The current discourse surrounding the agreement between Argentina and the United States appears heavily centered on economic considerations, dissecting its potential sectoral impacts and avenues for value chains. However, the writer argues that the political context is critical, emphasizing that the fate of such agreements is often dictated by geopolitical developments rather than merely commercial law and technical details. This sheds light on the complexity of international relations, particularly as the dynamics between powers like the U.S. and China evolve.

The discussion delves into historical precedents, alluding to past agreements such as Roca-Runciman, suggesting that the asymmetric nature of the current agreement may raise questions about its validity and long-term viability given current global power dynamics. Critics assert that an agreement skewed towards U.S. interests could prove detrimental to Argentina, and the necessity for a supportive political climate is highlighted as crucial for any anticipated success.

Ultimately, the article posits that the success or failure of the agreement hinges significantly upon broader geopolitical realities, encouraging a view that extends beyond economic analysis. It suggests that without favorable political backing, the agreement might falter despite any economic justification, prompting an important inquiry into Argentina's strategic positioning within global politics, particularly amid competing influences from major powers.