China in Latin America: South-South Cooperation with Chinese Characteristics

• DOI: 10.1177/0094582X18815511
• Published date: 01 March 2019
• Date: 01 March 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

LATIN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVES, Issue 225, Vol. 46 No. 2, March 2019, 107–125

DOI: 10.1177/0094582X18815511

© 2018 Latin American Perspectives

107

China in Latin America

South-South Cooperation with Chinese Characteristics

by

Javier A. Vadell

Translated by

Mariana Ortega Breña

The central questions for a critical analysis of the economic relations between China

and Latin America and the Caribbean countries since the beginning of the twenty-first

century are how to interpret the changes in them since the end of the commodities boom

and whether they have resulted in the emulation in these countries of the Chinese model

of development. Analysis suggests that, although the Chinese presence was welcome dur-

ing the turbulence of the 2001 economic crisis, relations with China are becoming increas-

ingly complex and reflect the political and economic principles of South-South cooperation.

Las preguntas centrales para un análisis crítico de las relaciones económicas entre

China y los países de América Latina y el Caribe desde principios del siglo XXI son cómo

interpretar los cambios en ellos desde el final del auge de los productos básicos y si han

resultado en la emulación en estos países del modelo de desarrollo chino. El análisis sugiere

que, aunque la presencia china fue bienvenida durante la turbulencia de la crisis económica

de 2001, las relaciones con China son cada vez más complejas y reflejan los principios

políticos y económicos de la cooperación Sur-Sur.

Keywords: Latin America, China, Cooperation, Trade, Global South, Development

In 2002, a year after the entry of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) into

the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Chinese Communist Party officially

inaugurated its “going-global” policy (Cui, 2016; Parello-Plesner, 2016) of stim-

ulating trade and foreign investment and internationalizing Chinese busi-

nesses. In 2009 the PRC formulated a foreign policy strategy that prioritized

relationships with the Global South (Lei, 2015), in particular strategic partner-

ships (Jiang, 2015), economic ties, and partnerships through various interna-

tional institutions. What are the political implications, domestic and

international, of the increasing Chinese economic presence for twenty-first-

century Latin American and Caribbean nations? In the complex economic sce-

nario marked by the end of the commodities boom, the role of the PRC appears

to have become more complex (China, 2016). My hypothesis is that the Chinese

economic presence in Latin America and the Caribbean goes beyond “the

Javier A. Vadell is an associate professor in international relations at the Pontifícia Universidade

Católica de Minas Gerais, Brazil. Mariana Ortega Breña is a translator based in Mexico City.

815511LAPXXX10.1177/0094582X18815511Latin American PerspectivesVadell / China In Latin America

research-article2018

108 LATIN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVES

resource curse” debate—the idea that the PRC is seeking to create a relationship

of interdependence based on its ability to extract natural resources—to consti-

tute an evolving relationship based on the principles of South-South coopera-

tion, in which trade, aid, and investment are parts of a whole (Lin and Wang,

2017) that is intended to promote development

In the 1980s, Juan Carlos Puig (1984: 25) spoke of the importance of a theoreti-

cal/conceptual framework that would serve “as a reliable approach to current

reality and . . . serve the prescriptive purposes of small and medium-sized states.”

This is more important than ever with regard to international relations and the

contemporary global political economy. Therefore, it deserves an epistemological

and theoretical analysis that does away with some “conceptual cages” (Vivares,

Torres, and Cvetich, 2013, echoing Max Weber). One such cage is the interpreta-

tion of socioeconomic development models and global hegemony. China special-

ists assume that the only path to development is neoliberal reform involving

liberal democracy. For example, David Shambaugh (2013: 11) says that “without

political liberalization . . . China will be unable to reach its growth potential and

aspirations, and relative stagnation will become the ‘new normal.’” This interpre-

tation is based on 1960s theories of economic and political modernization, espe-

cially those of W. W. Rostow (1960) and Samuel Huntington (1968). Rostow’s

stages of economic development and Huntington’s theories on the three phases

of adaptability (authoritarian to liberal democratic) are its core. These determin-

istic liberal theories were addressed by the Economic Commission on Latin

America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and dependency theorists throughout the

twentieth century (Cardoso and Faletto, 1969; Prebisch, 1979; 1980).

A second classical conceptual cage is the idea that a rising China involves the

danger of multipolarity (Gilpin, 1987; Kindleberger, 1973)—that only a hegemonic

power can bring stability to an international liberal economy. Even writers who

point to the role of global economic governing institutions agree that multipolar-

ity is inherently destabilizing (Keohane, 1980; Wyatt-Walter, 1996). Mainstream

debates in international relations tied to this notion have emphatically reemerged

since the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. Joseph Nye

(2017) has talked about the dilemma the PRC poses to the United States, some-

thing between the Kindleberger trap and the Thucydides trap (Allison, 2017). The

United States must prevent the PRC from becoming either so powerful that it can

affect U.S. leadership or so weak that it becomes a free rider. This debate has also

taken place in the PRC, especially since President Xi Jinping’s speech in Davos in

defense of globalization (Anderlini, Feng, and Tom, 2017): “There was a time

when China also had doubts about economic globalization, and was not sure

whether it should join the World Trade Organization. But we came to the conclu-

sion that integration into the global economy is a historical trend” (Xi, 2017). Chen

(2017) wonders whether the PRC is “ready to lead and whether it must do so.”

This analyst suggests caution, cooperation with the United States on security

grounds, avoidance of victimization, and global responsibility.

These interpretations, however, contrast with the many official documents

from the PRC referring to South-South cooperation and the creation of a more

equitable multilateral and multipolar international order (Harris, 2015), par-

ticularly in two policy papers regarding Latin America and the Caribbean:

“The world today is undergoing major transformation and adjustment. Peace