Brazzil

But what was not said more clearly is the animosity that prevail now in the Mercorsur between members. Publicly they form one bloc, but behing the scene major problems and differences are going worse and worse.

Brazil is now a predatory country with a desire to dictate to the Mercosur, the US, the EU and the rest of the world, their own decision and rules, without taking care of the others needs.

You said that Brazil subsidies heavily their industries. You are right. But then why is Brazil so much against subsidies.... on the subsidies of others countries (US,EU) ?

Why so much animosity in their speeches at the WTO when they themselves provide so much subsidies ?

It is like a criminal who say to other criminals, stop your killings, but my killings are legal and justified.
Killings are a very good example, in view of the total impunity to their own police and large landowners killing thousands of innocent people per year. but when one Brazilian is killed in a foreign country they insist for ever that justice must prevail.

In the WTO, Brazil always refers to the G20 and the poors. Except that the G20 are not poor countries and that poor countries are against the G20.

No doubt that animosity is rising against Brazil from the poor and rich countries due to their dirty game and tactics on the world scene.Brazil wants everything and give nothing to the Mercosur, the rich and poor countries. There is even large differences within the G20. Brazil feels normal to export grains to China but not when china export textile to Brazil.

Brazil wishes it is a one way street, everywhere.

IT IS NOT.

BRAZIL WILL FAIL AND FALL ONCE MORE

What subsidies? Don't be stupidy. Only an european farmer son would say so much nonsense. Boy, get a book!

Cleary a lot of thought and research went into this article but the statement that free trade obstructs the goals of regional integration is a bizarre one.

Language is a tool of the political, and the demonization of commerce is not helpful. You paint a clear picture of the distortional effects on particular industries when trade occurs on an ad-hoc fashion. But this effect itself is distorted by the manipulative nature of Brazilian interests. You undermine your own case with your illustration of the potential success of small-country exports - where Paraguay and Uruguay have exploited niche opportunities in soy and cellulose to increase their exports. This is a natural and desirable development for your "poor countries" and it is hardly fair to bemoan and loss to Brazilian or Argintinean industry.

As for the collapse of certain key industries in Brazil and Argentina like automotive, surely to God there is no other call for intense and direct involvement in regional trade negotiations than the objective of building the protection of key industries into the terms of reference of the agreements.

Your "so-called" victory over FTAA is nothing more than a setback for your own people. Had your politicians identified your strengths and negotiated to them with your neighbours then perhaps rather than "lose" your so-called automotive industry, you would have encouraged investment and innovation where it most suits your regional strengths. By the way, we in Canada do not sell our own cars, we maintain a massive auto industry and hundreds of thousands of jobs in the efficient production of other countries' vehicles, largely for the US market. There is no particular region why, as a bloc, the Latin America and its massive and distributed auto market cannot be served in similar fashion, with various countries building different key components of autos, much the same way that asian countries manufacture car parts today that are most conducive to their location and strengths. Another downfall of scrapping FTAA: an inability for regional negotiation with global automotive heavyweights, some of who carry revenues larger than many S. American countries tax base.

You argument that "neo-liberal" policies led to the collapse of the Argentine economy is simplistic and silly. Monetarist policy was the prime contributor to the devaluation of the peso and to civil unrest, and political and leadership weakness underlay Argentine ability to sit at the same table as the IMF. Do you think the resurgence of the Argentine economy today, and it's early IMF debt payment, is thanks to workers co-ops and other left-activitistic "victories"?

Wake up to the realities of global trade. Take responsibility for your actions. Get back to the table with the US as a hemispheric group, as much as this is possible given your vast internal differences, and hammer out a graduated framework for hemispheric trade agreements.