Canada should opt out of the free trade association with the United States

1992 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 363-368
Author(s):  
Richard D. Robinson
1973 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-92
Author(s):  
Z. A. Vaince

Harry G. Johnson edited the book under review when trade policy after the Kennedy Round was in a state of flux. In the United States there was a resurgence of protectionism. Britain suffered another EEC rebuff in the same period, with Western Europe remaining at Sixes and Sevens. The imbalance of European Currencies and the inadequacy of international reserves were a threat to international trade. Generalised Tariff Preferences for developing countries were agreed in principle, but agreement in practice was not in sight. President Kennedy's Grand Design needed a revision. A New Trade Strategy was required. The present collection of papers seems to have been designed to provide this new strategy. In broad terms, what is proposed is the establishment of a free trade regime in industrial products amongst a group of countries touching the Atlantic, together with some subsidiary proposals for action in related areas of trade policy. The nucleus of what would thus initially be a North Atlantic Free Trade Area (NAFTA) would be the United States, Canada and Britain and other members of the European Free Trade Associa¬tion (EFTA). But the plan would be an "open-ended" arrangement which other industrialised nations — Japan, Australia, New Zealand and the countries - of the European Economic Community—could also join, provided they were prepared to conform to the rules that this integration scheme would entail. The launching of a multilateral free trade association could be the means of continuing the momentum towards world trade liberalisation and of countering the inward-looking tendencies of the EEC.


1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-484

At a meeting of senior officials of the seven-nation European Free Trade Association (EFTA) held in London, February 12–13, 1960, the organization was reported to have chosen Geneva as the site of its headquarters, after the French government had informed it that it could not accept the proposal that Paris be the site, since France was not a member of EFTA. Although EFTA did not officially come into being until May 3, 1960, with the deposition of the seven instruments of ratification with the Swedish government, the preparatory meeting of its Ministerial Council was held in Vienna on March 11–12, devoting itself principally to an examination of the most important problem facing this new organization—namely, its relations with third countries, especially those of the European Economic Community (EEC). The member states declared their readiness to discuss with the EEC members the possible extension to the Six and to other countries, subject to reciprocity, of the 20-percent tariff reduction effective among themselves on July 1, 1960, and reaffirmed the importance of a continuation of European economic cooperation within the framework of the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), of which they would like to see the United States and Canada become full members. Also in March, EFTA members reportedly received the assurance of the United States government that its approval of a recent decision of EEC, concerning the reduction of its external tariff on July 1, 1960, did not reflect any animosity toward the Association.


1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Raby

This is a good deal, a good deal for Canada and a deal that is good for all Canadians. It is also a fair deal, which means that it brings benefits and progress to our partner, the United States of America. When both countries prosper, our democracies are strengthened and leadership has been provided to our trading partners around the world. I think this initiative represents enlightened leadership to the trading partners about what can be accomplished when we determine that we are going to strike down protectionism, move toward liberalized trade, and generate new prosperity for all our people.On January 2, 1988, President Ronald Reagan of the United States and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada signed the landmark comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries that already enjoyed the largest bilateral trade relationship in the world. The FTA was subsequently ratified by the legislatures of both countries, if only after a bitterly fought election on the subject in Canada. On January 1, 1989, the FTA formally came into effect.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Mohamad Zreik

AbstractThe Chinese Ministry of Commerce issued a statement Friday morning, July 6, 2018, confirming the outbreak of a trade war between the United States and China. The statement came after the United States imposed tariffs on many Chinese goods, in violation of international and bilateral agreements, and the destruction of the concept of free trade which the United States calls for following it. It is a war of opposite directions, especially the contradiction between the new Trump policy and the Chinese approach. The proof is what US Defense Secretary James Matisse announced in Singapore in early June 2018 of “the full strategy of the new United States, in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific,” where China was the “sole enemy of the United States” in China’s geostrategic region. Intentions have become publicized, and trade war between the two economic giants is turning into a reality. This paper will give an overview of the US-China scenario of trade war, then a focused analysis on the Trump’s administration economic decision regarding China, and the consequences of this decision.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document