| This study analyzes a contemporary rise in conflict between two global regime networks in the international system---a hegemonic one structured to deepen the incorporation of Latin American countries into the global market economy through the extraction of natural resources, and a counter-hegemonic one grounded in the defense of indigenous and environmental rights. The study argues that the deepening of these regime networks has contributed an increase in conflict, and, in tandem with globalization processes and the transnational expansion and domestic embedding of international law and environmental awareness, it has changed the arenas in which conflict, its arbitration, mediation and/or stalemate occur.; The study traces how indigenous peoples, considered historically "weak" actors, have acquired new instrumental and discursive tools and rules with which to face threats to their lives and livelihoods. It explores how strategies used by both weak and powerful actors involved have become more complex, transnational and diverse. It maps outcomes for democratization.; Empirically, this dissertation is based on a "thick description" single-N case study of resistance by the 5,000 member U'wa indigenous pueblo to oil development by the U.S.-based Occidental Petroleum and the Colombian government in U'wa territory. It traces the embedding in Colombia of the indigenous rights/environmental regime during a period of democratic transition and constitutional reform. It examines the collision of this process with the simultaneous embedding of neo-liberal economic and political policies.; This study expands and challenges international relations regime theory by introducing the concept of counter-hegemonic/challenger regimes, based in identity, and by developing the concept of regime networks. It moves regime theory forward by documenting how regime deepening can contribute to conflict, not just cooperation, especially when the political practices of less-dominant actors are taken into account. Finally, it empirically maps the "mixed parentage" nature of two regime networks. This thus study challenges state-centric models common to international relations and political science, conceptualizing the state as an arena of struggle undergoing reformulation as a result of sub-national and supra-national challenges to authority and sovereignty. |
