Sébastien Dubé is an Assistant Professor and Director of the master’s program in International Relations and Transborder Studies at Universidad Arturo Prat’s Instituto de Estudios Internacionales in Santiago de Chile. With a Ph.D. in Political Science from Université de Montréal, Sébastien brings a unique perspective shaped by his background as a French-speaking Canadian. His expertise spans international relations, Latin American politics, and geopolitics, and his career reflects a commitment to diverse academic experiences, having taught in five countries and three languages. He has worked in both public and private universities in Chile and Colombia. Sébastien’s research and publications can be found on ResearchGate.

Where do you see the most exciting research/debates happening in your field?

I believe the central research question today revolves around the profound consequences of the decline of Western powers and the rise of emerging ones. Politically, this decline means a crisis of the international liberal agenda, a product of Western governments’ numerous contradictions and double standards and the critiques and challenges of contesting powers. Its most explicit expression is that its self-proclaimed champion, the United States, raises growing mistrust among its allies and less fear among its challengers. President Trump’s world vision is one of states as a business competitor or a business partner. For him, coalitions should not exist based on shared values and goals – as in a community as most U.S. presidents have historically claimed – but as mere strategic opportunities.

Thus, this decline has endogenous and external factors, and it causes a tremendous political void. The Global South, a conceptual creation more than a geopolitical reality, is too heterogeneous to present a straightforward project beyond the weakening of the international liberal order and some adjustments. For example, the BRICS are already discussing the costs and benefits of expanding the group. The bloc’s primary goal is clear: a balanced structural power that would favor them. This straightforward principle easily coalesces and allows powerful pictures to go viral, but it does not propose a clear alternate geopolitical project or model. Many of the BRICS members do not even have a genuine material interest in, for example, a weakening of Western countries’ economies.

In comparison, the Cold War presented two competing projects framed as ways of living. I do not see a joint project or shared vision of the world uniting diverse countries such as China, Brazil, Russia, India, South Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt. The BRICS has democracies, liberal market economies, authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, regimes with a unique party or no party at all, theocracies, state capitalism, civilian leaders, and military leaders. You can also find major historical rivalries between some of them that are hard to overcome. Some BRICS countries give the impression that they want to crush the system, while others give the impression that they want more power over it. Therefore, this bloc is limited to discussing the global balance of power. We are still far from seeing an alternate model of functioning of the global system from the BRICS.

Nonetheless, for me, what is particularly interesting is how this disputed and chaotic global scenario affect Latin American countries, their foreign policy, and intraregional IR. Most Latin American countries share an understandable love-and-hate relationship with the international liberal order because it has had mixed effects on the story of the region, to say the least: flagrant human rights violations and rule of law with human rights guarantees. This is a unique historical situation in the international system. Today, many Latin American leaders are against different aspects of the international liberal order, but almost none officially reject it. Even efforts to combat insecurity are often framed within the narrative of strengthening civilian-led institutions and promoting state responses to criminal gangs, reflecting a nuanced engagement with the international liberal order.

Looking ahead, I anticipate clear and tangible consequences in the future. From a geopolitical and economic standpoint, I expect that when the People’s Republic of China invades Taiwan, the most influential countries in the region will neither issue condemnations nor make explicit calls to defend democracy. And this will be a breaking point. Regarding my personal research agenda, I am particularly interested in studying the impact of this broad geopolitical context on intraregional relations and how technology is used to facilitate movements of trade and........

© E-International