Das disputas a integração: historicidades da fronteira entre Capanema (BR) e Andresito (AR)

• Autor(a) principal: Silvestrin, Daniela
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações do UNIOESTE
• Texto Completo: http://tede.unioeste.br/handle/tede/4735
• topic: Fronteira; Paraná; Misiones; Brasil; Argentina; CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS:HISTÓRIA

This research deals with the Brazil-Argentina border, mainly focusing on the cities of Capanema, located in the Southwestern region of Paraná, and Comandante Andresito, located in the Argentinean Northeast, and taking in considerations the land conflicts related to the occupation and colonization of the said territory by both countries. The conflicts over the area originated with Spanish and Portuguese colonizers and lasted for years. The first treaty to delimit the border was the Tratado de Tordesilhas, signed in 1494. However, the conflicts over the area were only definitely solved with the “Questão de Palmas ou Misiones”, in 1895, when Brazil had already emancipated itself from Portugal, and Argentina from Spain. With the conclusion of the dispute between both countries, the Santo Antônio River was instituted as the border marker between Brazil and Argentina, and the crossing between Capanema and Andresito was made by boats. In 1993, an international bridge was built, connecting the two cities. The main argument of the then governor of Paraná, Roberto Requião, whom ordered the construction, was that the bridge would make it easier to integrate both cities and countries. Given this, the main objective of this research is to analyze the narratives published by newspapers and obtained from oral interviews with the cities’ residents about the constitution of this border and to understand why, after so many years of dispute over the Território de Palmas, the integration begins to take over the discussions about this border. The construction of the International Bridge over the Santo Antônio River was a landmark for the cities, but it was not a protagonist in the integration between the localities. The border integration discourse sometimes sounds idealistic, but it often does not consider the local reality and the will of the population.