![]()
1 The history of the OAS
• Building the multilateral scene in the Americas
• The Cold War
• The OAS after the end of the Cold War
• The structure of the OAS
• Conclusion
On 9 May 1948, the 21 ministers of foreign affairs of the Americas met in Bogotá, Colombia to sign the Charter of the Organization of American States.1 In this chapter I investigate the process that led to this symbolic moment in the history of the Western Hemisphere and look into the two main phases of the development of the organization: during and after the Cold War.
The historical processes that generated the conditions for the creation of the OAS are both regional and international. On one hand, we need to understand the building of a multilateral experience in the Americas. On the other, we need to look at the role of regional organizations in the context of the restructuring of international politics that occurred during and after the end of World War II and again after the end of the Cold War.
The OAS is the result of a long process of bridge building between the countries of the Western Hemisphere.2 During this time, the norms of non-intervention, international legality, territorial integrity, and peaceful settlement of disputes were developed in the context of multilateral and bilateral relations. The experience of signing multilateral treaties, setting up cooperation agencies and attending regional conferences led the way for the creation of the OAS. In order to understand this process, we must look back into the nineteenth century. The first task of the present chapter will be to explore this historical process.
The creation of the OAS inaugurated the process that led to a particular role in governance for regional organizations and regional cooperation during the second half of the twentieth century. When World War II ended, the world was being reorganized in order to support a smoother development of capitalism and liberal democracies, allowing at the same time for the coexistence of two very different forms of social, political and economic structures—communism and capitalism. It was necessary to adapt the inter-American system to this new international reality, in particular to the institutional format generated by the United Nations. The OAS Charter was produced in this context. In fact the Cold War framed international relations during most of the time of the existence of the OAS, and the manner in which the dispute between the two superpowers and the two social systems which they represented took shape in the Americas marked the history of the OAS. An analysis of this reality can be found in the second part of this chapter.
The end of the Cold War inaugurated a period of debate on change and continuity in the international sphere. The agenda most definitely was altered, incorporating new themes connected by a web of norms, networks, new flows of information and concerns with governance at every level. The inability of states to deal with this new agenda, the need for greater coordination and cooperation, new actors from individuals to transnational social movements, the use of violence by nonstate actors, the destruction of the environment and the rapid spread of epidemics are part of this conversation. Regional organizations have been portrayed as complementary to international organizations, to concerts of great powers, to states and other actors in dealing with an array of issues. In this context, a process of socialization of regional institutions has been taking place since the 1990s, producing new institutional designs, activities and debates. The third part of this chapter will shed an initial light on this process.
Finally I shall present the organizational structure of the OAS, allowing for an understanding of how it works and how the institution takes part in the building of global governance.
Building the multilateral scene in the Americas3
Latin America is a region of mostly small countries and has dealt, since the independence wars of the 1820s with the disputes between great powers—such as Great Britain and France, or the United States and the Soviet Union—over influence and resources. After the end of the Second World War, the dominance of the United States was put at the center of the debates on the world role and position of Latin American countries.
In this context multilateralism4 has been viewed by national elites as a form of protection from the asymmetry of power and disputes over influence between great powers that marks the international insertion of the region, and the ideas of equal sovereignty, non-intervention, and international legality were put forward in the process of generating a multilateral practice. A rule-based system and the lawful and peaceful resolution of controversies are seen to preserve the sovereignty of countries lacking significant power resources. The legalist tradition, profoundly rooted in Latin American international culture and also relevant in inter-American relations more generally, is firmly associated with the norm of peaceful conflict resolution and reinforces it.
As the process of transfer of violent conflict to the international realm, according to trends established in Western Europe,5 evolved, regional leaders understood the need to develop norms that would protect the state from the excessive power of external actors. This trend was part of a wider process of construction of shared meanings and inter-subjective structures.6 A common language emerged, incorporating standards of legitimacy that emphasized the role of international law and diplomacy. Beth Simmons, for example, notes that there is a “propensity” to “submit to authoritative third-party legal rulings” in the region.7 Andrew Hurrell, on the other hand, refers to a “diplomatic culture.”8
It is indeed possible to identify a regional culture largely because of the level of interaction between most regional elites since independence. The history of treaties, organizations, and diplomatic negotiations, particularly since the end of the nineteenth century, allows us to refer to elements of continuity regarding practices of peaceful conflict resolution. But it is by no means static or “finished.” The ideas regarding the role of law and diplomacy and the emphasis on multilateral institutions only survive because they are re-enacted in discourse and constitute part of the identity of ruling elites in Latin American countries in particular. Indeed, lately this trend has been re-enacted. In 1998, Peru and Ecuador finally settled their boundary dispute after several conflicts, and relations between Brazil and Argentina and between Argentina and Chile improved based on successful diplomatic negotiations after the mid-1980s.
These ideas are part of the ongoing building of a complex relation between the region and the international system where specificity and Western culture are bound by history. Thus the ideas of conflict resolution and international legality are imported, created and reinvented in the Americas.
From the 1820s, the Spanish-American movement, led by Simón Bolívar, sought to create a confederation of Hispanic-American states to protect those newly independent states from European intervention. In 1826, during the Congress of Panama, treaties referring to security and economic cooperation were signed. At that point the idea of regional solidarity in the realm of security was introduced. Bolívar's aim was to establish a union of Spanish America. Mexico, Gran Colombia (Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador), Peru and the Central American Federation were present. The United States and Brazil were obviously absent. The delegates agreed to defend the independence and sovereignty of the countries of the Americas against foreign domination.
During the following decades other meetings occurred: in 1847 in Lima, in 1856 and again in 1864 in Santiago, where treatieswere negotiated and the ideas of solidarity, peaceful resolution of conflict and non-intervention were slowly incorporated to the international norms governing Hispanic America.
In 1868, the first of two important legal doctrines of international law was devised. These doctrines set a legal framework for inter-American relations and sought to impose legal constraints on the United States and European countries with strong interests in the region. Carlos Calvo, an Argentinean diplomat and legal scholar, argued in his 1868 book9 that nations were not entitled to use armed force to collect debts owed to them by other nations or individuals. The Calvo Doctrine contributed to the establishment of the principles of sovereign immunity from external intervention and equality between states in the Americas, and has since been incorporated as a part of several Latin American constitutions, as well as many other treaties, statutes, and contracts. The doctrine puts forward the principle that jurisdiction over international investment disputes lies with the country in which the investment takes place, impeding intervention by the alien nation before exhausting all local resources. The Drago Doctrine of 1902—named after the Argentine foreign minister, Louis Maria Drago—reaffirmed the Calvo Doctrine and further stated that public debt cannot occasion armed intervention or occupation of the territory of American nations. Minister Drago invoked this doctrine to call upon the United States to help prevent armed intervention by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy against Venezuela for reasons of debt. These ideas had a very strong impact on the development of international relations in the Americas, putting forward the ideas of equal sovereignty, non-intervention and international legality.
Towards the end of the nineteenth century, the involvement of the United States in inter-American multilateralism changed its scope and nature. The United States became more interested in Latin America after the end of its Civil War, as it emerged as a great power in the international arena.10 Thus at the first International Conference of American States held in Washington, the United States was present for the first time at a multilateral inter-American meeting. The International Union of American Republics was created at that point, serving to encourage closer commercial relations between the countries of the Western Hemisphere. The Commercial Bureau for the International Union of American Republics was formed and made available information pertinent to commercial and economic relations. Between October 1889 and April 1890, delegates discussed an array of subjects pertaining to the stabilization of relations between these different societies in line with a generalized concerned amongWestern elites at the time regarding the elaboration of common norms and rules that would facilitate contact, commerce and legal procedures. The Calvo Doctrine was also recognized, thus affirming the sovereign rights of the countries of the region.
At this point the idea of a region called America incorporating the entire Western Hemisphere started to acquire political relevance for the continent. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander von Humboldt had referred to the Western Hemisphere, stressing the difference between the Old World, or Europe, and the NewWorld of the Americas by the beginning of the nineteenth century.11 It was applied to the latter in the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, but at that point the leadership in Washington did not have the means to regionalize international politics.
The presence and influence of the United States led to a shift in the focus of multilateral interaction from security and sovereignty issues to economic mechanisms of cooperation. A permanent secretariat was set up in Washington, DC. At the second Conference, in 1901, it became the International Bureau of American Republics; then at the fourth Conference in 1910, it was once more renamed the Pan American Union. The US secretary of state was the chairman of the Union and the United States had tight control over the conference agendas. Created to promote international cooperation, it offered technical and informational services to all the American republics and served as the repository for international documents. In addition the International Commission of Jurists created in 1906 had the function of drafting codes on international law and state rights.
Functional organizations became part of the inter-American multilateral scene at the beginning of the twentieth century, in line with an historical trend observed in European international relations. Significantly, the issue of communication was on the agenda of leaders in the Western Hemisphere. The first Inter-American International Conference adopted two resolutions regarding communications: the first one recommended that the 18 participating countries promote telegraphic lines with regular services and equitable tariffs as a means of improving communication across the region. The second resolution recommended that countries on the Pacific Ocean promote maritime, telegraphic and postal communications.
The Pan American Sanitary Bureau was created in 1902, in response to a yellow fever outbreak that had spread from Latin America to the United States. It was the first inter-American bureau established by the Pan American Union and the first international health agency in the world. Today it is called the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO).
The fifth Inter-American International Conference created the Inter-American Electrical Communication Commission in May 1923. In 1927, the Inter-American Children's Institute was set up. The Inter-American Commission for Women was established in 1928, at the sixth International Conference of American states, largely as a result of pressure from teachers seeking equal gender rights. It has been developing projects against gender discrimination ever since. In fact it was the first official intergovernmental agency in the world created expressly to ensure recognition of the civil and political rights of women. In 1928, a second organization was created: the Inter-American Institute of Geography and History (IAIGH), which is a scientific organization working in the field of cartography, geophysics, geology and history. In 1949, one year after the signing of the Charter of the OAS, the institute signed an agreement with the organization and became its first specialized organization.
The Inter-American Indian Institute was created in 1940 in order to deal with the specific needs of indigenous populations. An endeavor to study tropical plants in 1942, in the context of World War II, and the loss by Allied countries of control over land that produced rice, rubber, tea and medicinal plants, was the origin of the Inter-American Institute f...
