Abstract The paper examines Brazilians’ attitudes toward the BRICS, verifying whether the soft balancing strategy finds support on public opinion, by using survey data from the Brazil, the Americas and the World Project. Results indicate that the attitudes toward the BRICS countries are similar to those toward other relevant partners. Moreover, attitudes toward the BRICS are not associated with a rejection of the US, which points to the possibility of soft-balancing having support in national public opinion.

Abstract Public opinion plays a growing role in foreign policy formation in democratic societies. In this study, we use survey data from The Americas and the World project to establish whether Latin Americans share a common regional identity, and regard Brazil as a regional leader. Our results indicate that the majority of Brazilians do not identify themselves as Latin Americans. Moreover, while they believe their country is the most suitable candidate for regional leadership, they are unwilling to bear the costs of assuming such a role. Our study also explores perceptions of regional identity and Brazilian leadership in other Latin American countries, based on their own respective power aspirations. It shows that less powerful Latin American nations recognise Brazil as a regional leader, but citizens in middle powers, like Argentina and Mexico, still believe their countries should play a prominent regional role.

Resumo A sociedade civil desempenha um papel cada vez mais importante na formulação da política externa nos países emergentes. Este artigo investiga se a opinião pública é sensível a efeitos de framing no que diz respeito à política externa. Através de um survey experimental aplicado a uma amostra de 1530 estudantes na Universidad de Buenos Aires e na Universidad Nacional de Avellaneda, descobrimos que os participantes são sensíveis a efeitos de framing em temas de política exterior. Os entrevistados mudaram suas preferências quando foram estimulados com informações sobre o crescimento econômico brasileiro e os gastos militares de forma comparada com a Argentina. Por sua vez, esse efeito foi ainda mais pronunciado entre a) pessoas que tendem a se informar menos sobre assuntos internacionais e b) entre indivíduos mais nacionalistas.

Abstract Civil society plays an increasingly important role in the formulation of foreign policy in emerging countries. This article investigates whether public opinion is sensitive to framing effects regarding foreign policy. Data from a survey experiment with a sample of 1,530 students at the Universidad de Buenos Aires and the Universidad Nacional de Avellaneda, we find that participants are sensitive to framing effects on foreign affairs. The interviewees changed their preferences when stimulated by information regarding Brazilian economic growth and military expenditure in comparison with Argentina. In turn, this effect was more pronounced among a) people who tend to stay less informed regarding foreign affairs and b) individuals who are more nationalistic.

Resumen La sociedad civil desempeña un papel cada vez más importante en la formulación de la política externa de países emergentes. Este artículo indaga si la opinión pública es sensible a efectos de framing en lo que concierne a política externa. A través de un survey experimental, aplicado a una muestra de 1530 alumnos en la Universidad de Buenos Aires y en la Universidad Nacional de Avellaneda, encontramos que los participantes fueron sensibles a efectos de framing en temas de política exterior. Los entrevistados cambiaron sus preferencias cuando recibieron información respecto al crecimiento económico brasilero y sus gastos militares de forma comparada con la Argentina. A su vez, este efecto fue más pronunciado entre: a) personas que tienden a informarse menos sobre asuntos internacionales y b) individuos más nacionalistas.

Résumé La société civile joue un rôle de plus en plus important dans la formulation de la politique étrangère dans les pays émergents. À travers une enquête auprès de 1530 élèves de l'Université de Buenos Aires et de l'Universidad Nacional de Avellaneda, nous avons constaté que les participants étaient sensibles aux effets de cadrage concernant les affaires étrangères. En effet, les préférences des personnes interviewées changeaient lorsqu'elles étaient stimulées par des informations concernant la croissance économique et les dépenses militaires brésiliennes, en comparaison avec l'Argentine. De plus, cet effet était plus prononcé chez a) les gens qui ont moins tendance à se tenir informés des affaires étrangères et b) les gens plus nationalistes.

O artigo compara a unidade partidária de 25 partidos políticos latino-americanos em temas de política externa e doméstica. O objetivo principal é testar a hipótese da especificidade da política externa na estruturação do comportamento legislativo em seis países da América Latina. O resultado revela elevada similaridade entre os níveis de unidade partidária nas arenas doméstica e externa, indicando que esta não gera incentivos específicos na influência do comportamento legislativo. Como na política doméstica, os elevados índices de unidade partidária encontrados nos temas internacionais sugerem que os partidos políticos e respectivas lideranças partidárias são atores relevantes na determinação do voto do legislador latino-americano em temas de política externa.

The paper compares 25 Latin American political parties’ unity scores in domestic and foreign issues. Its main goal is to test the hypothesis of the specificity of foreign policy in structuring legislative behavior in six Latin American countries. The results show a strong similarity between the levels of party unity in domestic and foreign issues, indicating that foreign policy does not generate specific incentives influencing legislative behavior. As it occurs on domestic issues, the high levels of party unity observed on international themes suggest that the political parties and their respective leaderships are relevant actors in determining the votes of the Latin American legislator on the issues of international affairs.

L’article compare l’unité parmi 25 partis politiques latino-américains dans des thèmes de politique extérieure et domestique. L’objectif principal est de tester l’hypothèse de la spécificité de la politique extérieure dans la structuration du comportement législatif dans six pays d’Amérique latine. Le résultat révèle une similarité élevée entre les niveaux de l’unité des partis dans les domaines domestique et de la politique extérieure. Cela indique que l’unité des partis ne stimule pas le comportement législatif. Ainsi qu’en politique domestique, les indices élevés de l’unité des partis identifiés dans les thèmes internationaux suggèrent que les partis politiques et leurs dirigeants sont des acteurs importants dans le choix du vote du législateur latino-américain dans des thèmes de politique extérieure.

The aim of this article is to discuss the distribution of preferences of members of the Chilean and Argentinian Congress on foreign policy issues through the analysis of roll call votes. This goal is guided by the debate in Latin American literature concerning the decision-making process in foreign policy. The predominant argument focuses on the Executive as the principal decision-maker, disregarding the Legislative as relevant in this field. Thus, legislators would tend to abdicate from their preferences in determining foreign policy. Confronting this argument, we have many studies emphasising the importance of domestic actors in the foreign policy decision-making process. This article proposes to analyse two case studies in comparative perspective: the lower houses of the national parliaments of Argentina and Chile. The result is that the party ideology is a relevant explanatory factor of deputies’ votes. Although the argument is more evident for the Chilean case, it is possible to argue that there is a similar pattern to the structuring of deputies’ votes in the two countries, both on the domestic and on the international arena. The methodology used makes it possible to infer legislators’ preferences by means of roll call votes and of the construction of maps of deputies’ ideal points in foreign policy terms, as well as the correlation between Chilean and Argentinian parties’ ideological classifications. Votes on foreign policy questions during the 2002-2006/2007 legislatures are considered.

The aim of this article is to discuss the distribution of preferences of members of the Chilean and Argentinian Congress on foreign policy issues through the analysis of roll call votes. This goal is guided by the debate in Latin American literature concerning the decision-making process in foreign policy. The predominant argument focuses on the Executive as the principal decision-maker, disregarding the Legislative as relevant in this field. Thus, legislators would tend to abdicate from their preferences in determining foreign policy. Confronting this argument, we have many studies emphasising the importance of domestic actors in the foreign policy decision-making process. This article proposes to analyse two case studies in comparative perspective: the lower houses of the national parliaments of Argentina and Chile. The result is that the party ideology is a relevant explanatory factor of deputies' votes. Although the argument is more evident for the Chilean case, it is possible to argue that there is a similar pattern to the structuring of deputies' votes in the two countries, both on the domestic and on the international arena. The methodology used makes it possible to infer legislators' preferences by means of roll call votes and of the construction of maps of deputies' ideal points in foreign policy terms, as well as the correlation between Chilean and Argentinian parties' ideological classifications. Votes on foreign policy questions during the 2002-2006/2007 legislatures are considered.

Este artigo busca analisar as razões motivadoras da parceria no jogo das negociações comerciais multilaterais. O objetivo é contribuir para a compreensão mais ampla sobre as bases (doméstica e internacional) do processo de constituição de coalizões internacionais, ou parcerias, de tipo Sul-Sul no novo contexto da agenda multilateral. Tal processo tem ocupado papel central na dinâmica das negociações multilaterais e regionais de comércio, particularmente no que tange às perspectivas do reequilíbrio de forças centro-periferia do sistema internacional. A reabertura de uma nova rodada de negociações multilaterais no âmbito da Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC), com foco justamente nos novos desafios temáticos sobre comércio internacional e caminhos para o desenvolvimento, reintroduz a centralidade do papel das coalizões e alianças de tipo Sul-Sul. Este artigo analisa a convergência e divergência de interesses comerciais entre Brasil, Índia e África do Sul, dentro do quadro de interesses político-estratégicos mais amplos, mostrando que os aspectos meramente comerciais não dão conta de explicar os tipos de alinhamentos produzidos no interior da arena multilateral de comércio.

This article seeks to analyze the reasons that stimulate the multilateral trade negotiations. The purpose is going to contribute for the comprehension about the basis (domestic and international) in the constitution of international coalitions, in the new context of the multilateral agenda. The international coalitions constitution trial has occupied central paper in the dynamic one of the multilateral and regional negotiations, in particular in what plays to the perspectives of the balance of forces center-periphery of the international system. The new thematic challenges about international trade and development introduce new studies about the international coalitions and alliances on the South level. This article analyzes the convergence and divergence of commercial interests between Brazil, India and Africa of the South, inside the chart of broader political-strategic interests, showing that the merely commercial aspects do not give to count of explain the kinds of alignments that are produced in the interior of the arena multilateral of commerce.

This article analyses the recent evolution of Brazilian Foreign Policy, mainly its security aspects. The security issues were repositioned within the Brazil’s international agenda and have acquired new format during the 1990’s, particularly related to the Brazil’s strategy to build its South American leadership. Both, the September 11th attacks and Luis Inácio Lula Da Silva election in 2002, have strengthened the previous tendencies, and haven’t produced significant changes. Two factors are crucial to this process: a) MERCOSUR impact on the regional geopolitical accommodation and b) the recent Brazil’s policies toward Amazon region increasing its presence and political actions.

O objetivo deste artigo é analisar a evolução de um regime hemisférico de segurança tendo em vista duas questões fundamentais: o impacto do Mercosul no equilíbrio geopolítico continental e o papel do Brasil como ator-chave na conformação deste arranjo hemisférico de segurança. Nossa hipótese é de que, tanto na dimensão regional, quanto global, o Brasil tem atuado no sentido de contrabalançar a hegemonia norte-americana, reforçando a correlação entre o status de potência regional e o cálculo de opções internacionais.

The main purpose of this article is to analyse the evolution of a hemispheric regime of security using two basic issues: the impact of Mercosur in the regional geopolitical balance and the role of Brazil as a key-actor in the establishment of this agenda for regional security. Our hypothesis is that Brazil, as much in the regional, as in the global dimension, has acted so as to counterbalance the United States hegemony, strengthening the correlation between the status of regional power and the calculus of international options.