A 21st Century Security Architecture for the Americas: Multilateral Cooperation, Liberal Peace and Soft Power
The aftermath of September 11 brought attention to the general disarray in U.S. security arrangements in the western hemisphere, especially when Brazil and Mexico took diametrically opposed positions on the Rio Treaty, a collective-defense relic of the Cold War. Mexico unilaterally rejected it, whereas Brazil invoked it as a measure of solidarity with the United States. But in reality the treaty provides no effective avenue for military cooperation. The United States has no single military command that encompasses the Americas, only bilateral military arrangements with Mexico and Canada, relationships sustained with other Latin American governments by the U.S. Southern Command, and periodic meetings with regional defense chiefs.
Nunez, who teaches at the U.S. Army War College, proposes a radical rethinking of the hemispheric security architecture, this time under the auspices of the Organization of American States. The emergence of democratic states in the region and increasing economic integration make this an opportune moment, he argues. He sees as threats not traditional interstate wars but new transnational challenges such as natural disasters, insurgencies, drugs, and poverty. Given the enormous psychological constraints on cooperation, Nunez argues for a "soft power" framework that builds on U.S. exercise of restraint and support of confidence-building measures among its potential partners. The latter is especially important for countries such as Mexico, where there is great internal opposition within the military to greater cooperation, despite the country's new international assertiveness. He also calls for creating standing multinational units in both North and South America, looking back to the first special service force, the famous U.S.-Canadian "Devils Brigade" formed in 1942, as a model. With these steps, the United States can take the lead in expanding security cooperation in the hemisphere through a new multilateral framework acceptable to all. Political and military opposition to these ideas will be strong, and not only in Latin America. But this debate needs to begin, and Nunez has provided a provocative start.
Related
All Presidents are dependent on the permanent bureaucracies of government inherited from their predecessors. A President must have the information and analysis of options which the bureaucracies provide in order to anticipate problems and make educated choices. He must, in most cases, also have the coöperation of the bureaucracies to turn his decisions into governmental action. A bureaucracy can effectively defuse a presidential decision by refusing to support it with influential members of Congress or to implement it faithfully.
NATO's poorly planned adventure in Kosovo has brought a critical question to the fore: just how should Americans define their national interest in the information age? The Soviet Union is gone, and an information revolution has transformed the nature of power. Few "A list" threats to American security loom large today. Global telecommunications have made humanitarian crises in far-flung places impossible to ignore. But before the United States embarks on another costly human rights crusade, Americans should recognize that moral values are only part of a foreign policy. Other essential priorities remain. If Washington neglects to handle the "A list," the consequences for global peace and prosperity will be dire.
The military's backward budget process -- driven by parochial service interests rather than White House or Pentagon priorities -- must be fixed, and soon.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.