US Interests in International Trade


Rachael Feldhausen
American Foreign Policy
Professor Shirk
4/11/18
US Goals in International Trade
            Beginning in the post World War 2 era, the United States international trade prerogative prioritized U.S. interest abroad, while also supporting the creation of a globalized and capitalistic society. The Trans Pacific Partnership and the World Trade Organization are two such agreements that exemplify this position. However, under President Trump’s presidency this goal has changed so that US policies towards international trade is purely an ‘american first’ dichotomy. This includes pulling out of trade agreements that are multilateral such as NAFTA, NATO, and the TPP, only joining in bilateral trade agreements, and only agreeing to deals that will wholy benefit the United States.
            It is inherent to trade that the parties involved are first and foremost focused on their own self interest. In accordance with capitalist ideology, deals turn out best when each party is focused on gaining as much as possible for themselves. U.S. international trade policies can be viewed as following in accordance with this ideology. While overall, the U.S. is focused on self interest they are also interested in protecting the global economy and promoting capitalism abroad. The United States made a great effort to encourage China to join the World Trade Organization (WTO). This would benefit the United States by increasing trade between the two countries. However, it was also a benefit because it forced China to begin to open up their economy to capitalist elements. In fact the U.S.’s involvement in the WTO is another example of the dichotomy of U.S. international trade policies. The WTO is beneficial to the United States because it promotes smooth trade between countries across the world and promotes capitalism abroad. However, there have been instances in which the WTO have acted against the interests of the United States. For example, the WTO ruled against “the reformulated gasoline regulations of the U.S. clean air act” which “would strip the US government of some basic practical enforcement tools” regarding regulating production (citizen.org). Engagement in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is an example of the US promoting an international trade initiative that may have some negative impact on the United States economy by eliminating many manufacturing jobs within the U.S., but will also help the U.S. and the globe as a whole as it’s main prerogative was to reduce fossil fuel emissions.
            While prioritizing U.S. interest while also supporting a globalized and capitalist society had been the goal of U.S. international trade for many years, this has changed with the inauguration of Trump as the President of the United States. Trump has already pulled out of the TPP. He has made many comments suggesting that he will pull out of the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, and has outspokenly criticized NATO, calling both ‘bad deals’. He also also suggested that China and Russia should have never been a part of the WTO. Trump has imposed tariffs on the aluminum and steel trade, and wants to pull out of NAFTA in order to place tariffs on goods imported from Canada and Mexico. These tariffs are inherently against capitalism and free trade. Furthermore, placing tariffs on steel and aluminum purposefully goes against WTO policies and effectively weakens it. Trump seems to be against multilateral trade agreements as a whole. He believes that bilateral trade agreements are the only way to actually promote American interests abroad. Trump has also suggested that, because the United States is so powerful, it should not have to concede to the demands of other, weaker countries. In his opinion, trade deals should only be met if the United States ‘wins’. Therefore, many of Trump’s actions have gone against decades of international trade agreements that the U.S. has committed to. He does not seem to care for the world order or for international capitalism and free trade.

https://www.citizen.org/article/world-trade-organization-ruling-against-reformulated-gasoline-regulations-us-clean-air-act

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