Chile’s foreign policy in the Age of Multipolarity Strategic Autonomy, Pragmatic Multilateralism, and Global Realignments
Download
Abstract
The shift from a unipolar to a multipolar world has compelled middle powers to redefine their strategic orientation within an increasingly uncertain international system. This paper examines how Chile has adapted its foreign policy during the global shift toward multipolarity. It focuses on the interplay between structural pressures, domestic politics, and ideational identity. Using a neoclassical realist–constructivist framework, the paper argues that Chile’s diplomacy has evolved toward pragmatic multilateralism and strategic autonomy, which are anchored in the country's democratic identity, open economy, and commitment to international norms. Empirical data from 2008 to 2025 show that Chile maintains balanced engagement with the United States, China, and the European Union by pursuing diversified trade, environmental leadership, and normative diplomacy. The study concludes that Chile exemplifies how small and middle powers can navigate global transformations through adaptive pragmatism, policy innovation, and value-based engagement.Keywords:
Chile, Multipolarity, Strategic Autonomy, Multilateralism, Latin AmericaReferences
Acharya, A. (2018). The end of American world order (2nd ed.). Polity.
Aravena, F. (2022). La política exterior de Chile ante la reconfiguración del orden internacional. Universidad de Chile.
Banco Central de Chile. (2025). Informe de Comercio Exterior 2024–2025. Santiago: Departamento de Estudios.
Buzan, B., & Lawson, G. (2015). The global transformation: History, modernity and the making of international relations. Cambridge University Press.
Cancino, L. (2021). Institucionalidad y diplomacia en Chile: Continuidades y desafíos. Revista Chilena de Ciencia Política, 41(2), 55–78.
CEPAL. (1994). Regionalismo abierto en América Latina y el Caribe. Santiago: Naciones Unidas.
CEPAL. (2024). Escazú Agreement and environmental governance in Latin America. United Nations.
Cooper, A. F., Higgott, R., & Nossal, K. R. (1993). Relocating middle powers. UBC Press.
Direcon. (2014). Informe anual de comercio exterior de Chile. Santiago: Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.
Direcon. (2025). Acuerdos comerciales y modernización del tratado Chile–UE. Santiago: Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.
Direcon. (2025). Chile’s Trade Policy Review 2025. Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.
Direcon. (2025). Digital Chile 2035: Estrategia de transformación digital y cooperación internacional. Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.
EPRS. (2025). EU–Latin America relations in the context of the Global Gateway. European Parliament Research Service, Brussels.
European Commission. (2025). EU–Chile Advanced Framework Agreement Factsheet. Brussels: DG TRADE.
European External Action Service (EEAS). (2024). Alliance for Multilateralism: State of Play. Brussels.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. (2021). Weaponized interdependence and the new geo-economics. Foreign Affairs, 100(2), 118–128.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887-917.
Fuentes, C. (2023). Autonomía estratégica y poder medio en América Latina. CEPAL Working Paper No. 211.
Hakim, P. (2023). Latin America and the United States in the age of uncertainty. Inter-American Dialogue Report.
Howorth, J. (2019). Strategic autonomy and the European Union’s security policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(3), 556–573.
Hurrell, A. (2006). Hegemony, liberalism and global order: What space for would-be great powers? International Affairs, 82(1), 1-19.
Ikenberry, G. J. (2020). A world safe for democracy. Yale University Press.
Jordaan, E. (2017). The concept of a middle power in international relations: Distinguishing between emerging and traditional middle powers. Politikon, 44(3), 425-440.
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2012). Power and interdependence (4th ed.). Longman.
Lobell, S. E., Ripsman, N. M., & Taliaferro, J. W. (2009). Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy. Cambridge University Press.
Maira, L. (2003). La política exterior de Chile: Nuevos desafíos. Estudios Internacionales, 36(141), 9–35.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to fail: The rise and fall of the liberal international order. International Security, 43(4), 7-50.
Ministerio de Minería. (2024). Estrategia Nacional del Litio. Gobierno de Chile, Santiago.
Nye, J. S. (2021). Do morals matter? Presidents and foreign policy from FDR to Trump. Oxford University Press.
OECD. (2024). Government Expenditure and Foreign Policy Capacity in OECD Countries. Paris.
Pérez, M. (2024). Feminist diplomacy and soft power in Chile’s foreign policy. Latin American Policy, 15(1), 33–49.
Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144–172.
Sanahuja, J. A. (2018). Regionalismo, autonomía y desarrollo en América Latina. Fundación Carolina Working Paper.
Sanahuja, J. A., & López, A. (2018). La Alianza del Pacífico y el regionalismo latinoamericano: Entre la apertura y la autonomía. Pensamiento Propio, 23(47), 21–60.
Soto, D. (2011). Chile y la inserción internacional en el siglo XXI. RIAL, 8(2), 44–59.
Soto, D. (2020). El TPP y la política exterior chilena ante el cambio del orden global. Revista de Estudios Internacionales, 52(198), 77–102.
Tocci, N. (2021). The European Union’s quest for strategic autonomy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(2), 155–172.
U.S. International Trade Administration. (2025). U.S.–Chile Trade Statistics. Washington, DC.
United Nations. (2023). UN General Assembly Resolutions on Digital Governance. New York.
Valdés, C. (2000). Chile en APEC: Estrategias de inserción y desafíos futuros. Estudios Internacionales, 33(129), 33–55.
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. McGraw-Hill.
White House. (2023). Fact Sheet: Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity. Washington, DC.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press.
