This article was initially published in the Revista Seguridad y Poder Terrestre
Vol. 3 No. 3 (2024): July to September

---

Abstract

This article analyzes transnational illicit activities in the Amazon, a space where diverse criminal networks thrive. As a research proposal, it is verified, through descriptive (how) and causal (why) inferences, to what extent the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) can become an effective tool to combat them, replacing the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), which before the suspension of its activities was the appropriate forum for this purpose. To achieve this, research is developed based on the understanding of Richard Haass (2017), who argues that we live in an integrated and interdependent world or, in other words, in a World Order 2.0. In this context, overlapping threats from outside and inside a region or country require coordinated responses to protect the interests of those who, to some extent, are affected by the resulting externalities, as is the case of the Amazon region.

Keywords: Amazon, Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization, Transnational crimes, World Order 2.0.

Introduction

According to Richard Haass,^[1] we live in a globalized and highly interconnected world or, in his words, in World Order 2.0, where almost everything -threats and/or people- can reach anywhere, thus establishing complex interdependent relationships. In this context, characterized by disruptive challenges, some of them unprecedented, the internal affairs of a country cannot be considered exclusive to that territory.^[2]

In other words, overlapping threats from outside and within a region – as in the case of South America – demand coordinated responses to protect the interests of those who, to some extent, are affected by the externalities resulting from issues such as environmental degradation, climate change, conflict-induced forced displacement, radicalization and financing of terrorism, large-scale cyber-attacks, intentional use of violence by non-state entities, proliferation of failed states and organized crime.

that if in South America, the Southern Cone opted for the path of integration and the strengthening of mutual trust, with the Southern Common Market (Mercosur) as a pillar^[3], the Andean-Amazonian North keeps latent reminiscences of a past of conflicts and rivalries in a scenario aggravated by endemic structural problems.^[4]

In this developing North-Andean-Amazonian Arc of Instability, there are serious political-institutional weaknesses, one of the main factors responsible for turning it into a power vacuum occupied by organized crime networks, which have inserted the subregion into the global illicit market. Thus, the exponential growth of transnational criminal activities has turned the Amazon, shared by eight countries, into a space where threats of the most varied types, from drug trafficking to biopiracy, thrive.

Considering the specificities of each subregion, the facts reported point to the existence of two zones with distinct dynamics of interaction in South America. On the one hand, in the Southern Cone there is an arc of greater stability, albeit with many structural and cyclical problems, whose most successful expression is Mercosur. On the other hand, the Andean-Amazon region appears as an area of instability that contributes to the perpetuation of a conflictive geopolitical context, fueled by the emergence of new threats in addition to the traditional issues on the subregional security agenda, all of which are likely to cause spillover effects.

Figure 1

The Arches of South America ^[5]

Given this scenario, the subregion is witnessing, in the words of Buzan and Wæver, “a weakening of states, increasing external involvement, and much violence at all levels of society.”^[6] Thus, given the systemic weaknesses of the region, which includes the Andean-Amazonian countries, the State Building process becomes an important dimension of security and defense, according to Fukuyama (2004).^[7] For this to become a reality, it is proposed to strengthen the capacity of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) and, in this way, counter transnational illicit activities and promote the rule of law through the institutional framework of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty (ACT). This strategy is considered the most viable option.

At this juncture, with the suspension of UNASUR’s activities, the proposal has been conceived to institutionalize, within the structure of ACTO, tools to combat transnational networks, with the environmental issue as a key factor and starting point. This would be achieved through a polycentric governance model based on three dimensions: political-diplomatic, strategic and technical, as described in the following causal chain.

Figura 2

Causal chain of the case study ^[8]

 

Thus, in order to fulfill the proposed task, the research, methodologically qualitative, analyzes some aspects of the normative framework of the ATT in the context of polycentric governance. This refers to a decision-making structure that simultaneously combines intergovernmental and supranational characteristics. Using primary and secondary sources, causal propositions are suggested among the variables of the causal chain that justify ACTO as a tool to combat transnational crime networks in the Andean-Amazonian arc of instability. This is based, pragmatically, on an environmental normative framework that integrates two central issues in the agenda of contemporary international relations.

From UNASUR to ACTO

Inferences point to the fact that the threats and vulnerabilities present in the Andean-Amazonian Arc make up a complex and diffuse agenda, marked both by transnational issues – linked to the endemic practice of illicit activities – and by endogenous problems derived from the deep structural weaknesses that characterize the countries of the region.^[9] Some of these countries are prototypes of failed states “in which institutions ceased to function or were regimented to serve private interests, often illicit”, argues Naím (2005).^[10]

In the context of efforts to build mutual and necessary trust, it is worth mentioning the signing of the treaty creating UNASUR -an integration project originally known as CASA- on May 23, 2008, in Brasilia, Brazil, as a tool for governance in South America. Bringing together the twelve countries of South America (except French Guiana, as it is a French overseas territory), UNASUR was created with the objective of promoting a strategic identity of its own through South American integration in the economic, political, social, environmental and infrastructure fields, as established in the Declarations of Cuzco and Ayacucho.

In this sense, the strategic-military plan highlights the creation, in its structure, of the South American Defense Council (CDS), designed then to promote, in the short and medium term, a set of initiatives in the following thematic areas: (a) establishment of an information exchange network on defense policy; (b) transparency in defense spending and economic indicators; (c) joint actions in cases of natural disasters; (d) exchange of knowledge acquired in peace missions; (e) elaboration of a diagnosis of the defense industry of member countries in order to promote complementarity in areas of strategic partnership; (f) training and qualification of human resources, through exchanges between military academies.^[11] The host country, Ecuador, also announced its withdrawal, considering that the regional entity had become a “political platform”.

However, UNASUR suffered a hard blow in 2018. Under the argument of the malfunctioning of the Organization, the foreign ministers of Peru, Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Paraguay – through a document addressed to the Bolivian Foreign Minister, Fernando Huanacuni, then president of UNASUR – announced that they would stop participating in the bloc’s activities. In 2019, the host country, Ecuador, also announced its withdrawal on the grounds that the regional entity had become a “political platform”.

Since then, UNASUR’s activities have been suspended indefinitely. In this sense, it is proposed to instrumentalize, within the structure of ACTO, tools for combating illicit activities, as mentioned above, through cooperation in three areas -political-diplomatic, strategic and technical- for the following reasons.

ACTO: Tool for Combating Transnational Crime?

Located in the center-north of South America, the Amazon region, which encompasses the territories of Brazil, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana (French overseas territory), occupies about 7,800,000 km2 , which corresponds to 40% of the total area of the subcontinent.^[12]

With 30% of the tropical forests, almost 20% of the available fresh surface water and 1/3 of the planetary gene pool, the Amazon biome stands out in contemporary international debates for its incomparable natural resources, its role in climate change and biodiversity issues. This motivates the idea that the Amazon is an inescapable theme and, therefore, many efforts led to the design of a governance mechanism, currently based on a Treaty (1978) and an Intergovernmental Organization (2002).

Figura 3

The Amazon ^[13]

 

On July 3, 1978,^[14] the ACT was signed by the eight Amazonian countries, with the objective of promoting the harmonious development of the territories through joint actions that will benefit the entire region. However, over the years, there have been numerous criticisms of ACTO’s ability to meet its objectives, partly due to mistrust among the member countries themselves.^[15] This normative framework, based on the perceptions that actors construct of themselves and those with whom they relate, established Amazonian cooperative governance, mediating their mutual interactions. This represented an important step, although limited in scope and results.

From 1988 onwards, substantial efforts were observed that resulted in the creation of several Special Commissions that constituted privileged spaces to deal with issues such as Environment (CEMAA), Science and Technology (CECTA), Health (CESAM), Indigenous Affairs (CEAIA), Transport, Infrastructure and Communications (CETICAM), Tourism (CETURA) and Education in the Amazon (CEEDA). However, no Commission was created to address the problem of illicit and related matters during this period.

In 1998, a new phase in Amazonian multilateralism began with the approval of an amendment to the ACT, creating ACTO to strengthen and implement the objectives of the Treaty. As part of these efforts, the Permanent Secretariat was established in Brazil in 2002, with the objective of identifying the economic, political, environmental and social priorities of the Amazonian countries, according to a Strategic Agenda for Amazonian Cooperation (AECA).

Thus was born ACTO, an intergovernmental organization that is the only socio-environmental bloc in Latin America and which, through South-South Cooperation, seeks to establish synergies between governments, multilateral organizations, cooperation agencies, organized civil society, social movements, the scientific community, productive sectors and society within the framework of the implementation of the ACT.

However, it should be noted that the institutional structure of ACTO did not and does not have a normative provision that formally establishes the fight against transnational crime and illicit activities. In this sense,^[16] he political-institutional weaknesses of the Amazonian countries are pointed out as one of the main factors responsible for turning the region into a power vacuum where organized crime networks flourish, an issue of growing importance in International Relations whose externalities are not yet fully known.

Due to the common inability of these countries to fully exercise sovereignty and authority over their Amazonian territories,^[17] the process of strengthening the rule of law in the region, known as the “Periphery of the Periphery,” assumes an important security dimension, an essential component in maintaining regional order. A fundamental step in this process is to understand the meaning that unites the Amazon countries around cooperative proposals, the resulting effects and the institutional mechanisms that must be improved to face multidimensional challenges, among which the prominence of organized crime stands out. For this reason, the future vision of ACTO is highlighted, which, in theory, allows for the inclusion of this issue and supports the proposal for institutional expansion of its capacities for action.

Given the complexity of a scenario in which the destiny of its actors is inevitably intertwined, it is crucial to reflect on vectors and movements capable of shaping the Amazonian geopolitical chessboard.

An Organization recognized within the Member Countries and internationally as a reference in regional cooperation, in the discussion and positioning of issues on the international agenda related to the Amazon and in the exchange of experiences, acting on the basis of the principles of full exercise of sovereignty in the Amazonian space, respect and harmony with nature, integral sustainable development and the reduction of asymmetries of the States of the Region”.^[18]

In this sense, in order to make the proposal effective, the peculiar characteristics of this space are highlighted: everything in the Amazon is immense, large, challenging. It is where past and present challenges are found, including threats to its unique biodiversity, which is undoubtedly a challenge, as well as an opportunity for the development of pragmatic governance. This reserve means highly strategic assets, which must be preserved and monitored for their potential to generate, among other things, disruptive scientific revolutions, especially when five ACTO members are among the 17 countries considered megabiodiverse.

Pharmaceutical products, for example, based on smuggled Amazonian plants, are industrialized abroad, which exacerbates the risks associated with clandestine bio-business. Consequently, the slow progress of biotechnological research in Pan-Amazonian academies delays the use of biodiversity for the region’s progress.

A well-known example is that of the peptides extracted from the venom of the viper (Bothrops jararaca) in the treatment of hypertension, the result of research by the Brazilian physician Sérgio H. Ferreira. Associated with biopiracy, the drug developed and patented by Bristol-Meyers Squibb, captopril, is the best-selling antihypertensive drug in Europe and America.

Thus, environmental crimes are undoubtedly one of the points that demand joint efforts to address the urgent need to rethink Amazon multilateralism in the world order 2.0. And to think of a perspective that associates geopolitics with biodiversity reinforces the affirmation that the prevalence of myopia among Amazonian countries dangerously leads to errors that can seriously damage the development and security of the Amazon.^[19]

Conclusion

As discussed in the causal chain, in the context of world order 2.0, polycentric governance is crucial to address contemporary challenges in the Andean-Amazonian Arc of Instability. Therefore, the research design suggests using ACTO as a tool to combat the multiple manifestations of transnational illicit activities, through the three selected axes: political-diplomatic, technical and strategic.

Prior to the final analysis, it should be noted that the proposal presented in this policy paper is plausible, empirical and verifiable, as required by scientific research. The arguments are supported by solid empirical evidence.

To illustrate the analytical feasibility of the article, mention is made of an outstanding result achieved at the VIII Meeting of Foreign Ministers of ACTO (2004),^[20] where the issue of “security and defense” was included in the scope of Amazon multilateralism. This decision marked a new reality, different from the defense-protectionist period of the ATT, characterized by mistrust among the signatories that hindered the inclusion of sensitive issues in the negotiations.

At the following meeting of ministers, held on November 25, 2005 in Iquitos, Peru,^[21] he foreign ministers reiterated their intention to discuss the insertion of this issue as a vector for Amazonian cooperation. Subsequently, on July 13, 2006,^[22] at Colombia’s initiative, the First Ministerial Meeting on Defense and Integral Security of the Amazon took place in Bogota.

The Ministers of Defense and the delegations of the ACTO countries promoted conversations to build cooperation mechanisms to help mitigate problems that compromise security in the Amazon region. In this regard, two actions stood out: the Peruvian delegation’s proposal to establish a Special Commission on Defense and Integral Security of the Amazon to support sectoral policies and the formal identification of the main regional threats.

Transnational illicit activities were identified as a significant threat affecting the Amazon area, justifying the adoption of special measures. As stated by Camilo Ospina Bernal, then Minister of Defense of Colombia, “in this context, the armed forces must be prepared to play a leading role in guaranteeing the integrity of the Amazon, especially in the extensive border areas where the action of the security forces is limited by the geopolitical singularities of the region”.^[23]

The final declaration of the Conference established three central themes as a reference base for a multilateral action agenda in security and defense: 1) counteracting transnational organized crime, especially arms and drug trafficking; 2) developing a comprehensive system of surveillance and protection of the Amazon; 3) combating illegal trafficking in Amazonian flora and fauna; 4) combating the illegal trade of species of the Amazonian flora and fauna.^[24]

At the strategic level, the suspension of UNASUR activities underscores the need for ACTO as an effective and temporary governance instrument to combat criminal actions. The implementation of the Amazon Regional Observatory (ARO) in 2019 was the first step in this direction, albeit indirectly.

The ARO facilitates the flow of information between institutions and intergovernmental authorities, being a scientific-technological reference center on Amazonian biodiversity and issues established in the Strategic Agenda. It also compiles information on species richness, endemism, threats and illegal species trafficking according to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

Although initially focused on the environment, ARO could expand its monitoring capacity to other dimensions. Therefore, integrating the fight against biopiracy into the institutional structure of ACTO, which is often linked to crimes such as money laundering and corruption, is a natural step.

Finally, recognizing the timing and alignment of interests to develop a joint development strategy, it is crucial that the three axes mentioned in the causal chain work in a coordinated manner. This implies two immediate measures: 1) that the Permanent Secretariat establish a Special Thematic Commission (SC), something that has not happened since the creation of ACTO; 2) given that ACTO’s budget is limited, it is essential to define a source of funding to sustain the activities of a working group in charge of proposing an action agenda that will allow the creation of the SC.

Endnotes:

1. Richard Haass, “World Order 2.0: The Case for Sovereign Obligation“, Foreign Affairs 96, no. 1, 2017, 1-9. ↑
2. Ibid, 2. ↑
3. Mercosur, “En pocas palabras,” acceso el 23 de junio de 2024, https://www.mercosur.int/quienes-somos/en-pocas-palabras/. ↑
4. Aún persisten los resentimientos de las disputas territoriales de los siglos XIX y XX que involucraron a Perú, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Guyana y Ecuador. ↑
5. Oscar Medeiros Filho, “Breve panorama de segurança na América do Sul”. En O Brasil e a segurança em seu entorno estratégico”. Editado por Reginaldo Mattar Nasser y Rodrigo Fracalossi de Moraes (Brasília: IPEA, 2014), 29. ↑
6. Barry Buzan y Ole Wæver, “Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security”, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 331. ↑
7. Francis Fukuyama, “State Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st” (London: Profile Books, 2004). ↑
8. Las variables seleccionadas para el estudio se enumeran en la cadena causal. La llamada variable independiente es aquella que afecta a otras variables, son fenómenos útiles para explicar las características o comportamiento del objeto de estudio. Por lo tanto, la variable dependiente es lo que el investigador quiere explicar en términos de la influencia de una o más variables independientes. Finalmente, la variable interviniente es aquella que, en una secuencia causal, se ubica entre la variable independiente y la variable dependiente, ayudando a explicar el proceso por el cual la primera influye en la segunda. ↑
9. Programa de Cooperação em Segurança Regional (PCRS). “Tendências de Seguridad en América del Sur e Impactos en La Región Andina”, Policy Paper no. 9, mayo de 2006. ↑
10. Moisés Naím, “Illicit: How Smugglers, Traffickers and Copycats are Hijacking the Global Economy” (New York: Anchor Books, 2005), 57. ↑
11. Fábio Albergaria Queiroz, “Hidropolítica e Segurança: as Bacias Platina e Amazônica em perspectiva comparada” (Brasília: Ministério das Relações Exteriores, 2012). ↑
12. QUEIROZ, 2012. ↑
13. Organización del Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica (OTCA). “La Amazonía”, consultado el 24 de junio de 2024. http://otca.org/la-amazonia/. ↑
14. Fábio Albergaria Queiroz, Guilherme Lopes y Liziane Paixao. “Reflexões sobre a construção de um Regime de Cooperação Amazônico: do Protecionismo Defensivo à Reinvenção Institucional (1978-2020)”. En Direito e Desenvolvimento da Amazônia2, editado por Jean Carlos Dias, José Claudio Monteiro de Brito Filho, y José Henrique Mouta Araújo, (Florianópolis: Qualis, 2020), 517-534. ↑
15. Queiroz, P. L., Cunha, R. A., y Oliveira, M. A, “Desafíos de la OTCA en el contexto amazónico”, Revista de Estudios Internacionales 35, no. 2 (2020): 123-145. ↑
16. Argemiro Procópio. Subdesenvolvimento Sustentável. Curitiba: Juruá, 2007. ↑
17. Argemiro Procópio. Diplomacia e Desigualdade. Curitiba: Juruá, 2010. ↑
18. OTCA, “¿Quiénes Somos?”, consultado el 2 de junio de 2022, http://otca.org/quienes-somos/. ↑
19. Argemiro Procópio. Destino Amazônico. São Paulo: Hucitec, 2005. ↑
20. OTCA. VIII Reunión de Ministros de Relaciones Exteriores (Acta |Resol. | Declaración). Brasilia: OTCA, 2004. Enlace: https://otca.org/project/viii-reunion-de-ministros-de-relaciones-exteriores-acta-resol-declaracion-2/. ↑
21. OTCA (Organización del Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica). Declaración de Iquitos. Brasília: OTCA, 2005. Acceso el 24 de junio de 2024. www.otca.org.br. ↑
22. OTCA (Organização do Tratado de Cooperação Amazônica). Ata da Primeira Reunião de Ministros da Defesa sobre Defesa e Segurança Integral da Amazônia. Brasília: OTCA, 2006. Acceso el 24 de junio de 2024. www.otca.org.br. ↑
23. Camilo Ospina Bernal, “Intervención durante la Primera Reunión Ministerial sobre Defensa y Seguridad Integral de la Amazonía”, Bogotá, 13 de julio de 2006, citado en “Declaración Final de la OTCA”, 2006, 1. ↑
24. Ibid. ↑