THE LIBERAL NEWS (TM) By: The Gospel Followers of Jesus Christ (sm) www.theliberalnews.com

Table 1
U.S. INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS (BOP) BASIS, 1960-2004
(Billions of Dollars) Exports Imports Trade Balance Total GoodsServices Total GoodsServices TotalGoodsServices 196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004

25.9	19.7	6.3	22.4	14.8	7.7	3.5	4.9	-1.4
26.4	20.1	6.3	22.2	14.5	7.7	4.2	5.6	-1.4
27.7	20.8	6.9	24.4	16.3	8.1	3.4	4.5	-1.2
29.6	22.3	7.3	25.4	17.0	8.4	4.2	5.2	-1.0
33.3	25.5	7.8	27.3	18.7	8.6	6.0	6.8	-.8
35.3	26.5	8.8	30.6	21.5	9.1	4.7	5.0	-.3
38.9	29.3	9.6	36.0	25.5	10.5	2.9	3.8	-.9
41.3	30.7	10.7	38.7	26.9	11.9	2.6	3.8	-1.2
45.5	33.6	11.9	45.3	33.0	12.3	.2	.6	-.4
49.2	36.4	12.8	49.1	35.8	13.3	.1	.6	-.5
56.6	42.5	14.2	54.4	39.9	14.5	2.3	2.6	-.3
59.7	43.3	16.4	61.0	45.6	15.4	-1.3	-2.3	1.0
67.2	49.4	17.8	72.7	55.8	16.9	-5.4	-6.4	1.0
91.2	71.4	19.8	89.3	70.5	18.8	1.9	.9	1.0
120.9	98.3	22.6	125.2	103.8	21.4	-4.3	-5.5	1.2
132.6	107.1	25.5	120.2	98.2	22.0	12.4	8.9	3.5
142.7	114.7	28.0	148.8	124.2	24.6	-6.1	-9.5	3.4
152.3	120.8	31.5	179.5	151.9	27.6	-27.2	-31.1	3.8
178.4	142.1	36.4	208.2	176.0	32.2	-29.8	-33.9	4.2
224.1	184.4	39.7	248.7	212.0	36.7	-24.6	-27.6	3.0
271.8	224.3	47.6	291.2	249.8	41.5	-19.4	-25.5	6.1
294.4	237.0	57.4	310.6	265.1	45.5	-16.2	-28.0	11.9
275.2	211.2	64.1	299.4	247.6	51.7	-24.2	-36.5	12.3
266.0	201.8	64.2	323.8	268.9	54.9	-57.8	-67.1	9.3
290.9	219.9	71.0	400.1	332.4	67.7	-109.2	-112.5	3.3
288.8	215.9	72.9	410.9	338.1	72.8	-122.1	-122.2	.1
309.7	223.3	86.4	450.3	368.4	81.8	-140.6	-145.1	4.5
348.8	250.2	98.6	502.1	409.8	92.3	-153.3	-159.6	6.2
431.3	320.2	111.1	547.2	447.2	100.0	-115.9	-127.0	11.1
489.4	362.1	127.2	581.6	477.4	104.2	-92.2	-115.2	23.0
537.2	389.3	147.9	618.4	498.3	120.0	-81.1	-109.0	27.9
581.3	416.9	164.3	611.9	490.7	121.2	-30.7	-73.8	43.1
616.5	439.6	176.8	654.6	536.5	118.1	-38.2	-96.9	58.7
642.4	456.9	185.4	711.5	589.4	122.1	-69.2	-132.5	63.3
702.6	502.9	199.8	799.8	668.7	131.1	-97.2	-165.8	68.6
793.7	575.2	218.5	888.8	749.4	139.4	-95.1	-174.2	79.1
850.9	612.1	238.8	953.7	803.1	150.6	-102.9	-191.0	88.1
933.9	678.4	255.5	1,040.9	876.5	164.4	-107.0	-198.1	91.1
932.6	670.4	262.1	1,095.7	917.1	178.6	-163.2	-246.7	83.5
965.5	684.0	281.5	1,226.7	1,030.0	196.7	-261.2	-346.0	84.8
1,070.1	772.0	298.1	1,445.4	1,224.4	221.0	-375.4	-452.4	77.0
1,006.7	718.7	287.9	1,369.3	1,145.9	223.4	-362.7	-427.2	64.5
975.9	681.8	294.1	1,397.7	1,164.7	232.9	-421.7	-482.9	61.2
1,020.5	713.1	307.4	1,517.0	1,260.7	256.3	-496.5	-547.6	51.0
1,146.1	807.6	338.6	1,763.9	1,473.8	290.1	-617.7	-666.2	48.5

NOTE: 1. Compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic
Analysis. Data reflect revisions through 2/10/2005 in FT-900 (Exhibit 1).
2. Balance of Payments (BOP) basis for goods reflects adjustments for timing,
coverage, and valuation to the data compiled by the Census Bureau. The major
adjustments concern: military trade of U.S. defense agencies, additional nonmonetary
gold transactions and inland freight in Canada and Mexico.
3. Goods valuation are F.a.s. for exports and Customs value for imports.
Last updated 2/14/2005. Next update Summer 2005.

John Smith, President
In 1983, after years of serving as a Technology Consultant and IT Manager for various local govenment agencies, John founded ABC Information Solutions. He saw the need for a local company that...

Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)

The FTAA is seen as a smaller version of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and a larger version of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which is further described below. On the one hand, the same fears as with the MAI, which would give even more powers to foreign investors over national governments, are seen here.

Yet, Latin American countries also fear that if they do impose some regulation, then that will likely pose an obstacle to investment in that country, as investors would simply go where there are less so-called restrictions. Given the need in many Latin American nations to provide for the large poor population, the investment takes on a slightly more sense of urgency. However, if corporations are able to invest in that country without regulations, then their accountability for any problems that may result is diminished. A nasty catch 22 or race to the bottom.

April 2001, Quebec, Canada, saw a meeting of leaders from the hemisphere to discuss the FTAA.

The United States, being the dominant economic power in the region, as well as the world is obviously a major factor in the FTAA. The U.S. is very supportive of the FTAA and the United States Trade Representative (USTR) wishes to expand the trade in services which would imply the privatization of health, education and other public services. It would be similar to what is promoted via the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) at the World Trade Organization. (For more about GATS, visit this web site's section on GATS).

As with NAFTA, the USTR proposals for the FTAA would result in greater rights for investors, without establishing any corresponding responsibilities. The USTR's position is that investors should have the right to move funds into and out of countries without delay - meaning that provisions such as capital controls or performance requirements to ensure that investments serves to promote development goals would be illegal under an FTAA.

— Karen Hansen-Kuhn, Free Trade Area of the Americas, The Development GAP, appearing in Foreign Policy In Focus Volume 6, Number 12 April 2001

Furthermore, as pointed out in this radio show back in April 2001 leading up to the FTAA meeting in Quebec, it has been difficult for the public to get access to the FTAA documents, even though major corporations have ready access to it. Even the world's largest journalists' group, the International Federation of Journalists, has raised concerns about the secrecy around the FTAA despite the fact that it impacts the lives of roughly 800 million people.

Unfortunately, almost predictably, as with other protests around the world, the protests in Quebec at the FTAA meeting the weekend of April 20th, 2001, were accompanied by police violence, and even some protestor violence. The violence from a minority of protestors has served to discredit the movement a little bit, which is a shame and cannot be accepted by others who are also against the FTAA and the current forms of globalization. The media concentrated on the sensationlism and the minority of violent protestors, ignoring in that respect, the majority of the non-violent protestors. As this commentary suggests, many in the mainstream either didn't really want to, or try to understand what protestors were protesting.

End of October 2002 saw another FTAA round in Quito, Ecuador. As Food First reported, "after the worst of the police violence [on October 31, 2002] against the tens of thousands of indigenous people, farmers, students and other members of civil society from the across the Americas had taken place, a police platoon, including various officers, rebelled against their own government, and joined with indigenous leaders and other protesters in demanding that the trade ministers from 34 countries meeting to negotiate the FTAA agree to receive a delegation from the protesters carrying a declaration of opposition to the FTAA." The protestors voices heard in the negotiations led to some embarrassment for key delegates, such as those from the U.S., and as the above article continued, quoting Peter Rosset, director of Food First, "'After today's Seattle-like protests,' concluded Mr. Rosset, 'the U.S. government and the transnational corporations can never again claim that opposition to free trade comes only from a small group of northern environmentalists. It is abundantly clear that people from all walks of life, across all of Latin America, do not want anything to do with the FTAA, the World Trade Organization or any other manifestation of trade liberalization.'"

For more about the FTAA, check out the following links:

    * The Quebec part of the ZMagazine web site provides many articles, analysis and reports leading up to, during and since the FTAA protests, as well as numerous articles on first hand accounts from Quebec, and on neoliberal free trade in general.
    * The MAI Shell Game. This is a good primer on the FTAA, with comparisons to NAFTA.
    * A20.org Stop the FTAA web site provides information about the FTAA and is opposed to it. April 20, 2001 saw protests from some 20,000 people, in Quebec. Many links to other sites are provided as well as additional articles.
    * FTAA official web site
    * Free Trade Area of the Americas, by Karen Hansen-Kuhn, from The Development GAP, appearing in Foreign Policy In Focus Volume 6, Number 12 April 2001.
    * April Archives of the radio show Democracy Now! has a number of shows on the FTAA.
    * "Chasing the holy grail of free trade" from le Monde Diplomatique, April 2001, criticizes the FTAA.
    * The Preamble Center has a section on the FTAA. A noteworthy article of theirs includes:
          o This briefing paper entitled: "Recent Experiences with International Capital Markets: Lessons for the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)" explains well some of the problems we have seen in the Latin American and Asian financial crisis in the last few years and how still, the FTAA ignores these.
    * "Sovereign Corporations" by William Greider is an example of structuring inequality into law.
    * "Free Trade? Someone Always Has to Pay" by B.Kite, May 2, 2001, from Business Week looks at some of the realities.
    * "Brazil Increasingly Unenthusiastic about U.S. FTAA Proposals" by Matthew Flynn, Americas Program, February 1, 2002
    * "Many Oppose Trade Deal" by Marc Cooper, The Nation Magazine, February 11, 2002

NAFTA

A predecessor to the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) we have the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, set up by the United States of America, Canada and Mexico. It gives an indication of the potential impact a worldwide agreement like the MAI would have had if it had been allowed to formulate. Under the NAFTA agreement for example, corporations can sue a country if it is deemed to obstruct free trade. What could constitute an obstruction? Well, take the following for example:

    * Canada's attempt to protect its citizen's health from the effects of a fuel additive was overturned and deemed as an obstruction to free trade. Canada was sued by a US chemical manufacturing corporation that produces this additive.
    * Mexico wanted to prevent a hazardous waste disposal plant from being set up by a US firm. It also extended the proposed area into an environmental zone as it was found to be an ecologically sensitive area. That was enough for a US firm to claim grounds to sue under the NAFTA treaty. In fact, it turns out that Mexico is ordered to pay the US company $17 million.
    * A Canadian-based company, Methanex Corporation, filed against the United States, claiming that California's decision to phase out the use of its gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) cost the company 970 million dollars. There were potentially high levels of MTBE in California's drinking supply.

The priorities of aid and development, combined with trade agreements can also affect hunger, as the following quote illustrates:

[The] monolithic control over agricultural production, along with structural adjustment policies that brutally favor exports, results in floods of exports of foods from the United States and Europe to the Third World. As a result, of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the proportion of Mexico's food supply that is imported has increased from 20 percent in 1992 to 43 percent in 1996. After 18 months of NAFTA, 2.2 million Mexicans have lost their jobs, and 40 million have fallen into extreme poverty. One out of two peasants is not getting enough to eat. As Victor Suares has stated, "Eating more cheaply on imports is not eating at all for the poor in Mexico."

— Vandana Shiva, Stolen Harvest, (South End Press, 2000), p.9

(The above example is related to the issue of world hunger as well. Where trade agreements like this mean that more food is imported (and exported) in the name of trade, without first being allowed to meet the needs of the people, then local farmers are often undersold and driven out of business and national currencies earned do not get to circulate within that society. Hunger increases as a result. For more details on this, refer to this site's section on food dumping. For more about structural adjustment, visit this site's section on structural adjustment policies.)

The above examples just hint at environmental consequences but also reveal the potential impact on innocent citizens; while a country appears to have introduced some regulation that will help protect the health of the environment and its people, this can all be blown away by some agreement on the grounds that this prevents free trade.

Human Rights Watch for example, have also published a report that criticizes NAFTA's labor agreements as being ineffective.

These are the types of concerns that people have about the effects of the World Trade Organization, as well. It may be that market economies within regions could help nations develop, but they would need to be fair and equitable, taking into account various issues, such as the environment and labor considerations. If there is any imbalance there, then there is a downward pressure on those issues in the entire region. We see above just three examples, where each nation's environmental concerns are affected. Decreasing wages in Mexico is also having a downward pressure on some US wages, as corporations make more moves out of the US and set up in Mexico. This is less free markets and more mercantilism. Both Mexicans and Americans lose out. Corporations win.

As this Economic Policy Institute paper from April 2001 mentions, Mexican wages have decreased 27% since NAFTA, while hourly income from labor is down 40%.

(See also these collections of articles from the National Security Archives project from the George Washington University. It contains links to various documents from NAFTA's secret tribunals where decisions have favoured corporate threats to profit, over the laws of the three participating countries.)
The European Union and its Common Market

The European nations attempting to come together and form a more open status between them is an example of a free trade zone between like nations, that are equally developed. This is a possible scenario where free trade is beneficial, because of the equality between nations. It is not without its problems of course. However, it remains to be seen what direction this goes. For example, it is already noted how fortress Europe is already becoming more robust and closed off in some regards, such as in its treatment of immigrants.

If Europe can become truly unified, it will pose an even larger "threat" to American and Japanese economic dominance. Germany would be the main powerhouse supporting this (and that can give a hint at its involvement in the Baltic states in the last few years and how it is positioning itself). It also remains to be seen if they will use this opportunity to help capitalize the rest of the world, starting with the newly freed East European nations, or if they will mould them into dependent states, as with other colonized nations in the past, in order to extract resources cheaply. Germany's economic strength, proximity to East Europe and already increased involvement in Baltic affairs are hints towards these things. (Note that part of World War II was about German expansion into Eastern Europe and attempting to form such an empire. It is much less likely that such an explicit action is going to be repeated, as today's forms of globalization, if unchanged, risk leading to similar end results, with much less violent means.)

Given the Kosovo conflict, the US dominance of NATO, the inability of European forces to apparently do much without the US (possibly not a complete truth given the US insistence of control, or even bypassing NATO at some points), Europe is now considering other forms of regional security which would not include the US and NATO. This would also gear them up to be an even more powerful center of world capital than what it already is.
Free Trade between US and Africa

Some of the attempts and conditions suggested by USA in an effort to improve trade relationships and agreements with Africa have been criticized by South Africa and various NGOs as being "too much in favor of multinational corporations and foreign investors at the expense of the vast number of poor Africans."
US and Vietnam Trade Agreement

The US-Vietnam trade deal in the summer of 2000, is also about more economic liberalization of capital flows in and out of Vietnam (one of the things the US wanted to achieve in its war with that nation). US corporations stand to benefit.
Next/Previous Page Navigation

* « Previous Page Deregulation or Protectionism?
* Next Page Public Protests Around The World »

Other pages in this section

These are the pages within this section on this web site that you can also read.

    * Free Trade and Globalization
          o A Primer on Neoliberalism
          o Criticisms of Current Forms of Free Trade
          o The Mainstream Media and Free Trade
          o The WTO and Free Trade
          o WTO Meeting in Hong Kong, 2005
          o WTO July 2004 Package of Framework Agreements
          o WTO Meeting in Cancun, Mexico, 2003
          o WTO Meeting in Doha, Qatar, 2001
          o Deregulation or Protectionism?
          o You are here: Some Regional Free Trade Agreements
          o Public Protests Around The World
          o WTO Protests in Seattle, 1999
          o General Agreement on Trade in Services
          o Multilateral Agreement on Investment
          o Links for More Information

Site Information Links

    * Top of Page
    * Home
    * About This Site
    * Privacy
    * Site Map

Main Section Links

    * Human Rights
    * Geopolitics
    * Trade & Poverty
    * Environment

Page Utilities

* Email Page to a Friend
* Printer-Friendly Version

Author and Page Information

    * by Anup Shah
    * Created: Monday, September 07, 1998
    * Last Updated: Sunday, November 03, 2002

“Bad ideas flourish because they are in the interest of powerful groups” — Paul Krugman

    * Global Issues Home
    * What’s New
    * Trade-Related Issues
          o Causes of Poverty
          o Third World Debt
          o Free Trade
                + Neoliberalism
                + Criticisms
                + Mainstream Media
                + WTO
                + Hong Kong WTO Meeting
                + July 2004 Framework
                + Cancun WTO Meeting
                + Doha WTO Meeting
                + Deregulate or Protect
                + You are here: Regional Agreements
                + Public Protests
                + WTO Protests in Seattle, 1999
                + GATS
                + MAI
                + More Information
          o Corporations
          o Consumption and Consumerism
          o Sustainable Development
          o Fair Trade
    * Geopolitics
          o Arms Control
          o Arms Trade
          o Conflicts in Africa
          o Energy Security
          o International Criminal Court
          o The Middle East
          o War on Terror
          o Foreign Policy
          o Military Expansion
          o Children, Conflicts and the Military
          o Crisis in Chechnya
          o The Need for NATO
          o NATO and Kosovo
          o Crisis in East Timor
    * Human Rights Issues
          o Human Rights and Justice Issues
          o Mainstream Media
          o Racism
          o Women’s Rights
    * Environmental Issues
          o Biodiversity
          o Climate Change and Global Warming
          o Genetically Engineered Food
          o Human Population
          o Natural Disasters
          o Nature and Animal Conservation
    * Health Issues
          o Global Health Overview
          o Disease; Global Killers
          o AIDS
    * Other Things of Interest
          o Further Information and Resources
          o Favorite Quotes
          o Reading List
    * News Headlines
    * Site map
    * About this Web Site
          o Who am I, site funding, etc
          o Why?
          o Other FAQs
          o Site technical info & stats
          o Awards, partnerships, etc
          o Privacy Information
          o Copyright Information
          o Accessibility Statement

Feedback Volume may lead to slow response time, but please do send feedback Feedback
Free UpdatesFind Out MoreWeb Feed

Section: Free Trade and Globalization

    * Accessibility Statement
    * Skip straight to main content
    * Email Page to a Friend
    * Printer-Friendly Version
    * Set Text Preferences

Page Sign Post

You are here:

   1. Skip this sign post section
   2. Home
   3. Trade-Related Issues
   4. Free Trade

SearchSearch this siteOr Site Map
Free Trade and Globalization
Author and Page information

Skip this section and go straight to the main content

* by Anup Shah
* This Page Last Updated Monday, December 26, 2005

    * This page: http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade.asp.
    * To print full details (expanded/alternative links, side notes, etc.) use the printer-friendly version:
          o http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade.asp?p=1

It is yet another Civilized Power, with its banner of the Prince of Peace in one hand and its loot-basket and its butcher-knife in the other.

— Mark Twain, To the Person Sitting in Darkness, 1901, describing the United States playing the European-style imperialist game in the Philippines.

For globalism to work, America can't be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is....The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist -- McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

— Thomas Friedman, What the World Needs Now, New York Times, March 28, 1999. Quoted from Backing Up Globalization with Military Might

The world is becoming more globalized, there is no doubt about that. While that sounds promising, the current form of globalization, neoliberalism, free trade and open markets are coming under much criticism. The interests of powerful nations and corporations are shaping the terms of world trade. In democratic countries, they are shaping and affecting the ability of elected leaders to make decisions in the interests of their people. Elsewhere they are promoting narrow political discourse and even supporting dictatorships and the “stability” that it brings for their interests. This is to the detriment of most people in the world, while increasingly fewer people in proportion are prospering.

The western mainstream media, hardly provides much debate, gladly allowing this economic liberalism (a largely, but not only, politically conservative stance) to be confused with the term political liberalism (to do with progressive and liberal social political issues). Margaret Thatcher's slogan of “there is no alternative” rings sharply. Perhaps there is no alternative for such prosperity for a few, but what about a more equitable and sustainable development for all?
A Primer on Neoliberalism

Global trading that allows all nations to prosper and develop fairly and equitably is probably what most people would like to see. Neoliberalism is touted as the mechanism for this. Margaret Thatcher's TINA acronym suggested that There Is No Alternative. But what is neoliberalism, anyway? Find out more.
Criticisms of Current Forms of Free Trade

While internationalism and equitable global trading allowing fair development is probably what most people would like to see, the current model of corporate-led free trade and its version of globalization that has resulted, has come under criticism by many, many NGOs, developing nation governments and ordinary citizens. Find out more.
The Mainstream Media and Free Trade

The mainstream media has been flooded by free trade proponents and heavily backed by those that will profit from it the most. This makes public debate more difficult. Find out more.
The WTO and Free Trade

The World Trade Organization, (WTO), is the primary international body to help promote free trade, by drawing up the rules of international trade. It too has been criticized for being very opaque and not allowing enough public participation, while being very welcoming to large corporations. (That doesn't help the claims of free, open and democratic!) Criticisms have taken form in the shape of enormous protests in Seattle, in November 1999, of similar protests in Davos, Switzerland at the beginning of 2000 and there have also been increased campaigns for and against China's accession into the WTO, amongst many other issues to do with the WTO. Find out more.
WTO Meeting in Hong Kong, 2005 New!

December 2005 saw Hong Kong host the 4th World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial meeting. This meeting, one of the most important in the world, was to discuss a number of trade-related issues, key for developing and developed nations, alike. This meeting continues from the earlier “Doha round” where it was recognized that the global trading system was unequal and unfair for most of the world and so the meetings should place development at the fore. Thus this meeting is being billed as a “Development Round.” However, the concerns as per previous years continued to include the lack of transparency and democracy in the decision-making processes, and the power that the rich nations have over the poor distorting trade in their favor. The previous Ministerial meeting two years earlier collapsed as the developing world took a strong stance and stood up to the rich nations. Yet, since then, the same kinds of issues have resurfaced as rich nations appear to have hardly moved on their countless promises, pledges and obligations. As a result, and perhaps predictably, poorer countries were pressured to agree to a deal that did not really work in their favor. Find out more
WTO July 2004 Package of Framework Agreements

The World Trade Organization (WTO) July 2004 Package of Agreements Framework meeting was in response to the failure of the Cancun Ministerial Meetings in September 2003. However, these trade talks also resulted in more bullying and arm-twisting tactics from the richer, more powerful countries and regions, such as the EU and US. Find out more.
WTO Meeting in Cancun, Mexico

The 5th WTO Ministerial Conference in Cancun, Mexico was held in mid-September, 2003. Issues similar to those raised in Doha were raised again, with the accompanying controversies. The talks collapsed because rich countries refused to finish discussion on issues raised in previous meetings. Instead, they wanted to talk about new issues. Poorer countries wanted to finish discussion on the previous issues because it impacts them the most. While the talks failed, it was the first time the developing world took a united stance against the rich countries. Find out more.
WTO Meeting in Doha, Qatar

The 4th WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar was held in November 2001. But it was marred with controversy. Qatar was selected as the venue due to its repressive laws about the right to protest. Furthermore, both in the lead up to the meetings, and in the outcomes, developing countries on the whole had once again been marginalized and ignored. Find out more.
Deregulation or Protectionism?

Protectionism is often referred to as being a barrier to free trade. The word seems to conjure up negative images of isolationism and subsidizing industries that could otherwise not compete fairly against others. (This can help indicate why some industries would strongly support protectionism for themselves.) Complete deregulation allows corporations to benefit but at the possible expense of people in that nation or region if that deregulation means relaxation of environmental rules, health and educational services including control of natural resources and energy. (This hints at the powerful lure that the "freeing" of trade and liberalization of access to resources from regulation has to some proponents.) Neither seems to answer the notion of fairness, though. Often those nations that promote free trade for all, want protectionism for themselves. Find out more.
Some Regional Free Trade Agreements

There have been numerous regional free trade agreements. Some have been controversial, while others may be beneficial. Examples include the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), US attempts at free trade agreements with African nations and so on. Find out more.
Public Protests Around The World

As more and more people around the world are being negatively affected by the current corporate-led form of globalization, there are an increasing number of protests. While most have heard of the Seattle and Washington D.C. demonstrations against the WTO and the IMF/World Bank, respectively, there have been many around the world. Media portrayal by the corporate-owned mainstream of course, has been biased against the protestors. Find out more.
WTO Protests in Seattle

At the end of November 1999, Seattle saw major governments meet at a WTO ministerial meeting to discuss various trading rules. Seattle also saw free speech cracked down on in the name of free trade. Enormous public protests ensued. There were many differences in the perspectives of developing and industrialized nations on the current reality of free trade and how it affected them. It resulted in a WTO failure to agree on many issues, without adopting any resolutions. Developing countries were sidelined and one delegate even physically barred from a meeting. Find out more.
General Agreement on Trade in Services

A similar agreement to the derailed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) at the WTO has a potentially wide ramification for the poor and developing countries. Find out more.
Multilateral Agreement on Investment

We had a potential nightmare in the form of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). An almost secret agreement about investment rights and opening up nations for freer trade. However many, many people feared that this would be accompanied by grave social and environmental consequences, due to the wording of the MAI text. Find out more.
Next/Previous Page Navigation

* Next Page A Primer on Neoliberalism »

Other pages in this section

These are the pages within this section on this web site that you can also read.

    * You are here: Free Trade and Globalization
          o A Primer on Neoliberalism
          o Criticisms of Current Forms of Free Trade
          o The Mainstream Media and Free Trade
          o The WTO and Free Trade
          o WTO Meeting in Hong Kong, 2005
          o WTO July 2004 Package of Framework Agreements
          o WTO Meeting in Cancun, Mexico, 2003
          o WTO Meeting in Doha, Qatar, 2001
          o Deregulation or Protectionism?
          o Some Regional Free Trade Agreements
          o Public Protests Around The World
          o WTO Protests in Seattle, 1999
          o General Agreement on Trade in Services
          o Multilateral Agreement on Investment
          o Links for More Information

Site Information Links

    * Top of Page
    * Home
    * About This Site
    * Privacy
    * Site Map

Main Section Links

    * Human Rights
    * Geopolitics
    * Trade & Poverty
    * Environment

Page Utilities

* Email Page to a Friend
* Printer-Friendly Version

Author and Page Information

    * by Anup Shah
    * Created: Monday, September 07, 1998
    * Last Updated: Monday, December 26, 2005

“When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.” — Dom Helda Camara

    * Global Issues Home
    * What’s New
    * Trade-Related Issues
          o Causes of Poverty
          o Third World Debt
          o You are here: Free Trade
                + Neoliberalism
                + Criticisms
                + Mainstream Media
                + WTO
                + Hong Kong WTO Meeting
                + July 2004 Framework
                + Cancun WTO Meeting
                + Doha WTO Meeting
                + Deregulate or Protect
                + Regional Agreements
                + Public Protests
                + WTO Protests in Seattle, 1999
                + GATS
                + MAI
                + More Information
          o Corporations
          o Consumption and Consumerism
          o Sustainable Development
          o Fair Trade
    * Geopolitics
          o Arms Control
          o Arms Trade
          o Conflicts in Africa
          o Energy Security
          o International Criminal Court
          o The Middle East
          o War on Terror
          o Foreign Policy
          o Military Expansion
          o Children, Conflicts and the Military
          o Crisis in Chechnya
          o The Need for NATO
          o NATO and Kosovo
          o Crisis in East Timor
    * Human Rights Issues
          o Human Rights and Justice Issues
          o Mainstream Media
          o Racism
          o Women’s Rights
    * Environmental Issues
          o Biodiversity
          o Climate Change and Global Warming
          o Genetically Engineered Food
          o Human Population
          o Natural Disasters
          o Nature and Animal Conservation
    * Health Issues
          o Global Health Overview
          o Disease; Global Killers
          o AIDS
    * Other Things of Interest
          o Further Information and Resources
          o Favorite Quotes
          o Reading List
    * News Headlines
    * Site map
    * About this Web Site
          o Who am I, site funding, etc
          o Why?
          o Other FAQs
          o Site technical info & stats
          o Awards, partnerships, etc
          o Privacy Information
          o Copyright Information
          o Accessibility Statement

Feedback Volume may lead to slow response time, but please do send feedback Feedback
Free UpdatesFind Out MoreWeb Feed
Section: Free Trade and Globalization

    * Accessibility Statement
    * Skip straight to main content
    * Email Page to a Friend
    * Printer-Friendly Version
    * Set Text Preferences

Page Sign Post

You are here:

   1. Skip this sign post section
   2. Home
   3. Trade-Related Issues
   4. Free Trade
   5. Regional Agreements

SearchSearch this siteOr Site Map
Some Regional Free Trade Agreements
Author and Page information

Skip this section and go straight to the main content

* by Anup Shah
* This Page Last Updated Sunday, November 03, 2002

    * This page: http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/Regional.asp.
    * To print full details (expanded/alternative links, side notes, etc.) use the printer-friendly version:
          o http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/Regional.asp?p=1

Table of contents for this page

This web page has the following sub-sections:

    * Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)
    * NAFTA
    * The European Union and its Common Market
    * Free Trade between US and Africa
    * US and Vietnam Trade Agreement

Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)

April 2001, Quebec, Canada, saw a meeting of leaders from the hemisphere to discuss the FTAA.

— Karen Hansen-Kuhn, Free Trade Area of the Americas, The Development GAP, appearing in Foreign Policy In Focus Volume 6, Number 12 April 2001

For more about the FTAA, check out the following links:

NAFTA

The priorities of aid and development, combined with trade agreements can also affect hunger, as the following quote illustrates:

— Vandana Shiva, Stolen Harvest, (South End Press, 2000), p.9

Human Rights Watch for example, have also published a report that criticizes NAFTA's labor agreements as being ineffective.

As this Economic Policy Institute paper from April 2001 mentions, Mexican wages have decreased 27% since NAFTA, while hourly income from labor is down 40%.

* « Previous Page Deregulation or Protectionism?
* Next Page Public Protests Around The World »

Other pages in this section

These are the pages within this section on this web site that you can also read.

Site Information Links

    * Top of Page
    * Home
    * About This Site
    * Privacy
    * Site Map

Main Section Links

    * Human Rights
    * Geopolitics
    * Trade & Poverty
    * Environment

Page Utilities

* Email Page to a Friend
* Printer-Friendly Version

Author and Page Information

    * by Anup Shah
    * Created: Monday, September 07, 1998
    * Last Updated: Sunday, November 03, 2002

“Bad ideas flourish because they are in the interest of powerful groups” — Paul Krugman

Feedback Volume may lead to slow response time, but please do send feedback Feedback
Free UpdatesFind Out MoreWeb Feed

THE LIBERAL NEWS™ © Assisting single mothers by our 441 society plan. The Gospel Followers of JESUS CHRIST[sm]© Editor: Dr. Stephen-James Warner

Saving the World; One Person At A Time[sm] = Make Every Day Christmas; Every Night Christmas Eve!

FRONTPAGE

GOSPEL FOLLOWERS OF JESUS

PROTECT OUR TRADEMARK

Preface

Trustworthys

HONORABLE TRUST SITES

HON DYLAN RATTIGAN&CHENK

KEITH OLBERMANN

HONORABLES 2011

>>>>>WORTHY OF TRUST

HonorAwards

THE 441 SOCIETY

Financial

>>>>>OUR RESEARCH

Statistics=Factoids

SITE MISSION MAP CONTENT

GAO,CBO,CENSUS

>>>>>OUR BOOK REVIEWS

>>>>>WHAT ARE THE ISSUES

Opinion=Remarks

NegativeViews2Depressing

Gloom and Doom Grimms

theliberalnews.org!

the prophet?

The Dishonorables

DEMAGOGUE = BECK

Site Map

TV COMMERCIAL 4 REFORMS

ADVERTISING HONOR SYSTEM

911

BLOGS BLOGGER.COM

HEALTH-CARE PROFITEERING

STOP HEALTH MONOPOLY

HEALTH WAGE PRICE CONTROL

21ST CENTURY POL PARTY

PREJUDICE>FREE-MASONS

CYNIC'S CORRUPTION LIST

STOP SYSTEMIC CORRUPTION

NEED NATIONAL PROTESTS

DC MARCH LIVING WAGE JOB

UNIONS=LABOR ALLIANCES

RIGHT TO LIVING WAGE

BUY AMERICAN MOVEMENT

ECONOMIC CONVENTION PLAN

2011=USA MUST START OVER

OUTLAW OUTSOURCING

START REBUILD AMERICA

AlternativeEnergy=PickOne

Quick Use Energy Sources

CUTTING CARBON ILLUSION

Clean Coal Slurry

Coal Gasification Clean

High-Octane Furnaces

Co-generation Plants

Underground Nuclear

Uniform Nuclear Design

Windmill Design Invention

WINDMILL INVENTION NOW!

NEED FORBES FLAT TAX NOW!

CREATE NEW MANUFACTURING

BusinessIndustrialComplex

BANKS INVEST USA OR TAXED

STOP EXPORT US CAPITAL

AMERICA FIRST= INVESTMENT

SaveUSCapitalFutureInvest

USA REFORMS 2011

SOLUTIONS-REFORMS

Specific Solutions

Robotics

ANTI-TRUST LAWS> MONOPOLY

MONOPOLYvsFREE ENTERPRISE

CORP. MONOPOLIES RUN USA

USA A TWO-CLASS SOCIETY

TOP 10% GET 50% INCOME

NEW PARTY DEMS & REPS

NO REPUBLICANS OF OLD

DEBT DEFICIT FALSEHOOD

DEFICIT? TAX THE RICH