document.
______. 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available at: http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf, access on November 13th 2015.
______. 1998. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf, access in February 22nd 2016.
UN General Assembly. 2011. A/66/551-S/2011/701. Available at: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/POC%20S2011%20701.pdf, access on February 18th 2016.
UN Security Council. 2011. Resolution 1973 (2011). S/RES/1973 (2011). Available at: http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_2011_03/20110927_110311-UNSCR-1973.pdf, access on February 18th 2016.
Verdier, Daniel. 2008. Multilateralism, bilateralism, and exclusion in the nuclear proliferation regime. International organization, vol. 62, n. 3 (Summer, 2008), pp. 439-476.
Vihma, Antto. 2011. India and the Global Climate Governance: Between Principles and Pragmatism. Journal of Environment & Development, 20(1), pp. 69-94.
Viotti, Maria Luiza Ribeiro; Dunlop, Regina Maria Cordeiro; Fernandes, Leonardo Luís Gorgulho N. 2014. O Brasil no Conselho de Segurança da ONU: 2010-2011. Brasília: FUNAG.
Walsh, Jim. 2005. Learning from past success: the NPT and the future of non-proliferation. The Paper prepared for the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission. Stockholm, Sweden.
Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of international politics. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
- Autores mantêm os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.