Carlos Salinas de Gortari and His Legacy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Morris
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Mexican History ◽  
Institutional Revolutionary Party ◽  
Neoliberal Reforms ◽  
Carlos Salinas De Gortari ◽  
Revolutionary Party ◽  
New Strategies

Mexico’s President Carlos Salinas de Gortari of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) came to power amidst crisis and controversy in 1988. Using a variety of old and new strategies and innate political skill, he largely surmounted the political crisis, gaining popularity and legitimacy for himself and support for the PRI, handing power off to his hand-picked successor six years later. During his six-year term, he implemented a series of neoliberal reforms, privatized state-owned enterprises, and overhauled and restructured the Mexican economy, turning the nation into a leading manufacturing exporter and one of the most open economies in the world. This included the historic signing of a free trade agreement with Canada and the United States in 1992. Yet many of the gains and achievements were tarnished by events in 1994. In the aftermath, Salinas would become one of the most reviled presidents in Mexican history.

Democratizing Mexican Politics, 1982–2012

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roderic Ai Camp
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Catholic Church ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Institutional Revolutionary Party ◽  
Electoral Laws ◽  
Revolutionary Party ◽  
Independent Decision

Mexico’s democratic transition provides a revealing case study of a semi-authoritarian political model evolving incrementally into an electoral democracy over two decades. One of the special features of that transition was its slow progress compared to its peers in Latin America, especially given its proximity to the United States, the most influential democracy in the last half of the 20th century. The first attempt to introduce fair, competitive elections occurred under the leadership of Miguel de la Madrid in 1983, but he reversed direction when he was opposed by leading politicians from his own party. His successor, Carlos Salinas (1988–1994), chose to pursue economic liberalization, opening up Mexico to greater competition globally, and negotiating an agreement with Canada and the United States (North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA), while maintaining an authoritarian presidency. During this era, proactive actors that fomented significant political change came from numerous sources. The following were particularly noteworthy in explaining Mexico’s shift to a democratic model: dissident elites who pushed for democracy inside the dominant Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI); dissident elites who left PRI to form the most successful opposition parties in the 20th century, including the founding of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) in 1989; social and civic movements originating from government incompetence in addressing the results of the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City, the widespread fraud during the 1988 presidential election, and the Zapatista Army of National Liberation uprising in 1994; the altered composition of political leadership from the establishment and the opposition characterized by stronger backgrounds in local, elective offices, party leadership, and nonpolitical careers; new electoral laws reinforcing independent decision-making regarding electoral practices and outcomes in the 1990s; and the introduction of new political actors supportive of democratic change, such as the Catholic Church.

The Investment Provisions of the Canada—United States Free Trade Agreement: A Canadian Perspective

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Raby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
The World ◽  
Trading Partners

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.

scholarly journals A Study of the Environmental Issues Associated with the Dominican RepublicCentral American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA)

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shyamalendu Sarkar
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Central American ◽  
Environmental Objectives ◽  
Environmental Requirements ◽  
The U.S

The Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA) with the United States was passed on July 28, 2005. The main goal of DR-CAFTA is to create a free trade zone for economic development. The Agreement is highly controversial with many contentious issues including concern about the environment, which is the focus of this study. The concern is that the environmental objectives are expected to be subservient to trade and other economic incentives which will lead to further deterioration of the environment in countries where the environmental standards are already low. The effects on the U.S. environment are expected to be minimal. However, it is feared that the U.S. manufacturing facilities may relocate to Central American countries to take advantage of low wages and low environmental requirements, which may result in loss of jobs and capital investment in the U.S. However, overall DR-CAFTA is expected to be beneficial in many ways, including an increase in trade and economic growth in all participating countries.

scholarly journals The peaceful resolution of U.S.-Mexican transboundary water disputes

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyssa M. Neir ◽  
Michael E. Campana
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Production ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Formal System ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transboundary Water ◽  
The North ◽  
International Boundary ◽  
Water Issues ◽  
The U.S

To deal with boundary and transboundary water issues along their border, the United States and Mexico established the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) in 1889. Initially dealing only with surface water flows, its flexibility permitted changes such that groundwater and water quality issues could be addressed. In 1994, the U.S., Mexico, and Canada adopted the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) primarily to facilitate trade, but which can govern water as an article of commerce. Both NAFTA and the IBWC have been instrumental in promoting peaceful solutions to water issues. The article examines three cases: (1) Mexico's protesting of a U.S. plan to line the All-American Canal on the Mexico-California; (2) the underdelivery of Mexican Rio Grande water to the U.S. state of Texas; and (3) the case of an aquifer entirely within Mexico whose supply is being stressed because of a shift in agricultural production prompted by NAFTA. The article concludes that both countries should: (1) develop a more formal system for groundwater issues and (2) exercise vigilance with respect to NAFTA's ability to treat water solely as an economic good.

AHMED GALAL AND ROBERT Z. LAWRENCE, ED., Building Bridges: An Egypt–US Free Trade Agreement (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998). Pp. 121. $29.95 cloth.

2000 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 312-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samira Salem
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Brookings Institution ◽  
Optimal Form

Has the time come for a free-trade agreement (FTA) between Egypt and the United States? According to the contributors to Building Bridges, an FTA is the logical next step in the Egypt–U.S. relationship. This policy-oriented volume explores the conditions under which the benefits of an FTA between the parties would be maximized. Although the contributors reach different conclusions regarding the optimal form of the Egypt–U.S. FTA, consensus is reached on one point: an FTA between Egypt and the United States will produce economic benefits for both nations.

Central American integration through infrastructure development: A case study of Costa Rican hydropower

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denielle M. Perry ◽  
Kate A. Berry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central America ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Market ◽  
Central American ◽  
Infrastructure Development

At the turn of the 21st century, protectionist policies in Latin America were largely abandoned for an agenda that promoted free trade and regional integration. Central America especially experienced an increase in international, interstate, and intraregional economic integration through trade liberalization. In 2004, such integration was on the agenda of every Central American administration, the U.S. Congress, and Mexico. The Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP) and the Central America Integrated Electricity System (SIEPAC), in particular, aimed to facilitate the success of free trade by increasing energy production and transmission on a unifi ed regional power grid (Mesoamerica, 2011). Meanwhile, for the United States, a free trade agreement (FTA) with Central America would bring it a step closer to realizing a hemispheric trade bloc while securing market access for its products. Isthmus states considered the potential for a Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) with the United States, their largest trading partner, as an opportunity to enter the global market on a united front. A decade and a half on, CAFTA, PPP, and SIEPAC are interwoven, complimentary initiatives that exemplify a shift towards increased free trade and development throughout the region. As such, to understand one, the other must be examined.

Developments Relating to U.S. Trade Negotiations—KORUS, NAFTA, and Trade Promotion Authority

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 510-513 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Final Agreement ◽  
Trade Promotion ◽  
Trade Deals ◽  
Trump Administration

Consistent with his approach on the campaign trail, President Trump has demonstrated a continued interest in revamping U.S. trade agreements. By the late spring of 2018, the Trump administration had negotiated modest changes to the United States-Republic of Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) in favor of U.S. interests. It had yet to reach any final agreement with regard to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), despite the expiration of an initial deadline that was designed to ensure adequate time for a vote on the negotiated agreement by the present Congress. To ease the passage of future trade deals, Trump has triggered the three-year extension of a process that provides expedited congressional consideration of negotiated trade agreements.

Neoliberalism and Counterinsurgency

Colombia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard D. Mahoney
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Latin American ◽  
North American ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The North ◽  
Trade Promotion ◽  
The U.S

How did the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement come about? The officially named “U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement” was the stepchild of a rancorous hemispheric divorce between the United States and five Latin American governments over the proposal to extend the North American Free Trade Agreement...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document