In order to better understand the debate on the methods of joint work among Mercosur member countries, as well as on the future development of the regional integration process, it is advisable to go back to its foundational stages. It is in its origins where we will find explanations of the course taken by the international trade negotiations in which our country participates, both at the regional and global level, and particularly in the negotiations with the European Union.

The founding strategic idea was clear: to deepen integration in order to create a regional environment that would be both credible and favorable for valuable internal processes -politically, democracy; economically, productive transformation; socially, equity-, as well as for the requirements for competitive insertion in the world and the ability to attract investments that would allow the partners to be an active part of the internationalization of global production.

It is advisable to go back to the roots of an integration process, since in many of the positions adopted today by significant protagonists, there seems to be a tendency to underestimate the background that explains the commitments undertaken, or to confuse the sequence of events and the steps that were taken.

At least three options are seen as feasible to face the problems that Mercosur confronts today. All three are viable, but their direct or indirect consequences could be very different for the construction of Mercosur and South American cooperation.

What we will discuss in this newsletter is based on our chapter from the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson (coordinators), included below as Recommended Reading. It is a book containing articles by different experts presented at the symposium "Mercosur 30 years: trajectories, flexibilization and interregionalism", held virtually in Montevideo on September 7, 8 and 9 of 2021. The symposium was organized by the University of the Republic of Uruguay (Udelar), the German Institute for Global and Regional Studies of Hamburg (GIGA), the Carolina Foundation of Spain and the EU-LAC Foundation, based in Hamburg.

This is a chapter where we revisit ideas included in several previously published works, some of which are reviewed in this opportunity.

A fundamental idea is that the new international realities, both at the global level and in each of the different regions, are generating the need to adapt working methods and institutions involved in the joint work of countries, especially in the cooperation between countries that share the same region.

In order to better understand the debate on the methods of joint work among Mercosur member countries, as well as on the future development of the regional integration process, it is advisable to go back to its founding moments. It is in its roots where we will find some explanations of the course followed by the international trade negotiations in which our country participates, both at the regional and global level and in the negotiations with the European Union.

The founding strategic idea was to form a customs union and then a common market in order to open up to the world and negotiate jointly, especially with the USA and the EU, and within the framework of LAIA, as well as with other countries. This explains the definition of a common external tariff "to encourage external competitiveness" included in the Treaty of Asunción. It is an approach that has been present, since its origins, in the idea of transforming the bilateral integration process initiated in the 1980s by Argentina and Brazil, and later including Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay.

The founding idea was clear: to deepen integration in order to create a credible regional environment favorable to valuable internal processes -politically, democracy; economically, productive transformation; socially, equity-, and to the requirements of competitive insertion in the world and the attraction of investments that would allow the partners to be an active part of the internationalization of global production.

Mercosur, then, appears as the backbone of the idea of a solid strategic alliance -open to the world- between the two main South American economies, later joined by Paraguay and Uruguay. Creating a common platform to compete and negotiate in the world was, and continues to be, the raison d'être of the project launched in June 1990, in Buenos Aires, and based on the progress achieved in the bilateral project between Argentina and Brazil (PICAB), initiated in 1986. The founding idea was, and still is, to constitute a "hard core" that, through economic integration, would facilitate the political stabilization and economic and social development of the entire South American space.

Two ideas were linked from the beginning. One was the creation of an integration space in the South of the Americas, open to South American countries and inserted in the context of the LAIA. The other was the joint participation in broader hemispheric free trade negotiations, an initiative launched in the early 1990s by President Bush of the United States. This link became even more evident at the Ministerial Meeting held in Brasilia on July 30 and August 1 of 1990, with the participation of Brazil and Argentina, together with Uruguay and Chile, and where the basic guidelines of the strategy to be followed were agreed upon. At the regional level, these involved creating a customs union as a preliminary step to a common market; at the hemispheric level, to negotiate together the still uncertain development of the American proposal. Paraguay, which had just started its path towards democratic institutionalization, later joined the group. Chile, on the other hand, gave the reasons why it could not participate, a position that was understood by the other countries.

Such elements are part of the political definition of the original strategic idea, at least in its economic and commercial component. They have been-and continue to be-inseparable parts of the founding negotiating package. They involve, firstly, unrestricted access to the respective markets for all goods and, in a further instance explicitly contemplated in the Treaty, for services and other productive factors; secondly, a common external tariff functional to the opening of the respective markets to world trade; and thirdly, joint negotiations, including those with other LAIA partners, with the US and the EU among others. All three elements recognize a central and explicit assumption in the original approach: macroeconomic coordination among the partners. Hence, it can be argued that, in the founding strategic approach, Mercosur and hemispheric integration-together with free trade, at least with Europe-were conceived as two sides of the same coin.

At the same time, it is clear from the founding moment that Mercosur's associative pact was based on the idea that all members would be guaranteed access to a market of more than two hundred million consumers, not only for goods but also for services. This objective implied the development of collective macroeconomic, sectoral and external trade disciplines.

We believe that going back to the roots of an integration process is advisable, since in many of the positions adopted today by significant protagonists there seems to be a tendency to underestimate the historical background that explains the commitments undertaken, or to confuse the sequence of events and their interrelation.

Discontinuities in the previously defined paths, which do not necessarily respond to the new realities, could affect the international credibility of Mercosur countries, drastically reducing the effectiveness of the common project in the tough global competition for attracting productive investments and affecting its quality as a valid counterpart to face complex international trade negotiations. In particular, they have a high economic cost-although not evident in the short term-in terms of discouraging productive investments and industrial location decisions.

More than thirty years later, it seems indisputable that Mercosur is in need of modernization and adaptation of its objectives and working methods to current and future times. In fact, it is going through a delicate moment in which its credibility is being affected and even its subsistence is often being questioned.
The problems it faces are largely the result of changes in the global and regional realities that have taken place since its creation. They are also the result of difficulties that tend to affect the priorities of its member countries. However, they can also be the result of the working methods used for the joint action of the members and, in particular, for the adoption of formal decisions that require consensus.

Three options are seen as possible to address the problems that Mercosur is facing today. All three are feasible, but their direct or indirect consequences might vary significantly.

A first option would be to recognize the possible obsolescence of Mercosur and the country that considers it appropriate could gain independence through the denunciation of the Constitutive Treaty, as foreseen in its Chapter V. It would be the equivalent of what the "Brexit" option meant for Great Britain. For any given country, this experience might demonstrate that the costs of "disintegration" could be even higher than those of "integration".

A second option would be to undertake the process of modifying the fundamental ground rules and, more specifically, those of the Treaty of Asunción, in particular Articles 1, 2 and 5, among others. This is an option with uncertain deadlines and results which could have high and different political costs in each country, as it would require parliamentary approval. This fact would make this option unadvisable for the actual politics of any country.

Lastly, a third option would be for the four member countries to agree on joint policies and working methods aimed at taking full advantage of the existing constituent rules, without the need to resort to their modification and without excluding the possibility of promoting new constituent rules at a later date. This would seem to be a more advisable option for any of the countries whose governments might have doubts about the costs of securing parliamentary support for the second option.

Within the framework of this third option, an attempt could be made at three different levels, among others, to introduce substantial improvements in the objectives and functioning of Mercosur. These improvements would not necessarily require reforms to the Treaty of Asunción or the Ouro Preto Protocol.

The first level would be that of the coordination of national interests necessary to achieve the adoption by consensus of joint decisions of the Mercosur members, which would then effectively impact on reality and could be carried out successfully. Specifically, what is proposed would be to undertake an initiative aimed at strengthening the functions of the Administrative Secretariat, especially in relation to the process of technical preparation and the adoption of joint decisions that require the consensus of all the members. The aim would thus be to strengthen its capacity to facilitate, with its contributions and initiatives, the complex task of coordinating the interests and priorities of each of the partners in the adoption of Council decisions requiring consensus.

This would not imply opening a debate on possible supranational functions of the Mercosur Secretariat, i.e. that those performing these functions would be considered to be above individual national States. However, it would require granting the Secretariat the necessary technical capacity to facilitate the complex task of coordinating the various positions of the member countries, particularly with respect to decisions that must be adopted by consensus. Helping to build such consensus would then be a fundamental role of a strengthened Mercosur Secretariat. This would also imply developing an active role of the Secretariat in the creation of networks of academic institutions and technical analysis, with the participation of experts from member countries, as well as from international organizations operating in the region, including the ECLAC and INTAL.

In principle, the Mercosur Secretariat already has an organizational model that would allow it to fulfill such a function. Strengthening its role in providing the experience, information and intelligence required to coordinate the diversity of interests and visions of its members, and thus achieve the necessary consensus for the adoption of decisions, may contribute to enhance Mercosur's role in the productive development and international insertion strategy of the member countries.

In this opportunity we will only mention the other two levels for improvement briefly. One is that of the sectoral agreements provided for in Article 5, paragraph d) of the Treaty of Asunción and regulated in Decision No. 3, of 1991. This must be approached in conjunction with the instrument of partial scope agreements, provided for in the 1980 Treaty of Montevideo that created the LAIA and linking them with another relevant element of Mercosur's integration strategy, which is that of joint action with the countries of the Pacific Alliance and with other countries of Latina America. The third level for action refers to the full inclusion in the Mercosur work agenda of issues that have acquired greater relevance in recent times and, more specifically, those related to climate change.

The above mentioned issues should be addressed simultaneously through an ambitious strategy of trade negotiations with a wide range of developed and developing countries. Such a strategy should include, from the outset, the negotiation of the so-called free trade agreements with the world's major markets (especially the US and China) and the completion of the pending agreement with the EU.

Recommended reading:

• Actis, Esteban; Creus, Nicolás, "La Disputa por el Poder Global. China contra Estados Unidos en la crisis de la pandemia", Prologue by Andrés Malamud, Capital Intelectual, Buenos Aires, 2020.
  
• Baldini, Gianfranco; Bressanelli, Edoardo; Massetti, Emanuele, "The Brexit Effect. What Leaving the EU Means for British Politics", Routledge, London-NY, 2023.
  
• Barrego, Viviana, "Flexibilización del Mercosur o rupture?", pp 137-146, in the by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed below.
  
• Bartesaghi, Ignacio, "Uruguay y el Mercosur", pp 147-159, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed below.
  
• Basedow, Robert, "East Asia Needs to tap into plurilateralism's potential", EastAsiaForum, April 22, www.eastasiaforum.org.
  
• Bell, Daniel A. "The Dean of Shandong. Confessions of a Minor Bureaucrat at a Chinese University", Princeton University Press, Princeton & Oxford, 2023.
  
• Briceño Ruiz, José, "La flexibilización del Mercosur", pp. 111-129, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed below.
  
• Caetano, Gerardo; Hernández Nilson, Diego (coordinators), "30 años del Mercosur. Trayectorias, Flexibilización e Interregionalismo", Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República; Fundación EU-LAC; Fundación Carolina; GIGA, Montevideo 2022.
  
• Gomez Saraiva, Miriam, "Avances y límites de un Mercosur a los 30 años", pp. 61-64, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Hernández Nilson, Diego, "La supervivencia del Mercosur: entre la aberración institucional y el regionalismo populista", pp. 89-98, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• INTAL - BID, "Conocimiento de Exportación: La Era de los Servicios en América Latina", I & C N° 48, Year 26, November 2022.
  
• Ismard, Paulin (direction); Rossi, Benedetta; Vidal, Cécile (coordination); Chevaleyre, Claude (colaboration), Miano, Léonora (epilogue), "Les Mondes de L'Esclavage. Une Histoire Comparée", Editions du Seuil, Paris, 2012.
  
• Malamud, Andrés, "Treinta años de Mercosur: entre flujos declinantes y reglas deficientes", pp. 83-88, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Malamud, Andrés, "Diccionario Arbitrario de Política", Clave Intelectual, Buenos Aires, 2023.
  
• Martín Jimenez, Cristina, "La Tercera Guerra Mundial ya está aquí", Editorial Planeta, Barcelona 2021.
  
• Masi, Fernando, "Paraguay y los treinta años del Mercosur", pp. 65-70, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Menem, Eduardo; Corach, Carlos (compiladores), "Los Noventa. La Argentina de Menem", Sudamericana, Buenos Aires 2021.
  
• Nolte, Detlef, "El acuerdo de asociación entre la UE y el Mercosur", pp. 187- 206, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Onuki, Janina, "Los cambios internacionales y el futuro del Mercosur", pp. 55-59, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Pastoriza, Elisa; Torres, Juan Carlos, "Mar del Plata. Un Sueño de los Argentinos", Edhasa, Buenos Aires 2019.
  
• Peixoto, Juliana, "Reflexiones sobre la flexibilización del Mercosur", pp.131-135 in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Peña. Félix, "Las virtudes de Sudamérica, una región de paz, diversidad y recursos naturales", Foreign Trade Supplement in La Nación newspaper, March 30, 2023,
  
• Peña, Félix, "Comentarios y sugerencias para la construcción de un Mercosur más eficaz y creíble",pp. 227-234, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Piero, Pennetta, "Il Regionalismo Multipolare Asiatico. Contributo al diritto della cooperazione instituzionalizzata fra Stati", G.Giappichelli Editore, Torino 2003.
  
• Piketty, Thomas, "Une Breve Histoire de L'Égalité", Editions du Seuil, Paris, 2012.
  
• Piñeiro, Martín; Vallés Galmés (coordinadores), "Geopolítica de los Alimentos. Intereses, actores y posibles respuestas del Cono Sur", Teseo, Bs.As 2020.
  
• Priestland, David, "Merchant Soldier Sage. A New History of Power", Penguin Books, New York, 2014.
  
• Rivarola Puntigliano, Andrés, "El Mercosur y la Geopolítica de Integración", pp. 71-81, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Sanahuja, José Antonio, "30 años de Mercosur; resiliencia y oportunidad para las relaciones UE-América Latina", pp. 207-217, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Stuenkel, Oliver, "Post Western World, How Emerging Powers are Remaking Global Order", Polity Press, Cambridge-Malden, 2016.
  
• Stuhldreherm Amalia, "Acuerdos y desacuerdos UE-Mercosur. Muchos años de febriles miradas y el desafío del futuro", pp. 219-225, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Tussie, Diana, "Las trayectorias del Mercosur: su inserción en un mundo que no para de cambiar", pp. 45-53, in the book by Gerardo Caetano and Diego Hernández Nilson, listed above.
  
• Williams, David Henry, "How Brexit will Make You Millions", D.W.Publishing, UK, Second Edition, 2023.