Les Etudes du CERI

The conflict in Colombia has, in the space of a few years, become a real headache for the United States as well as for Europe. Countless human rights violations, forced population displacement, drug trafficking and terrorism make Colombia a textbook case for examining the entire range of security problems today. With the launching of Plan Colombia in 1999, the United States considerably increased its aid to the country. Today, the American administration actively supports Alvaro Uribe’s government in its fight against guerilla movements, labeled “narcoterrorists,” and rumors of armed intervention regularly resurface. Having long remained on the sidelines of the “Colombian tragedy,” Europe seems to be relegated to playing second fiddle. The military option represented by Plan Colombia had opened up a political spaced that the Europeans began to occupy. But with the break-off of peace negotiations, this space has shrunk and has maybe even disappeared for good. In the face of American efforts to monopolize management of the Colombian conflict, it is in fact hard to see how the European Union can return to the forefront in this area of the world that remains the United States’ preserve. All the more so since virtually no voices can be heard asking the Europeans to counterbalance the United States. The situation in Colombia is a new illustration of the state of U.S.-European relations today, between competition, a search for complementarity and a mutual lack of understanding.

In South Africa, the transition negotiated in order to build a post-apartheid political order has brought about a deep-seated transformation of the state. A central issue of this radical reform had to do with the territorial arrangement of the new state. Constitutional negotiations resulted in a hybrid federal type of system that distinctly reinforced the power of local government, particularly to counterbalance that of the nine provinces. At the same time, a smoother form of intergovernmental relations was introduced with the concept of “cooperative government.” In contrast to the centralized system that held sway under apartheid, local government has been strengthened by a new constitutional status, which in particular guarantees an “equitable share” of the national revenue. It also ensures that municipalities are represented nationally through intergovernmental structures involving the participation of local governments. The new space of autonomization that local governments henceforth enjoy nevertheless comes up against the centralizing tendencies of intergovernmental relations. In South Africa, cooperative government has turned out to be a means of consolidating national power. The configuration of the South African political party system also plays up this rationale. The dominant position of the ANC at every level of government thus has a centralizing effect on the management of center-periphery relations. Yet this dynamic is partly the result of a centralization “by default” due to the institutional weakness of sub-national governments. The use local governments make of the new constitutional space granted to them greatly depends on their own capacities, thus producing an asymmetrical dynamic of autonomization. Without their own resources, rural municipalities remain highly dependent on the central government. On the contrary, metropolitan areas manage to strengthen their power and position themselves as competitors with certain provinces, thus becoming central actors in intergovernmental relations.

East Asian economic cooperation has been actively pursued during the past few years, especially after the Asian financial crisis. A number of bilateral and multilateral Free Trade Area (FTA) agreements were concluded or are being negotiated. The recently published East Asia Vision Group Report provides a more concrete roadmap for an East Asian economic community. The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) became a reality on January 1, 2002, following a 10-years tariff reduction schedule. AFTA aims not only at trade facilitation but at inducing more investment. An ASEAN+3 (i.e. Japan, China and South Korea) FTA was also suggested to build an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA). Japan signed an FTA with Singapore of ASEAN, while China and ASEAN agreed to create FTA within 10 years. On the financial side, the Chiang Mai Initiative created a regional liquidity fund by expanding the existing ASEAN Swap Arrangement to include all ASEAN members and augmented it by a network of bilateral swap arrangements among the ASEAN countries, China, Japan and South Korea. East Asian countries have also established a surveillance mechanism to monitor their economic performance. However, there are many obstacles in further enhancing regional economic cooperation. Structural problems involve political, economic, and cultural heterogeneities among East Asian countries. Low legalization and effectiveness of overlapping regional institutions render deeper regional cooperation difficult. Domestic instability of the ASEAN countries may hamper rapid regional cooperation. Regional rivalry between Japan and China should be an important object of observation. East Asian economic cooperation will be accelerated in the near future. Since the announcement of the ASEAN-China FTA agreement, Japan has attentively sought alliances to vie with growing China and to maintain her influence in the region. The next few years will see the emergence of a number of new bilateral and multilateral relations, both in trade and finance, in East Asia.