Latin America is emerging from a 30-year period of intense, violent, and deadly conflict. Yet the legacy of this violent period has a strong impact on Latin American citizens, policymakers, and military officers: few believe that this past has been clearly exiled to the dust bin of history, never to threaten the peace and prosperity of the region again. Hence a lively and fundamentally important discussion flourishes in the region concerning the causes, prevention, and resolution of deadly conflict.
Latin American analysts have debated a number of recommendations regarding the prevention of violent conflict. A number of these proposals parallel those included in the Carnegie Commission’s Second Progress Report, while three others reflect distinct ideas.
Control, reduce and eventually eliminate Weapons of Mass Destruction. These efforts have a long history in Latin America, beginning with the Treaty of Tlatelolco of 1967. While it is true that the key countries (Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, and the United States) did not sign on at the time, Cuba is no longer a concern and Argentina and Brazil have now agreed not to proliferate. In 1991 Argentina, Brazil, and Chile signed accords to proscribe chemical and biological weapons.
Control trade in conventional weapons. The discussion of various arms control measures is a major enterprise in Latin America today. Nobel Peace Laureate and former Costa Rican President Oscar Arias has proposed a Code of Conduct concerning the arms trade. It requires increased control and vigilance, including registries of arms produced and sold, plus international collaboration to exchange the intelligence that allows one to increase the transparency in the trade.
Promote the establishment of stable, democratic governments. For Latin Americans today, discussion of how to promote stable and democratic governments means focusing above all else on the questions of governability and civilian control over the military. For most Latin Americans strengthening democratic governments also means consolidating civilian control over the military. Civil control in a democratic context is expected to produce fewer domestic and international conflicts. Another way to strengthen democracy is to enhance its reputation and standing in the region by committing the Inter-American community to its defense. The OAS recently adopted the view that a threat to democracy in any Western hemisphere nation automatically constituted a threat to the security of all American nations. The Miami Summit of American Nations seconded this view and the first hemispheric meeting of ministers of defense followed suit.
Champion the rule of law as the basis for regulating social interaction at all levels. The buzzword in Latin America for this issue is "Estado de Derecho." Both the right and the left use it against each other because the laws themselves privilege some outcomes over others (i.e., by what is defined as legal and illegal). But the basic point upon which all sides agree is that the rule of law provides credibility among competing actors. There is also a sense that the rule of law derives from popular sovereignty and justice.
Promote creation of a robust civil society to help diverse groups thrive in proximity. In Latin America one of the key social divides is ethnicity. The region had avoided widespread ethnic conflict for the past half century, mainly by continued demobilization and isolation of indigenous communities. Mestizo society has largely been unaware of the large-scale and efficient organization among indigenous peoples until public manifestations burst onto the national scene in the 1990s. For many analysts, achieving a stable multiethnic society would be greatly facilitated by promoting local non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
Promote economic development in ways that can be indigenously absorbed and sustained. The need for sustainable economic development extends to poor mestizo peasants as well as indigenous communities. It is particularly important for development aid to promote education and alternative crops for peasants growing illegal ones. The "Alliance for the Sustained Development of Central America" agreement reached at the presidential summit of 1994 calls for the respect of cultural and ethnic diversity in the development process. This requires not just promoting economic development, but also socioeconomic reforms that distribute resources more broadly.
Refine institutions and processes for nonviolent dispute resolution and promote conflict resolution strategies based on mutual accommodation. getting the military out of the business of ensuring domestic order is a fundamental first step for many analysts in refining institutions and conflict resolution processes. This issue is caught up with the controversial question of justice for violators of human rights in a country’s authoritarian past. The framing of an issue plays an important role in negotiations between adversaries. New definitions open up new opportunities; symbols and signs in the negotiations, signaling that the military option is being discarded or downplayed.
None of the recommendations by Latin Americans to the prevention or resolution of deadly conflict has been particularly unique to Latin America. But there are three areas in which Latin American analysts address issues that relate more specifically to their own reality.
More efforts to control/reduce demand for drugs in Advanced Industrialized Countries. Drug trafficking has wreaked havoc on many local communities and even entire countries in Latin America. There are few calls for legalizing the production and export of drugs in Latin America, although the violence of the last 15 years is beginning to push some analysts to discuss it, not as a solution, but as an aid in the effort to combat consumption. There is a sense that Latin America is paying the bulk of the costs of the war on drugs, even as the consumption that drives the market occurs largely in the advanced industrialized nations, with the United States as the dominant consumer. Analysts are interested in developing a means to transfer more costs of fighting the problem to consuming countries. This strategy requires cooperation among producing countries so as to negotiate a better deal with consumers, including the United States.
Small arms registration and control. While most analysts in the United States think of controlling conventional weapons in the military sphere, the issue looks very different from Latin America. The export of small arms from the United States to Latin America dramatically aggravates the problem of deadly conflict. There is, thus, an increasingly vocal demand in Latin America that the United States cooperate on regulating the flow of small arms to the region. In an interesting twist to what we commonly hear in the United States, on this matter Latin America wants the United States to control its borders!
Maintain stable local balances. Another difference between how the United States looks at Latin America and how it looks at itself lies in the area of deterrence. Many Latin American civilian and military analysts perceive the need to deter aggression or adventures by neighbors militarily. The United States doesn’t see why Latin American nations would fight each other, and hence ascribe this talk to militarists. But some very respected Latin American advocates of democracy and civilian control over the military see an uncertain world and believe that prudence in the defense of a nation’s interest requires that it have a minimal deterrent force. For these analysts, the success of confidence-building measures depends upon partners perceiving that risks of betrayal are low because the military balance is stable. This perspective informs their suggestions for international cooperation in order to modernize, rebuild, and professionalize the armies of the region.