Image Courtesy of Prensa Latina
By Catalina Fazio Belán
The first round of the Chilean presidential elections has seen two starkly contrasting individuals elected for the runoffs. From civil unrest in 2019 to the current changes to the constitution, political division has risen radically in the country resulting in the most polarised election since Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship, which ended in 1990. Far-right candidate José Antonio Kast became popular through promises of order and conservatorship, whereas Gabriel Boric, the thirty-five-year-old ex-student leader with ties to the Communist Party, promotes an agenda of social change. The importance of foreign policy to an administration’s actions is only increasing with globalisation, and the two candidates promise very different futures for Chile.
Gabriel Boric’s Four Axes of Foreign Policy
The main objective of Boric’s foreign policy is to provide support to the domestic reforms he intends to push forward in his administration. These include changes to pensions and education, increase in wages and taxation, and the establishment of universal healthcare. In the realm of foreign policy, Boric’s programme is divided into four themes.
Multilateralism.
The first axis is about re-establishing Chile’s international status and legitimacy. It emphasises the value of global treaties and engagement with themes like human rights, international law, and climate change. Boric adopts an optimistic stance
towards a foreign policy focused on reinforcing agreements and treaties and based on reciprocity and solidarity. He proposes that regional integration is vital for further dynamism in a context of international uncertainty.
Entrepreneurship.
With more room for strategic autonomy, Chile cannot act isolated from its region, especially since the main threats (pandemic, immigration, climate change) are of transnational character. “Entrepreneurial diplomacy” is necessary; the coordination of international strategies with domestic development, and involvement in regional and global consensuses such as the Escazú Agreement and the Global Compact for Migration. Boric particularly emphasises the relevance of a commercial strategy which acts according to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Flexible foreign policy requires that both state and non-state actors be integrated in the system.
Feminism.
The lack of women in foreign policy is a challenge for inclusive policymaking, and no international matter can be tackled effectively without a gender perspective. Boric proposes the feminist axis to institutionalise and mainstream the focus on human rights, gender, and intersectionality to diversify foreign policy both regionally and multilaterally.
Turquoise.
Boric’s final theme highlights the importance of tackling the climate and ecological crisis (green) and a correct administration of oceans (blue). Chile, he argues, should be a core contributor to the fight against environmental degradation, emphasising the great human and economic costs of inaction. He proposes a reformed administration of resources that have historically been exploited at the expense of development across the region. Finally, Boric intends to revise current commercial treaties to enable Chile to effectively face global challenges that could threaten the country’s wellbeing.
Evaluation
Gabriel Boric proposes an intersectional approach to foreign policy which might be effective as it attempts to tackle current issues and globalised threats placing particular emphasis on international agreements and institutions. However, it could be said his proposals are somewhat naïve, optimistic, and too reliant on interstate relations. Additionally, there is a lack of specificity surrounding his plan to revise commercial treaties which could impose threatening or disadvantaging conditions on Chile. There is no understanding to what a “disadvantaging condition” may be, or what commercial treaties Boric is referring to, which could create uncertainty and fear among voters.
Furthermore, some critics denounce Boric’s foreign policy for being too passive and reliant on other states. As it places a significant emphasis on interstate relations and multilateral agreements, it could potentially decrease Chile’s power to promote its own personal agenda in the international arena, such as protecting its sovereignty or pursuing self-interest. Nevertheless, a certain degree of dependency might strengthen diplomatic ties as other states would perceive Chile as stable and trustworthy, decreasing the possibility of a security dilemma or aggressive competition.
José Antonio Kast and Supreme Sovereignty
It is relevant to note that Kast has been changing his proposals in the weeks before the runoff elections on the 19th of December. This analysis is based on his initial proposal.
Kast’s main aim within foreign policy is to defend Chilean interests in the international arena, exerting and defending the country’s independence and sovereignty through political and territorial integrity. Chile must be active in the world economy to develop domestically, contribute to global stability and prosperity, and defend the freedom and rights of its citizens. His proposals have been summarised below based on general themes that repeat themselves throughout the programme.
An essential aspect of Kast’s foreign policy is supreme sovereignty. Chilean laws and constitution must be prioritised over international treaties; participation in these is voluntary and should depend on Chilean self-interest. He claims that current supranational organisations have violated Chilean sovereignty to further their own agenda of political, economic, and cultural control. Therefore, he plans for Chile to resign from the 1948 American Treaty of Pacific Settlement signed by most states in the region, and stop activities of the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences as, according to Kast, it has fuelled political activism under the façade of an academic institution.
As international economic integration has reached stability, it requires revision to maintain growth. Kast proposes further bilateral agreements to continue market freedom, reduction of tariffs, protection of intellectual property and maintain bilateral interest. Kast also believes Chile should take an active role in economy and security, asserting its relevance in organisations such as the Organisation of American States and the UN Security Council. Moreover, Chile must deter political actors from seeking transnational alliances to achieve power, such as the left-wing alignment with the Chilean Communist Party and its supposed radicalisation and funding.
Kast’s programme establishes that there will be a definite break of diplomatic relations with Cuba and Venezuela due to their dictatorial regimes. He also proposes Chile’s retirement from the UN Human Rights Council, deeming its condemnations of Chile for “human rights violations” hypocritical, given the continued memberships of Cuba and Venezuela. Furthermore, he proposes a coordinated international movement to deter left-wing radicalisation. Finally, Kast has a strong anti-immigration policy focused on curtailing illegal immigrants and strengthening border control.
Evaluation
Kast’s programme evidences an agenda of control and self-interest. His discourse and diplomacy strategy are based on a negative stance on multilateralism.
His foreign policy proposals, as the rest of his programme, are clearly biased against the left (while vouching for democracy and freedom). For example, on the deterrence of transnational alliances to get to power in Chile, he mentions the dangerous tendency of regimes such as Cuba and Venezuela to provide support to far-left parties. However, he fails to mention or to condemn the U.S.’s interventionism across the region throughout the Cold War, or how the CIA directly aided Augusto Pinochet in the 1973 coup d’état. Kast even contested the existence of repression of political opposition during the 1989 election period, which has been proven to be incorrect.
Furthermore, he condemns Cuba and Venezuela for being “bloody” dictatorial regimes and calls for a break in relations with the two states. However, this is clearly in self-interest rather than for true ideological reasons. If the latter were the case, there would at least be some condemnation, for instance, of China’s actions in Hong Kong or the oppression of religious minorities, such as the Uyghur Muslims. It is obviously not in the Chilean economic interest to break relations with China if it wants international economic integration – nonetheless, it makes Kast appear as severely biased and undermines his rhetoric.
While Kast’s emphasis on sovereignty is relevant to today’s international relations, his protectionist stance might damage relations with countries that do not necessarily align with the candidate’s neoliberal agenda. For instance, retiring Chile from multilateral treaties and agreements, such as the UN Human Rights Council, could increase tension and damage the country’s image internationally.
Boric v/s Kast
The candidates have proved to have radically distinct programmes for foreign policy. Boric represents a rather optimistic and open perspective, whereas Kast shows the strong stance as with his other discourse, emphasising sovereignty and self-interest. Kast is the conservative neoliberalist that has promoted Chilean economic growth, but at the expense of social issues which have been at stake, and denounced, over the past two years since the social unrest. Boric is the impersonation of social change and reform. Their foreign policy is representative of these images. Within an increasingly globalised world, perhaps there is a stronger need for closer diplomatic ties rather than a potential protectionist policy, potentially making Boric’s proposals more capable of facing transnational challenges. Nonetheless, the polarisation and uncertainty of the result in the upcoming runoff election means there is nothing to do but wait.
[On Sunday, December 19, Gabriel Boric won the Chilean 2021 presidential elections]
Catalina Fazio Belán is a Chilean first-year International Relations BA student at King's College London. She is passionate about Latin American politics and current affairs.
