Since the political crisis of the 1970s and 1980s, marked by an ever-increasing US-American influence on the Global South, Latin America yearns for independence. But as every civilization in the need of “keeping up with the Joneses” it was confronted with the need to catch up with the Global North while simultaneously building up it’s own economic and industrial power.

Whereas different brand of Populism and Socialism inside the continent called for Autarky and the strengthening of Labour Rights, the new idea of Open Regionalism had something different in mind. Oriented around the market fundamentalist goals of the Washington Consensus, this ideology pleaded for the Liberalization and opening of Latin American markets while integrating them into the Globalist economy of the Global North.

Schizophrenically it called at the same time for the integration and development of Latin American economies , grouped around the big players Brazil and Argentina, in order to protect them from Imperialism. This ideology lies at the heart of Mercosur, an economic alliance encompassing Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay.

Whereas the bloc strives for an ever increasing integration of Latin America, Venezuela was blocked from joining the club for geopolitical reasons, since it’s openly resisting Western Imperialism and Globalization.

Furthermore, it’s not the ordinary citizens of Latin America, neither the farmers nor the Labour movement who profited from Mercosur, but only parts of Argentina’s and Brazil’s industry, together with big agrarian companies. The dire need for social integration in Latin America however wasn’t answered by Mercosur.

Judging from the ideological background of Mercosur it’s highly unlikely that the states belonging to the alliance will be able to propose models of development in politics and economy different from the Washington Consensus.

Especially when we look at current developments like the ongoing bargains on a free trade deal with the European Union expected to conclude in 2026, another example of neoliberal integration comparable to Open Regionalism, it becomes obvious that the political DNA of Mercosur is more closely aligned to the subjugation of Latin America under the Interests of the West than with independence and sovereignty.

The free trade deal is predicted to mainly profit big European companies like Bayer and the big players in the agricultural sector of Latin America, whereas small European farmers and ordinary people in Brazil and Argentina will only face the consequences. The pesticides used by Bayer for example are highly toxic and are expected to damage the Brazilian soil and groundwater, whereas European customers in return would be sold the agricultural products resulting from this kind of farming. Furthermore, the deindustrialization of Mercosur is expected as a result of the free trade agreement.

As a result of it’s inner contradictions, not only the neoliberal president of Argentina Xavier Milei wants to leave Mercosur in favour of direct trade relations with USA – also other Latin American states witness a growing discontent with the trade bloc.

So far the Mercosur block failed to deliver independence from the Global North and social integration – therefore it’s dissolution is possible, especially if a sovereigntist-populist alternative is formed.