Influence of the power of great powers on emerging States.

To what extent do the great powers intervene in the development of the public policies of

Emerging States?

Global Politics

Word count: 3,869

 2

Table of contents:

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………....3

Chapter 1: development of power and world order……………………………………………4

Chapter 2: Latin America and Asymmetric power relation with the United States………..….6

Chapter 3: consequences of the development plan in Colombia (2002-2010)……………...…9

Chapter 4: comparative analysis with other case studies……………………………….……13

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………15

References……………………………………………………………………………………16
 3

Introduction:

Global politics is about relations between States, stakeholders and individuals, but in those

relations power is the key element that guides how those relations work. For this very reason,

the relationships between States have never been fully symmetric, specially between the

global north and global south hemispheres. This has been seen especially in the last decades,

where the power is not distributed in a multipolar way but rather in bipolar and even unipolar

way. The power of regional and global hegemonies keeps growing while the rest of the

world, especially emerging States, are subjugated to comply with the agendas of great

powers.

For this reason a very pivotal question to understand the international relations purview

arises; To what extent do the great powers intervene in the development of public policies of

emerging States?

In this extended essay this question will be answered through the research approach of case

studies and comparative studies by applying the research technique of qualitative data

analysis.

In order to answer the research question, this essay will address the distribution of power and

the world order and how great powers from the global north hemisphere are able to influence

and “coerce” emerging States from the global south hemisphere into aligning with their core

values and serve them. Although the purpose of this extended essay is to answer the inquiry
 4

question in general terms, this essay will focus mainly on the influence of The United States,

a super power in Latin America.

Chapter 1: development of power and world order

The definition of power fluctuates depending on the context and ideology, the scholar Eric

Wolf believes that there are four types of power “Power works differently in interpersonal

relation, in institutional arenas and on the level of whole societies” (E. Wolf, 1999). In the

global politics purview, the idea of structural power is the one that best describes how power

impacts the international relations purview. Structural power can be understood as States

influencing the political ideas, structure and framework of global politics (Murphy et al.,

2016).

The notion of structural power has been seen in the international relations field since the

conception of a State as one. The Westphalian Peace Treaty set a precedent in terms of the

autonomy and definition of a State as sovereign. Something that as time passed quickly

shifted from a power game between Empires to States, in which regional and global

hegemonies held all the cards, and the emerging countries were subjected to the decisions

taken by the wealthy States. The Whestphalian treaty amongst its many impacts in global

politics, resulted in the expansion of colonialism and European imperialism, meanwhile

European states had the autonomy to solidify their states and strengthen their relations with

other neighboring countries, the African and American colonies were subjected by the

European States, which resulted in the construction of asymmetric power relations between
 5

the global north and south hemisphere, an asymmetric power balance that is still present in

the current international relations field.

Moreover, in terms of power, relational power is a theory of power that also vastly applies to

global politics. Relational power refers to a State that has a relationship with another and

uses this relationship to influence the other state to change its behavior, this can be done

through military, economic, hard, soft, smart power or a combination of these in order to

achieve its aims (Murphy et al., 2016). In order to effectively apply relational power a State

should know the other state’s weakness, strengths and needs. Joseph Nye, one of the most

important contemporary figures in the study of geopolitics argues that there are three types

of relational power: through threats and rewards, by controlling the agenda of other States in

order to achieve the desired goals and by the establishment of preferences which refers to

making the other State want to achieve the same objectives as theirs (Nye, 2008).

Both relational and structural power help better understand the world order, specifically since

the second half of the twentieth century. After the end of WWII, The United States instead of

opting for isolation had to intervene in the global politics due to the growing influence of the

Soviet Union in easter europe. The United Kingdom who prior to WWII was the global

hegemony suffered from an economic crisis due to all the war spendings, for this reason they

were unable to stop the advance of the USSR influence. This set a precedent for the

international relations purview as the United States was the one to directly confront the

Soviet Union, this was done through many approaches such as the creation of NATO. It is

this precedent that created a turning point for Global politics and world order, the United

States became the new global hegemonic power and the era of pax Americana started. The
 6

division of the world between communism and capitalism resulted in The United States and

Soviet Union as super powers influencing the development and public policies of emerging

countries. The Soviet Union had a strong influence in eastern Europe, while The United

States had a strong influence on the west.

Even after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the United States had already consolidated

itself as a global hegemony in economic and military terms. Therefore, the world order post

WWII has The United States at the top of the pyramid. Although the United States is

currently the only global hegemonic power, countries such as Russia and China are also

considered superpowers, thus, the power in the world order is multipolar.

Chapter 2: Latin America and Asymmetric power relation with the United States

At the end of the 19th century, the majority of the Latin American countries had gained

independence and stopped being European colonies. At this time, the majority of their

income came from the export of agriculture, but as the countries grew they needed other

types of incomes to grow the economy. For this reason many European countries like France,

England and Germany became investors in the business of extracting natural resources and

materials. Although European countries were initially the investors, as the economic and

regional influence of the United States grew, they became the primary investors in Latin

American countries. Many Latin American countries took out loans from the United States

government and American Multinational corporations, but unfortunately on september 1929

the Wall Street stock market crashed which resulted in a great depression. The crash had

enormous repercussions world wide but the Latin American countries were significantly
 7

affected as those loans quickly turned into an enormous external debt that these South

American countries owed.

The great depression of 1929 was undoubtedly a turning point for the Latin American

economy. After this time period the majority of Latin American countries relied heavily on

the importation of goods from very industrialized countries, such as The United States at the

time. This precedent begins to show the power imbalance in the American continent between

the global north and global south hemisphere.

Moreover, the asymmetric relations between the United States and Latin American countries

were in great part solidified by many policies from the United States, such as the Monroe

Doctrine. This policy from 1823 was written by former president of the United States James

Monroe, In which it warns the European countries about pursuing colonies in the American

continent, the policy established that the United States would not interfere with European

colonies in the American continent but it they would not allow European countries to

colonize new territories of the American continent nor re colonize the colonies that became

independent. When this foreign policy was passed, the Latin American countries that had

recently become independent were very thankful to the US. But this policy that initially

seemed like the United States granting freedom and protection to Latin American countries,

soon shifted into the United States pushing their political agenda into Latin American

countries. This was evidenced when former president of the United States, Therodore

Roosevelt in 1904 made an alteration to the Monroe doctrine, it was called Roosevelt

Corollary. In the own words of Theodore Roosevelt “In the Western Hemisphere, the

adherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however

reluctantly, in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, to the exercise of an

 8

international police power” (Roosevelt,1904). This meant that the United States would

intervene in the internal affairs and public policy of a Latin American country if they go

against the USA government or pose for their State.

Both the Monroe doctrine and the great depression of the 1920’s showcase perfectly how the

United States through relational power and to an extent smart power was able to subjugate

the Latin American countries making the southern hemisphere of the American continent

heavily rely on the United States. The USA was able to exercise this power by applying the

three types of relational power conceptualized by the scholar Joseph Nye. Initially by

controlling the agendas of these countries, by limiting their economic capabilities and

posteriorly making the Latin American countries rely on the imports and goods from them.

Simultaneously, since the beginning of the 20th century they started to establish a preference,

by making the Latin American countries align their goals and values with the same ones as

them and if the Latin American countries refused, they would exercise their power through

threats and rewards, for example by instilling the notion that if these southern countries did

not align themselves with the United States, they would intervene with their sovereignty and

public policy just how the Monroe doctrine states.

As time passed, the Roosevelt Corollary was later changed to a less aggressive policy; the

good neighbor policy, which was established by former US president Franklin Roosevelt

from 1933 to the start of WWII in 1945. The purpose of this policy was to better the foreign

relations with Latin America and establish free trade agreements. But this policy was not

placed to help Latin American countries, but rather to help the United States economy further

expand. After the beginning of WWII this policy was quickly dismissed and later with the
 9

beginning of the cold war, the United States re-adopted the Roosevelt Corollary. This was

evidenced for example with the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

Therefore, prior to WWII the United States tried adopting with Latin America a false

liberalist approach to international relations in which they wanted to cooperate with Latin

America and through interdependence to mutually improve their economies and

development. But after WWII broke and later the cold war, The USA re-adopted realism as

their approach to the international relations field and took the role of a revisionist State.

Through offensive realism during the second half of the 20th century they kept pushing to

gain more power, promote neoliberalism as the default economic and political system, while

at the same time trying to destroy the soviet union and the growing wave of communism in

the world.

Although South America was not directly involved in the cold war, the efforts and pressure

exercised by the United States worldwide to promote Neoliberalism and become the sole

hegemony of the world certainly had an impact on South America and their public policies.

Seeing this from a realist point of view, it can be emphasized that South America in the last

50 years of the 20th century established a pessimistic economic policy where it specifically

emphasized free trade agreements, economic openings, etc. Becoming subject to what

emanated from the economic and development policies of other states such as the United

States, as a result of this type of policies, Colombia and other States will create and guide

their public policies for the benefit of the United States.

Moreover, after the start of the cold war, South America also saw a rise in the United States

interventionism in terms of shifting south american countries public policies and stopping the
 10

growing left wing government as the time, this led to historical events like the

implementation of plan condor.

Chapter 3: consequences of the development plan in Colombia (2002-2010)

The United States intervention in Colombia during 2002 to 2010 against terrorism and drug

trafficking. The name of the intervention was “Plan Colombia Phase II”. The first Plan

Colombia was signed in 1999. Plan Colombia was a bilateral agreement between both states

in order to combat the prominent guerrillas such as the FARC (Fuerzas Armadas

Revolucionarias de Colombia) and drug trafficking in Colombia. Plan Colombia Phase II had

the same objectives as the first one but took a different approach. Although President Uribe

claimed that the investment made by the United State’s government was going to go

primarily to social development and only a small part of the budget was destined to war and

the army. During those years the government enforced a war policy against the FARC

(Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia). This policy was named “Policy of

democratic defense and security” (PSD) which was pushed since 2003 as after failed

negotiations between the Colombian State and the FARC in 1998, the FARC kept gaining

power and became a “real” threat to legitimacy and sovereignty of the Colombian State. The

PSD had the objective of regaining control of the Colombian territory, protecting the

civilians and to eliminate drug trafficking (DIH & Observatorio de Derechos Humanos,

2008).

Amongst the many strategies that the Colombian government employed, one of the most

controversial was a result-reward based system solidified by the Acts “2767” of 2004,

“1400” of 2006 and “108” of 2003. The purpose of these legislations was to incentivize the

Army to fight harder in war (FIDH & CCEEU, 2011) . All these acts consist in giving the
 11

army members as well as the collaborators economic bonifications, for intel gathered as well

as successful operations that were measured usually by the body count of deceased FARC

combatants. What initially sounded like an appropriate plan of action, soon proved to be

disastrous when the “Falsos Positivos'' problem began to arise. The term “Falsos Positivos”

was coined by the Colombian media and refers to the Colombian army allegedly killing

mostly vulnerable citizens and making them pass as FARC members that were killed in

combat.

Despite being a bilateral agreement, since the beginning of “Plan Colombia Phase II” there

was a clear asymmetric power dynamic. The United State’s government held all the cards,

and the Colombian government was subjected to obedience to receive the important

investments and donations from the USA government. For this reason, the development of

Colombia for almost a decade relied on the results that the Colombian government showed

to the United States government. The need to show tangible results to the USA resulted in

the implementation of the “Falsos positivos” system which through structural and behavioral

violence resulted in the human rights violations and death of an estimated 6,402 Colombian

citizens (Open Democracy, 2021).

After the peace treaty was signed in 2016 between the FARC and the Colombian

government, the special jurisdiction for peace (JEP) was established, the JEP consists of an

independent organ from the government that intends to investigate, judicialize the

perpetrators and repair the victims through restorative justice. Although the Colombian

government and the army members that committed these atrocities are being punished, the

Colombian government cannot be entirely blamed for the “Falsos positivos'' phenomenon.
 12

The United States government is to a major extent guilty for the uprising of the “Falsos

Positivos”. It has been proved that the US government did not directly command the

Colombian army or government to commit these acts against humanity, but their pressure

and the economic leverage that they held against Colombia was undoubtedly a pivotal driver

(CCEEUMR, 2014).

After the 9/11 attack, the United States declared a war on terror which mayorly took place in

the middle east, but the FARC being a prominent terrorist organization and having a big

involvement in the drug trafficking and cartels, led the US government to place eyes in

Colombia. From the years 2000 to 2010, the US government gave the Colombian

government 5,683 million dollars for the military and police institutions, 73% of this budget

was invested in the Colombian Army. Furthermore, the US government not only gave the

military institutions money but helped train and structure this entity. The United States

government decided not to get involved in the Colombian Civil War unless the FARC acted

against their interests. But in 2003 a plane with 3 Americans was kidnapped by the FARC

and the Americans were held captive for over 5 years. This precedent intensified the

involvement of the US government which during 2003-2007 annually gave the Colombian

government over 600 million dollars, making Colombia at that time the fifth country to

receive the most monetary aid for military assistance. Even after having a significant

reduction from the monetary aid of the US (from 600 million USD to 150 million USD) the

Colombian government approved a “wealth tax” that recouped over 400 million USD to buy

weapons from the US government. Alone the Colombian government was unable to fight the

FARC, something that the US government knew, for this reason they used this military

investment as leverage and through smart power, they made the Colombian government

intensify the crackdown against the FARC in order to keep receiving monetary aid. This
 13

resulted not only in the systematic violation of human rights but also in the interference of

Colombian sovereignty and development. As Colombia was unable to make fully

autonomous decisions about their territory and internal policy because they feared that if they

acted against the United States government’s “values” the help and the economic investment

that they were receiving would be cut. Although the United States government never

implicitly or explicitly advised the Colombian Army to employ the “Falsos positivos”

technique, they should have rigorously inspected the body counts and achievement of the

army, but most importantly they should have ceased any economic support to the Colombian

Army when the first cases of “Falsos positivos” were reported.

Chapter 4: comparative analysis with other case studies

Although the US intervention in Colombia showcases a clear example of the influence of the

USA (super power) in the public policy of an emerging State (Colombia), this is not the only

case study where this asymmetric power dynamic can be seen, the operation condor also

perfectly exemplifies this phenomenon.

During the cold war, the world was divided between two economic systems, capitalism and

communism. Russia, at the time the Soviet Union wanted to spread the political and

economic system of communism, while the United States wanted to maintain the status quo,

capitalism, and fought to eradicate the fast spread of communism. In South America there

was a growing increase in socialist governments. In the mid 1970’s various left wing

governments were toppled and right wing dictatorships began to govern. For example, in

Chile, the left wing president Salvador Allende was toppled by Agusto Pinochet’s right wing
 14

military junta. Pincohet’s dictatorship was in place from 1974 to 1990. Operation Condor

was officially started on november 28, 1975 in Chile and consisted in an intergovernmental

cooperation to gather information and create a database on left wing guerrillas and political

opposers to the right wing dictatorships in Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay and

Brazil. Their main objective was to eradicate the spread of communism as well as to

persecute political opposers and guerrillas. This operation was done through the economic

aid and influence of the United States government, specifically with the help of the CIA

(Central Intelligence Agency). This operation was approved and supported by Henry

Kissinger who was the National Security Advisor during Richard Nixon’s and Gerald Ford’s

presidency.

During the operation condor, freedom of expression and democracy were heavily suppressed,

the estimate of disappeared/deaths of political opposers and civilians is estimated to be

around 50,000 and it is also estimated that around 400,000 civilians and political opposers

were arrested and deprived of their freedom. Moreover during this operation there were

many human rights violations such as; article 3, article 5, article 9, article 10 and article 12

(UN General assembly, 1948).

The systematic violations of this human rights as well as horrible atrocities were not only

known by the CIA but also endorsed, although the United States has denied these claims

many times it has been proved that through encryption machines from crypto AG a swiss

company the CIA had access to all this information. Moreover, in a declassified CIA

document from june 23rd, 1976 which was published by La republica, a uruguayan news

outlet in 2007, revealed that high ranking officials from latin american countries (Argentina,

Chile, Uruguay and Bolivia) had a meeting in Buenos Aires in 1974 “to organize coordinated

actions against subversive targets” (Cuba’s Representative Office Abroad, 2020).

 15

The plan condor case study and plan Colombia phase II, had different approaches in terms of

the influence exercised by the USA. Although Operation Condor was not a development plan

like in Colombia and there was not a bilateral agreement between the USA and the South

American countries involved, it was in fact an operation made by many Latin American

aided economically by the USA and the CIA. Having this information one is able to analyze

that super powers and hegemonies have in fact the faculty and abilities of influencing

emerging states and their public policies.

Conclusion:

Through the research approach of case studies and qualitative data analysis in this essay one

is able to conclude that in the current international relations system, realism, countries seek

to acquire as much power as they can and as a result of this endless quest, through the use of

power, specially relational power, many superpowers and hegemonies can and will influence

for this reason emerging States and their public policies in a way that ultimately benefits

these super powers to a mayor extent. By looking at the consequences of the US intervention

in Colombia as well as the operation condor, it is evident that these emerging States did not

have full autonomy in the development of their public policy, but rather many of the policies

in place during these events were highly influenced by the United States, which undoubtedly

ended being more prejudicial than beneficial for the emerging countries.

Moreover one is able to conclude that the constructions of asymmetric power balances,

especially between the global north and south are one of the biggest drivers and enablers of

this phenomenon. This is evident when looking at the development of Latin America in the

20th century and how after they stopped being colonies and were able to become

independent sovereign states they still were not fully free as the United States in many ways
 16

took a similar role than the one of the European countries in the south hemisphere when

these countries were still colonies.

In terms of the limitations of this essay, the research question and thesis were answered only

by focusing on the dynamics between the emerging States and super powers of the western

hemisphere. Despite this, I strongly believe that this thesis can be proven correctly when

applied to the estern hemisphere, as the history in this hemisphere in terms of power pursue

is to an extent very similar to the western hemisphere.

References:

Acosta, M., & Faroh, F. (2021, March 12). La Crisis de 1929 y sus repercusiones en América

Latina (página 2). Monografias.com.

https://www.monografias.com/trabajos38/crisis-del-veintinueve/crisis-del-veintinuev2

Cuba’s Representative Office Abroad. (2020). Operation Condor: The CIA is not innocent.

http://www.cubadiplomatica.cu/en/articulo/operation-condor-cia-not-innocent

DIH & Observatorio de Derechos Humanos. (2008). Impacto de la Política de Seguridad

Democrática sobre la confrontación armada, el narcotráfico y los derechos humanos.

https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r25967.pdf

FIDH & CCEEU. (2011). Colombia. La guerra se mide en litros de sangre.

https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/colombie589e.pdf

Izzit. (2018, January 18). Pax Americana - Full Video. YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIkwy1o2CfY
 17

Kirsch, M. (2017). IB Global Politics Course Book: Oxford IB Diploma Programme (1st ed.).

Oxford University Press.

Movimiento de Reconciliación (FOR) y la Coordinación Colombia-Europa_Estados Unidos

(CCEEU). (2014). “Falsos positivos” en Colombia y el papel de asistencia militar de

Estados Unidos, 2000–2010.

https://verdadabierta.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/falsos-positivos-2000-2010.pd

Murphy, R., Gleek, C., & Gleek, C. M. R. (2016). Pearson Bacc ESS: GlobPol bundle

(Pearson Baccalaureate) (1st ed.). Pearson Education ESL.

National Archives. (2022, February 8). Theodore Roosevelt’s Corollary to the Monroe

Doctrine (1905). Archives.Gov.

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/roosevelt-corollary

Open Democracy. (2021). 6,402 “falsos positivos” en Colombia: ¿Quién dio la orden?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/es/6402-falsos-positivos-colombia-quien-dio-orden/