The European Union and MERCOSUR: Prospects for a Free Trade Agreement

2000 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Bulmer-Thomas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Customs Unions ◽  
Trade Area

Negotiations between the European Union and MERCOSUR aim to establish the first free trade agreement ever between two customs unions. Among the potential obstacles are compliance with World Trade Organization rules, treatment of “sensitive” products, and competition from the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas. This analysis reviews the economic background on both sides, the motivation, and the prospects for success, along with the agreement’s potential impact on the largest third party, the United States.

scholarly journals Is There A Need For A Free Trade Agreement Between The European Union And Gulf Cooperation Council?

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
M. Anaam Hashmi ◽  
Fahad Al-Eatani ◽  
Fareed Shaikh
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Gulf Cooperation Council ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
Trade Area

The need for a free trade agreement between the European Union (EU) and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is analyzed in this research project. Trade flows between these two economic blocs are studied to understand the importance of trade for these respective blocs. Failure of the free trade agreement negotiation is attributed to the lack of economic focus and the EU demands to improve human rights in GCC member countries. Based on the secondary sources and data analyses, the primary interest of both economic blocs is to enhance geopolitical influence and not boasting bilateral trade. Despite recent failures, both sides are still committed to increased partnership in the future. It is concluded that an EU-GCC free trade area may be essential for increased cooperation in economic, as well as geopolitical, security, environmental, and cultural arenas.

scholarly journals ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES IN THE PERIOD THE PRESIDENCY OF DONALD TRUMP (2017-2020)

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
Andrei Martynov ◽  
Sergey Asaturov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Area

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union.Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.

scholarly journals The Development of the Free Trade Area of the Americas: A Guide For Legal Research

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle S. Viegas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The World

At the 1994 Summit of the Americas, leaders of democratic nations in the Western Hemisphere committed to establishing a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) by January 2005. The Declaration of Principles resulting from that Summit called for building on “existing sub-regional and bilateral arrangements in order to broaden and deepen hemispheric economic integration and to bring the agreements together.” Although ambitious, this endeavor was undertaken during a decade marked by an unprecedented proliferation of trade agreements. In 1991, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay agreed to initiate the formation of a common market now known as the MERCOSUR. Then in 1994, Canada, Mexico and the United States signed the North American Free Trade Agreement which replaced the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement. Later that year, nations around the world formalized the existing General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, creating the World Trade Organization. In 1997, the Andean Community of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela formalized its plans to establish a common market. Members of the Caribbean Community and Common Market also agreed in several protocols to further their economic and social integration. During the 1990's, numerous other trade agreements were negotiated, and their development continues at the same rapid pace today.

scholarly journals Integration Character of the CETA Agreement

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (337) ◽  
pp. 111-125
Author(s):  
Magdalena Śliwińska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Economic Life ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
New Generation

One of the manifestations of economic globalisation seen in recent years is the so‑called “new generation” type of trade agreements such as the TPP, CETA and TTIP. They aim at trade liberalisation, but their scope is broader, comprising other areas of socio‑economic life, more or less directly linked to trade, such as e.g.: the liberalisation of public services, the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, the deregulation and liberalisation of financial markets, the protection of intellectual property rights, and the cooperation in creating new rules or protecting mutual investments. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyse the scope and content of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) signed in 2016 by the European Union and Canada from the point of view of the Balassa stages of economic integration and the EU’s experience in order to state whether the naming of such agreements as trade agreements, even with the “new generation” qualification, is really justified. The analysis presented in this paper leads to the conclusion that this agreement should rather be included in the category of agreements labelled as integration agreements. Most of the CETA provisions are at the same level of sophistication as was achieved by the EU countries at the stage of building the single market, that is, at the stage of the implementation of the common market in Balassa’s nomenclature, and some of them are at the stage of economic and monetary union. The scope of the CETA, i.e. the number of areas of social and economic life regulated by it as well as their advancement and complexity, goes far beyond what is commonly understood as a trade agreement and beyond its official purpose – the creation of a free trade area between the European Union and Canada. It leads to economic integration at a level far deeper than a free trade area in its classic and common sense.

Free Trade Agreement between Tunisia and the European Union, Do Institutions Matter?: An Empirical Validation by A Gravity Model

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Anis Kacem
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Gravity Model ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Spatial Econometrics ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Institutional Dimension ◽  
North And South

Tunisia has signed a free trade agreement with the European Union in 1996, which provides for the reduction of tariff barriers between Tunisia and the EU. In this article, we aim to know and test whether the similarity of the institutional framework has to stimulate international trade between Tunisia and the European Union. In this context, we built a variable called “Institutional distance” to valid the institutional dimension of international trade, near borders effects reported in the literature. To this end, a gravity model was used initially (Tunisia and 21 European countries). Secondly, the estimate shows the existence of spatial autocorrelation. The latter has been corrected using spatial econometrics. The results show that the geographical distance remains more important than the institutions in this type of agreement between north and south shores of the Mediterranean.

Ein ökonomisches Happy End aus geostrategischen Gründen? Erfolgsaussichten für den Freihandel zwischen der Europäischen Union und Indien

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-317
Author(s):  
Mariano Barbato
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Good Chance ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Decisive Reason ◽  
Climate Crisis

The talks that have been resumed for reaching a free trade agreement between the European Union and India have a good chance for success. Both partners, especially India, have to achieve new economic dynamics in order to be able to face the challenge posed by China. This decisive reason is supported by Brexit, the pandemic and the climate crisis, which also spark an exogenous, geostrategic dynamic that gives new impetus to the paralyzed liberal paradigm of free trade. Taken together, it is likely that exogenous geostrategic factors realign the endogenous economic factors and thus promote a positive outcome despite the ongoing weakness of liberal free trade ideas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document