| dc.description.abstract | This study analyzed the decision-making process in foreign policy from the presidential messages sent by the Executive Branch to the National Congress, examining comparatively the center-left governments of the Workers Party (2003-2010) in Brazil, and the Socialist Party (2000-2009) in Chile, investigating how the decision-making process of international acts may be the object of legislative and partisan action and, most important, that is subject to conflict/consensus between government and opposition from the ideological structure of coalitions that affects the negotiation of the agreement at the international level and especially in domestic context. Therefore, the ideological factor present in coalitions is a variable that affects the decision-making process in foreign policy. The higher the ideological heterogeneity and the size of the coalition, the greater the partisan conflict in foreign policy. On the other hand, the greater the ideological homogeneity and the smaller the size of the coalition, the lower the partisan conflict in international acts. In Chile, the role of the Socialist Party in foreign policy, based on the continuity of international integration paradigms, occurred in an environment marked by moderation and by partisan commitment and building consensus around government objectives, namely, trade agreements and free trade agreements, emphasizing the partnership with Latin America. The party activity in this way was guided by consensus, with few changes in trade agreements and FTA's, seeking to speed up the decision-making process of international acts. In Brazil, in turn, the Workers Parties undertook to form broad and heterogeneous coalitions and not as stable as the Chilean ones, considering various partisan and ideological preferences and increasing therefore the conflicted component of the decision-making process showing the largest internal ideological fight, in the coalition, and external, in relation to the opposition parties. In short, due to the importance of the domestic component in international agreements, the findings of this study are important to articulate an explanation of the reasons why countries administered by center-left political parties to act differently/similarly in foreign policy, considering previous governments and even the countries themselves in similar periods, because there were important differences between the two styles of government, considering the overall and partisan objectives in foreign policy of each one, as well as the composition and ideological preferences of the government coalition government. | |
