[BRIEF NOTE] Partners?
Feb. 27th, 2008 09:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldFrom The Globe and Mail, John Ibbitson's article "Clinton and Obama vow to reopen NAFTA".
Talk of renegotiating an unfair and threatening NAFTA seems to be, in the United States' political lexicon, some sort of trope for an unfair and threatening economic relationship with the world in general, somewhat like free trade for some Canadians. Still. Is it wrong for me to be suspicious of the United States' willingness to renegotiate NAFTA fairly, especially with one partner that has a tenth of the United States' population and the other with a third of the United States' population and a third or so of the larger country's GDP per capita, both of these members being much more dependent on trade with the United States than vice versa, especially in light of the United States' demonstrated reluctance to abide by many of the rulings of the various tribunals involved in NAFTA?
Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would withdraw the United States from the North American free trade agreement with six months notice after becoming president, unless the deal were completely renegotiated.
The Democrats made the commitment yesterday at the final debate before next Tuesday's Texas and Ohio primaries.
Both candidates have been highly critical of the trade deal, saying it has cost thousands of Americans their jobs.
Asked whether she would inform Canada and Mexico that the U.S. government was activating the six-month opt-out clause under which any country can leave the deal, Ms. Clinton replied: "I've said that I will renegotiate NAFTA, so obviously we'd have to say to Canada and Mexico that that's exactly what we're going to do; ... we will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it."
Ms. Clinton would demand new environmental and labour provisions as well as a new dispute-resolution mechanism, and she would eliminate the right of foreign firms to sue Washington for enacting measures to protect its workers.
All those demands would be negotiated with Canada and Mexico while the six-month opt-out clock ticked.
Talk of renegotiating an unfair and threatening NAFTA seems to be, in the United States' political lexicon, some sort of trope for an unfair and threatening economic relationship with the world in general, somewhat like free trade for some Canadians. Still. Is it wrong for me to be suspicious of the United States' willingness to renegotiate NAFTA fairly, especially with one partner that has a tenth of the United States' population and the other with a third of the United States' population and a third or so of the larger country's GDP per capita, both of these members being much more dependent on trade with the United States than vice versa, especially in light of the United States' demonstrated reluctance to abide by many of the rulings of the various tribunals involved in NAFTA?
