U.S. Foreign Policy: Trade Interests


Victoria Hassan
Professor Shirk
American Foreign Policy
13 April 2018

U.S. Foreign Policy: Trade Interests

            After analyzing the history of United States trade and economic policies, it is clear that United States interests in trade have shown a combination of creating a freer, more prosperous world, satisfying local interests by ‘winning’ trade,  and building a world order led by the United States.
            Based on the first image of United States trade policy, the United States government has arguably prioritized free trade and the free movement of business and finances. This can be viewed as a multilateral image because it is based on economic interests that are best for the world, rather than a single nation or region. Furthermore, it has been found that developing countries in regions such as Africa and Latin America have accepted this notion of free trade and the free movement of capital. The United States’ prioritization of trade without tariff, quotas, and other restrictions along with the liberalism of capital movement can be seen as the best option for economic interests globally. The freedom of capital movement directly allows for the free movement of trading goods and services, which arguably benefits the economy on a global scale. Overall, this image of United States foreign policy regarding trade can be seen as an interest in creating a freer, more prosperous world.
            The second image of United States trade policy produces the argument that international trade is significant and should be promoted in order to help the United States, specifically in terms of economics. This can be seen as a mercantilist image or one that attempts to boost economic nationalism within the United States. Policies that stem from the economic nationalism ideology tend to stress the domestic control of trade and capital movement. Therefore, tariffs, quotas, and other restrictions might be implemented in order to attain the economic interests of the United States alone. It is quite clear that this image of trade policy puts United States economic interests first and prioritizes United States victories in terms of economics. Overall, this image of United States foreign policy regarding trade can be seen as attempting to satisfy domestic economic interests by ‘winning’ in the world of trade.
            The third image of United States trade policy characterizes the United States as a ‘world empire.’ This image can be seen as a globalist view of foreign policy regarding trade, considering that it advocates for economic and foreign policy on a global scale. With this economic image, it is clear that the overarching goal of the United States is to advance and expand United States influence throughout the world by imposing capitalism around the globe. By imposing capitalism and spreading the influence of the United States globally, the United States could potentially impose other United States interests upon other nations of the world. In doing so, this would likely improve the security of the United States and the United States would be able to maintain, and even increase, its power as a global leader. Overall, this image of United States foreign policy regarding trade can be seen as an attempt at expanding United States power by creating  a world order led by the United States.
            For the most part, the United States has combined these images in order to cover each of these interests regarding foreign policy and trade. It has been quite apparent that the United States has been very much interested in spreading democracy through trade, with the notion that open markets allow for a more accessible facilitation of the global spread of democracy. This ideal was demonstrated in Obama’s foreign policy ideology in regards to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Although the TPP has been deemed beneficial for American businesses and American security, it can also be seen as an opportunity to spread democracy. More specifically, under the Obama Administration, one major objective of the TPP was for the United States to “lead  a broad coalition of like-minded states committed to reinforcing the rules-based order in Asia” (WTO). Thus, this international trade policy ideology coincides with the third image of trade policy, which emphasizes the importance of improving the security of the United States while also expanding the power of the United States through the spread of democracy globally.
            Additionally, it is clear that with President Trump’s “America First” ideology in foreign policy, the United States has been focusing on satisfying local and domestic interests by essentially ‘winning’ in the world of trade. Trump’s international trade policy has been deemed “pro-American”, considering that he has promised implementing trading tariffs and other restrictions in order to protect the United States from being “cheated” in trade deals. During one of his campaign speeches, Trump stated, “No longer will we enter into these massive deals, with many countries, that are thousands of pages long – and which no one from our country even reads or understands. We are going to enforce all trade violations, including through the use of taxes and tariffs, against any country that cheats” (Lewandowski). This statement and foreign policy outlook perfectly fits the second image of trade policy, which emphasizes economic nationalism and domestic control of trade to attain the economic goals of the United States.
            Finally, the United States has often been categorized as having a free market economy and free trade, which would coincide with the first image’s notion of focusing on advancing the economics on a global scale. Additionally, the United States was very much involved in the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which is an agreement that reduces barriers to trade and essentially benefits all nations involved (U.S. Trade Representative). With that being said, it is clear that the United States has been working to create a more free and prosperous world. Thus, with the creation of and involvement in the WTO, the United States has shown interest free movement of trading goods and services, which is essentially beneficial on a global scale.


Work Cited

Lewandowski, Corey R. “Trump's pro-American Trade Policy Is Just What He
Promised.”TheHill, 7 Mar. 2018, thehill.com/opinion/white-house/377111-trumps-pro-american-trade-policy-is-just-what-he-promised.

U.S. Trade Representative. “America and the World Trade Organization.” America and the World
Trade Organization, www.iatp.org/files/America_and_the_World_Trade_Organization.htm.

“WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION.” WTO | 2018 News Items - DDG Wolff: Trade and
Foreign Policy Have Always Been Intertwined, www.wto.org/english/news_e/news18_e/ddgra_09feb18_e.htm.
       

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

U.S Foreign Policy towards Middle East

After World War II, the overriding concern of American foreign policy was finding a new way to check Soviet expansion and influence throughout the world. The Middle East, specifically, was a vulnerable target for the U.S. and Soviet Union after British and French colonialism. That said, US foreign policy towards the Middle East was not completely linear during the past century. Instead, it can be divided into two periods — during the Cold War and after the Cold War. During the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy was mostly a reaction to Soviet strength, position, and action. [1] After the Cold War, the Middle East — being considered as part of the Third World, was to be “exploited” for the needs of the industrial societies and to “fulfill its major function as a source of raw materials and a market.”[2] In other words, peace and oil have been the main focus of US foreign policy in the Middle East after the Cold War.  During the Cold War, the Soviet goal was to achieve strategic pari...
Read more

Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement

TO: President Donald Trump FROM: Matt Fitzgerald DATE: April 29, 2018 SUBJECT: Memorandum on US policy on the Paris Agreement Introduction Climate change has been increasingly affecting Earth ever since the industrial revolution. Earth has been becoming warmer every month. Sea levels have been rising, and coastlines have been disappearing. Something needs to be done so that the effects of climate change do not become permanent. There have been many failed global attempts to decrease our carbon emissions, and many countries including the three largest polluters, the U.S., China, and India are reluctant to do so. Only one attempt looks promising to help start the trend towards using green energy. The Paris Accords might not be perfect, but it is a good start to the world using green energy. Option 1 Pulling out of the Accords will be a reckless long-term decision. The U.S. needs to be the leader of the free world. The U.S. is the largest polluter in terms of population. W...
Read more

Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea

Memorandum Memorandum on United States Foreign Policy Regarding North Korea To: President Donald Trump CC: Professor Shirk From: Foreign Policy Analyst, Victoria Hassan Subject: The North Korean Nuclear Arsenal Dilemma Issue: If not already, North Korea is very close to achieving nuclear armed international ballistic missile capability that is capable of reaching the United States and other regions of North America. Even to experts, North Korea’s motive and intentions for building up a nuclear arsenal have been quite unclear and unpredictable. Recently, there has been much debate as to whether or not the United States should take military action regarding North Korea’s reluctance to denuclearize the entire Korean Peninsula. However, U.S. military action and complete U.S.  inaction are not the only options for dealing with North Korea. Option 1: Trump-Kim Summit Peaceful Negotiations Avoiding military action and possibly the use of nuclear weapons agai...
Read more