July 27 – The House of Representatives votes to extend normal trade relations with China by one year. Read the article. Second, there has been a notable increase in activism among groups that opposed globalization. Initially, activism was organized around certain goals, such as the anti-sweatshop movement on campuses, debt relief for the poorest countries, and managing the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa. But starting with the WTO protests in Seattle in 2000 and continuing with every international meeting since then, anti-globalization has become a battle cry for a much more diffuse set of interests. Ironically, this cowardly movement itself is a product of the globalization of ideas. In contrast, the Clinton administration made it clear early on that it viewed the strong implementation of U.S. trade laws – in line with international obligations – as an integral part of maintaining domestic support for the international trading system. In practice, this meant that the President took action in all cases where ICT recommended it, from the brush industry to the powerful steel industry. However, the government has refrained from imposing protectionist measures outside the legal process (with the sole exception of two agricultural cases with Canada, where it has expanded negotiated solutions established under previous governments). With these caveats, the Clinton administration`s performance has been strong – especially compared to the 1980s.
In the 1980s, there were a number of ad hoc mechanisms that limited imports into a number of politically important industries: steel quotas for 27 countries, quotas for Japanese car imports, global price cartel for semiconductors, restrictions on imports of machine tools, and quotas for Canadian softwood imports (although the Reagan administration also terminated the marketing agreement order. in the footwear industry). In almost all cases, protection has been introduced outside the scope of U.S. trade laws, and in many cases, findings have been ignored or rejected in legal proceedings. In 1999 and 2000, efforts to enforce U.S. competition policy led to record fines being imposed on international price-fixing cartels. The United States considers the relationship between trade and competition policy to be increasingly important, but wonders whether the WTO is currently the appropriate institution for developing multilateral competition rules. April 6 Chinese and U.S.
trade officials reach agreements on a number of contentious issues affecting agriculture, leaving telecommunications, banking and other issues unresolved. Read the article. Three things are worth noting here, as they concern the interaction between international economic policy and foreign policy. First, while it is generally recognized that the United States has played a key role in financial stabilization in Asia, foreign perception of America`s role has suffered from the highly partisan debate over the U.S. financial contribution to the IMF and the inability of the United States to pledge financing for Thailand, a relative of the treaty. due to restrictions on the exchange stabilization fund during the peso crisis. Second, as in the course of many trade negotiations, while our security agenda is well served by helping friends and allies in times of financial crisis, the “take your medicine” content of U.S. involvement implies America`s complicity coupled with the IMF`s strict conditionality that can strain our relations.