International Politics

, Volume 56, Issue 5, pp 569–584 | Cite as

Reassessing Chilean international security

  • Carlos SolarEmail author
Original Article


In this paper, I offer a neorealist interpretation of Chile’s pursuit of security in the Southern Andean Cone in Latin America. I challenge current liberal institutionalist interpretations to shed light on the mounting evidence suggesting Chile’s strong sense of interstate rivalry and competition for power with its regional neighbours. Since the turn of the century, relations with Peru and Bolivia are at a low considering the recent demands in The Hague over territorial bargaining, and, unlike the amicable bilateral relations that have developed recently with long-time rival Argentina, Chile’s interactions with Lima and La Paz reveal the use of purposeful alliances, military deterrence, and diplomatic means to balance each other’s strategic advantages. Against this backdrop, the paper provides with explanatory power to understand Chile’s overall mistrust of Latin America’s rebellious security scenario as it breaks through the theoretical ceiling of current Southern Cone international politics studies.


International relations theories Regional security Territorial conflict Alliances Military deterrence Peace 


  1. Abdenur, A.E., F. Mattheis, and P. Seabra. 2016. An ocean for the Global South: Brazil and the zone of peace and cooperation in the South Atlantic. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 29(3): 1112–1131.Google Scholar
  2. Amorim Neto, O., and A. Malamud. 2015. What determines foreign policy in Latin America? Systemic versus domestic factors in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico, 1946–2008. Latin American Politics and Society 57(4): 1–27.Google Scholar
  3. Avilés, W. 2010. Globalization and military power in the Andes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Briceño-Ruiz, J., and A.R. Hoffmann. 2015. Post-hegemonic regionalism, UNASUR, and the reconfiguration of regional cooperation in South America. Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 40: 48–62.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, M.E., O.R. Coté, S.M. Lynn-Jones, and S.E. Miller. 2004. Offense, defense, and war. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Burges, S.W. 2008. Consensual hegemony: Theorizing Brazilian foreign policy after the Cold War. International Relations 22(1): 65–84.Google Scholar
  7. Buszynski, L. 2002. Realism, institutionalism, and Philippine Security. Asian Survey 42(3): 483–501.Google Scholar
  8. Buzan, B., C. Jones, and R. Little. 1993. The logic of anarchy: Neorealism to structural realism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Call, C.T. 2012. Why peace fails. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Chilean Ministry of Defence. 2010. Libro de la defensa. Retrieved from Accessed 12 June 2017.
  11. Chilean Ministry of Defence. 2016. Ministerios de Defensa de Chile y Argentina acuerdan plan de accion bilateral en Defensa. Retrieved from Accessed 17 June 2017.
  12. Chilean Ministry of Defence. 2017. Cuenta Pública Participativa. Retrieved from Accessed 12 June 2017.
  13. Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2017. Cuenta Pública Participativa. Retrieved from Accessed 17 June 2017.
  14. Chipman, J., and J. Lockhart Smith. 2009. South America: Framing regional security. Survival 51(6): 77–104.Google Scholar
  15. Chong, A., and M. Maass. 2010. Introduction: The foreign policy power of small states. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 23(3): 381–382.Google Scholar
  16. Clemons, S., and S.M. Walt. 2009. Realism, really? Foreign Policy 175: 10.Google Scholar
  17. Cohen, E. 1986. Distant battles: Modern war in the third world. International Security 10(4): 143–171.Google Scholar
  18. Daddow, O. 2017. International relations theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Darnton, C. 2014. Rivalry and alliance politics in Cold War Latin America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Diamint, R. 2004. Security Challenges in Latin America. Bulletin of Latin American Research 23(1): 43–62.Google Scholar
  21. Dirección General de Relaciones Economicas Internacionales (Direcon). 2017. 20 años del acuerdo Chile Mercosur 19962016. Retrieved from Accessed 17 June 2017.
  22. Donnelly, J. 2000. Themes in international relations: Realism and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Duarte, R.A., and B. Weiffen. 2014. South American re-armament: From balancing to symbolizing power. Contemporary Security Policy 35(1): 138–162.Google Scholar
  24. El Comercio. 2015. Bachelet asisitió a ejercicio militar cerca de frontera con Perú’. Retrieved from Accessed 20 May 2017.
  25. Fukuyama, F. 2015. Political order and political decay: From the industrial revolution to the globalisation of democracy. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  26. Gallagher, K.P. 2017. China steps into the Latin American void Donald Trump has left behind. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from Accessed 13 June 2017.
  27. Gardini, G.L. 2012. Latin America in the 21st century: Nations, regionalism, globalization. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  28. Garretón, M. 2003. Incomplete democracy: Political democratization in Chile and Latin America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  29. Giacalone, R. 2012. Latin American foreign policy analysis: External influences and internal circumstances. Foreign Policy Analysis 8(4): 335–353.Google Scholar
  30. Gibler, D.M., and A. Braithwaite. 2012. Dangerous neighbours, regional territorial conflict and the democratic peace. British Journal of Political Science 43(4): 877–887.Google Scholar
  31. Grindle, M.S., and E.E. Goodman. 2016. Reflection on memory and democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hanami, A.K. 2003. Perspective on structural realism. New York: Palgrave Macmilla.Google Scholar
  33. Hassner, R.E. 2007. The Path to intractability: Time and the entrenchment of territorial disputes. International Security 31(3): 107–138.Google Scholar
  34. Hellinger, D. 2011. Obama and the Bolivarian agenda for the Americas. Latin American Perspectives 38(4): 46–62.Google Scholar
  35. Herz, M. 2010. Concepts of security in South America. International Peacekeeping 17(5): 598–612.Google Scholar
  36. Jervis, R. 1999. Realism, neoliberalism, and cooperation: Understanding the debate. International Security 24(1): 42–63.Google Scholar
  37. Kacowicz, A.M. 1998. Zones of peace in the third world: South America and West Africa in comparative perspective. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  38. Krasner, S.D. 1985. Structural conflict: The third world against global liberalism. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kratochwil, F., P. Rohrloich, and H. Mahajan. 1985. Peace and disputed sovereignty: Reflections on conflict over territory. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  40. Lagos, R. 2008. América Latina: ¿Integración o fragmentación?. Buenos Aires: Edhasa.Google Scholar
  41. Lake, D.A. 2008. The state and international relations. In The Oxford handbook of international relations, ed. C. Reus-Smit and D. Snidal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Lowenthal, A.F., T.J. Piccone, and L. Whitehead. 2009. The Obama administration and the Americas: Agenda for change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  43. Mares, D.R. 1994. Foreign policy in Argentina, Brazil, and Chile: The burden of the hast, the Hope for the future. Latin American Research Review 29(1): 227–237.Google Scholar
  44. Mares, D.R. 2001. Violent peace: Militarized interstate bargaining in Latin America. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Mares, D.R. 2011. Exploring the impact of economic cooperation and on political security relations between Argentina and Chile. Retrieved from Accessed 30 May 2017.
  46. Mares, D.R. 2012. Latin America and the illusion of peace. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Martin, S.B. 2003. From balance of power to balancing behaviour: The long and winding road. In Perspectives on structural realism, ed. A.K. Hanami, 60–82. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  48. Mearsheimer, J.J. 2009. Reckless states and realism. International Relations 23(2): 241–256.Google Scholar
  49. Mearsheimer, J.J. 2010. Structural realism. In International relations theories: Discipline and diversity, ed. T. Dunne, M. Kurki, and S. Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Mearsheimer, J.J. 2011. Realists as idealists. Security Studies 20(3): 424–430.Google Scholar
  51. Morales Castillo, R., G. Maldonado, and J.A. Schiavon. 2015. To know or not to know? Realist and liberal theories on foreign affairs and public opinion in Latin America. Latin American Policy 6: 2–18.Google Scholar
  52. Muhindo, M., and G. Calenzo. 2011. Neorealism and international subsystems of small states: Insights from Sub-Saharan African countries’ interactions. Interdisciplinary Political Studies 1: 148–160.Google Scholar
  53. Observatory of Economic Complexity. 2017 Chile. Retrieved from Accessed 30 May 2017.
  54. Oelsner, A. 2009. Consensus and governance in Mercosur: The evolution of the South American Security agenda. Security Dialogue 40(2): 191–212.Google Scholar
  55. Parent, J.W., and S. Rosato. 2015. Balancing in neorealism. International Security 40(2): 51–86.Google Scholar
  56. Perlo-Freeman, S. 2011. Budgetary priorities in Latin America: Military, health and education spending. Retrieved from Accessed 12 June 2017.
  57. Pion-Berlin, D. 2016. Military missions in democratic Latin America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  58. Rathbun, B. 2008. A rose by any other name: Neoclassical realism as the logical and necessary extension of structural realism. Security Studies 17(2): 294–321.Google Scholar
  59. Resende-Santos, J. 2002. The origins of security cooperation in the Southern Cone. Latin American Politics and Society 44(4): 89–126.Google Scholar
  60. Resende-Santos, J. 2007. Neorealism, states, and the modern mass army. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Riggirozzi, P., and J. Grugel. 2015. Regional governance and legitimacy in South America: The meaning of UNASUR. International Affairs 91(4): 781–797.Google Scholar
  62. Ripsman, N.M., J.W. Taliaferro, and S.E. Lobell. 2016. Neoclassical realist theory of international politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Rojas, M. Perú realiza ejercicios militares cerca de la frontera con Chile. El Mercurio, 25 November 2015.Google Scholar
  64. Scott, J.M., and R.G. Carter. 2016. Promoting democracy in Latin America: Foreign policy change and US democracy assistance, 1975–2010. Third World Quarterly 37(2): 299–320.Google Scholar
  65. Shaw, C.M. 2003. Limits to hegemonic influence in the Organization of American States’. Latin American Politics and Society 45(3): 59–92.Google Scholar
  66. Snyder, G.H. 2007. Alliance politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Solar, C. 2015a. Governance of defense and policymaking in Chile. Latin American Policy 6(2): 205–225.Google Scholar
  68. Solar, C. 2015b. Police bribery: Is corruption fostering dissatisfaction with the political system? Democracy and Security 11(4): 373–394.Google Scholar
  69. Solar, C. 2017. Civil-military relations and human security in a post-dictatorship. Journal of Strategic Studies. Accessed 12 June 2017.Google Scholar
  70. Stopford, J., and S. Strange. 1991. Rival states, rival firms: Competition for world market shares. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Suarez, M.A.G., R. Duarte, and B. Weiffen. 2017. Power dynamics and regional security in Latin America. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  72. Sylvester, C. 2014. Neorealist reductionism. Australian Journal of Political Science 49(3): 547–551.Google Scholar
  73. Taliaferro, J.W. 2000. Security seeking under anarchy: Defensive realism revisited. International Security 25(3): 128–161.Google Scholar
  74. Tapia Figueroa, C. 2011. Chilean foreign policy in the regional dilemma: The Ecuadorian–Peruvian territorial conflict circa 1910. Historia Critica 43: 156–173.Google Scholar
  75. Telhami, S. 2002. Kenneth Waltz, neorealism, and foreign policy. Security Studies 11(3): 158–170.Google Scholar
  76. Tickner, A. 2003. Seeing IR differently: Notes from the third world. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 32(2): 295–324.Google Scholar
  77. Thies, C.G. 2010. State socialization and structural realism. Security Studies 19(4): 689–717.Google Scholar
  78. Toro-Hardy, A. 2004. Is there a future for Latin America? Cambridge Review of International Affairs 17(1): 155–166.Google Scholar
  79. Tulchin, J.S. 2016. Latin America in international politics: Challenging US hegemony. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  80. Ugarte Díaz, E.J. 2014. The War of the Pacific as a national reference point and determinant issue of Chilean–Peruvian relations. Sí Somos Americanos 14: 159–185.Google Scholar
  81. Van Der Ree, G. 2010. Chile’s (inter)national identities: Framing the relations with Bolivia and Peru. Bulletin of Latin American Research 29(2): 208–223.Google Scholar
  82. Van Klaveren, A. 2000. Chile’s international integration. In Chile in the nineties, ed. C. Toloza and E. Lahera. Stanford: Standford University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Villar Gertner, A. 2014. The Beagle Channel frontier dispute between Argentina and Chile: Converging domestic and international conflicts. International Relations 28(2): 207–227.Google Scholar
  84. Walt, S.M. 1987. The origins of alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Walt, S.M. 1998. International relations: One world, many theories. Foreign Policy 110: 29–46.Google Scholar
  86. Walt, S.M. 1999. Rigor or rigor mortis? Rational choice and security studies. International Security 23 (4): 5–48.Google Scholar
  87. Walt, S.M. 2013. Revolution and war. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Waltz, K.N. 1979. Theory of international politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  89. Waltz, K.N. 1988. The origins of war in neorealist theory. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18(4): 615–628.Google Scholar
  90. Waltz, K.N. 1990. Realist thought and neorealist theory. Journal of International Affairs 4(1): 21–37.Google Scholar
  91. Waltz, K.N. 1997. Evaluating theories. American Political Science Review 91(4): 913–917.Google Scholar
  92. Waltz, K.N. 2000. Structural realism after the Cold War. International Security 25(1): 5–41.Google Scholar
  93. Weiffen, B. 2012. Persistence and change in regional security institutions: Does the OAS still have a project? Contemporary Security Policy 33(2): 360–383.Google Scholar
  94. Weinberger, S. 2007. Neorealism, Iranian style. Iranian Studies 40(1): 5–16.Google Scholar
  95. Weeks, G. 2015. U.S. and Latin American relations. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  96. Wohlforth, W.C. 2008. Realism. In The Oxford handbook of international relations, ed. C. Reus-Smit, and D. Snidal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Latin American CentreUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations