DOCSLIB.ORG

NAFTA, Globalization and Free Trade: Can the U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NAFTA, Globalization and Free Trade: Can the U.S Bridgewater Review Volume 37 | Issue 1 Article 5 Apr-2018 NAFTA, Globalization and Free Trade: Can the U.S. Maintain Leadership in the World Economy? Elmore R. Alexander Bridgewater State University, [email protected] Recommended Citation Alexander, Elmore R. (2018). NAFTA, Globalization and Free Trade: Can the U.S. Maintain Leadership in the World Economy?. Bridgewater Review, 37(1), 11-15. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/br_rev/vol37/iss1/5 This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. Nevertheless, international trade is NAFTA, Globalization and Free constantly attacked—every candidate (Republican and Democratic) in the Trade: Can the U.S. Maintain recent presidential election questioned trade policies. The most vocifer­ Leadership in the World Economy? ous attacks came from now President Donald Trump, who labeled the North Elmore R. Alexander American Free Trade Agreement uring election season in 2002, in an MBA (NAFTA) the worst trade agreement ever negotiated. course on global management I was teaching Can we reconcile the positive effects of Dat Philadelphia University, I identified trade since World War II with current competitive U.S. congressional races where the issue sentiments in America? More impor­ tantly, are we headed toward a sort of of globalization was relevant. The students then protectionism comparable to that expe­ focused on these races to develop comprehensive rienced during the Great Depression? analyses of the candidates’ positions and understanding The Rise of of globalization. The results were telling: the Anti-Globalization candidates who were judged by the students to Nationalist sentiment is on the rise. understand globalization best lost every single race. The shock of the United Kingdom’s June 2016 “Brexit” vote was fol­ This is the quandary of globalization— refuse to pay more for a U.S. product.1 lowed by Donald Trump’s election it involves complex issues that neither In reality, international trade has been a on a populist­nationalist agenda. The political leaders nor the general public positive force since World War II. Trade trend continued across Europe from completely understand. While 70 per­ has expanded, global living standards the Czech Republic to Hungary, cent of Americans think it is important have improved dramatically, and mil­ Poland and Rumania. While there have to buy US products, 37 percent would lions world­wide have escaped poverty.2 been recalibrations with Emmanuel April 2018 11 Macron’s May 2017 defeat of right­ United States experienced its first pro­ Businesses and members of the skilled wing populist Marine Le Pen in France ductivity decline since 1982, which has workforce have typically benefited; in and the victory of Angela Merkel’s created an economic recovery without contrast, lower­skilled workers have centrist Christian Democratic Union in wage growth.4 The final dynamic to typically been hurt. In reality, a sub­ Germany, Merkel is still struggling to consider is the decline in global trade. stantial proportion of the job losses are form a stable government, and nation­ Global trade hit its apex in 2008. U.S. attributable to automation as opposed alistic rhetoric has not disappeared. It is trade actually declined $500 billion to trade. Nevertheless, only 35 per­ important to understand the underlying in 2016.5` Growth is occurring only in cent of workers think that the U.S. has dynamics of the movement as well as restricted industrial and geographic benefited from globalization while 55 the experience of workers in the cur­ sectors. In 1975, 109 firms accounted percent believe that we have lost.9 Given rent economy. for one­half of U.S. profits. By 2015, these trends and the experience of the workforce, the rise of nationalist senti­ ment is not surprising. U.S. agriculture depends heavily The Current State of U.S. Trade Policy on agricultural exports to Mexico Upon taking office, President Trump withdrew from the Trans­Pacific ($18B) and Canada ($23B). If Partnership (TPP) negotiations, a NAFTA were to expire, tariffs on proposed trade agreement that would have linked the U.S. economy to 12 agricultural products (currently countries in the Asia­Pacific region and North America. Next, he began at zero) would jump dramatically renegotiating NAFTA and threaten­ ing action on numerous bilateral fronts and bring devastation to from Korea to China. The President’s rhetoric has been loud and aggressive, midwestern farmers. especially as it has concerned NAFTA. Indeed, NAFTA has been controver­ sial in North America, ever since it was signed with Canada and Mexico Underlying Dynamics that number had fallen to 30. In 2015, 75 percent of U.S. venture capital went in 1993. The agreement consists of six There are three underlying dynamics to just four metropolitan areas—New basic provisions: a) the elimination that must be considered. The first of York City, Boston, Los Angeles and San of duties and tariffs for goods traded these involves recent declines in popu- Francisco.6 Today, American companies between the three countries; b) the lation growth rates. The post­World seem to be more risk averse, choosing protection of the foreign direct invest­ War II period saw dramatic population to redistribute capital to shareholders ment of the three countries; c) the growth creating a young demographic. rather than investing in growth. protection of intellectual property; d) Recently, growth rates have declined in ensuring ease of movement for business the developed world, resulting in an The Experience of travelers; e) mechanisms for independ­ older demographic. Japan and China the Workforce ent resolution of trade disputes; and f) face the toughest challenges, but nine freer access to government procure­ In addition, the American workforce of the 56 largest countries are already ment for suppliers from each coun­ is undergoing significant change. dangerously older.3 The second try.10 The details are complicated and Manufacturing employment fell by dy namic is equally important: there controversial. With the exception of between six and seven million jobs in has been stagnation in worker produc- the provisions for dispute resolution the 2000s. The average income for the tivity. Productivity growth surged and the definition of what constitutes a bottom 90 percent of families has been during the “dot com” bubble. NAFTA­compliant product, however, stagnant since 1980, and wage growth However, since 2007, productivity the disputes that have emerged among has been one­half the rate of produc­ growth has been just one­half of that the partners since 1993 have focused tivity growth.7 Much of this has been experienced since 1945. In 2016, the more on outcomes than on the specific blamed on international trade. Clearly, provisions of the agreement. there are winners and losers from trade.8 12 Bridgewater Review Why is NAFTA so significant? NAFTA the U.S. labor force, a miniscule num­ NAFTA: The Negotiations combined two developed economies ber when compared to recent monthly The initial NAFTA renegotiation with a developing one (a first in mod­ job growth of approximately 150,000 process in the spring and summer of ern trade history). More concretely, it jobs. Furthermore, U.S. states with a 2017 was very positive. Congressional encompasses fully one quarter of global higher proportion of NAFTA trade hearings were held soliciting input trade.11 Interestingly, most NAFTA have a higher involvement in advanced from a wide variety of interest groups. trade is focused on “intermediate manufacturing, and the jobs created Seasoned trade professionals who had goods” (components that make up by NAFTA pay 15 to 20 percent more been a part of the original NAFTA parts of finished goods). For example, than the jobs that were lost.15 negotiations were appointed to han­ automotive components cross U.S.­ Has NAFTA increased trade deficits? dle the talks. The announced objec­ Canadian and U.S.­Mexican borders First, there is not a deficit with Canada. tives were thoughtful and moderate, approximately eight times before a The exact number varies from slightly and reflected the interests of both completed car reaches a U.S. show­ positive to slightly negative from year Republicans and Democrats.18 They room.12 This illustrates the economic concept of “comparative advantage.” to year. With Mexico, trade has moved focus on four goals: a) higher­paying Each country specializes in what it does from a surplus of $1.7 billion before the U.S. jobs; b) growing the U.S. econ­ best, yielding a higher­quality and less­ agreement took effect to a deficit of omy; c) reducing the trade deficit; and expensive product and raising the Gross $61.2 billion in 2016.16 The intermedi­ d) trade rule enforcement reform. The Domestic Products of all. The resulting ate trade effect (percentage of imported first negotiation rounds resulted in integrated North American economy is products with U.S. components), how­ agreement on many issues including primed to compete in Asia, Europe and ever, means that that the deficit is closer those involving the environment, tel­ the rest of the world. to $30 billion. While that number may ecommunications, digital trade, small­ seem worrisome, consider the larger and medium­sized businesses, and In the past 25 years, trade among the context keeping in mind that it is only services.19 Even the rhetoric surround­ three NAFTA countries has increased about 5 percent of our overall trade ing the negotiations was positive. threefold—from approximately $300 deficit. Trade deficits do not result from billion in 1993 to $1.1 trillion in 2016.13 Then things became complicated. trade agreements. They are macroeco­ The integration of the three economies In late fall 2017, the U.S. began nomic phenomena caused by low U.S. is dramatic. Forty­five percent of the mak ing untenable demands on the consumer savings and the attractive­ value of U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements
    This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: International Trade in East Asia, NBER-East Asia Seminar on Economics, Volume 14 Volume Author/Editor: Takatoshi Ito and Andrew K. Rose, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-37896-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/ito_05-1 Conference Date: September 5-7, 2003 Publication Date: August 2005 Title: The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Author: Philippa Dee, Jyothi Gali URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c0193 5 The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Philippa Dee and Jyothi Gali The number of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) has grown dra- matically over the last decade or so. By the end of March 2002, there were 250 agreements in force that had been notified to the World Trade Organi- zation (WTO), compared with 40 in 1990 (WTO 2002). The coverage of preferential trading arrangements has also tended to expand over time. The preferential liberalization of tariffs and other mea- sures governing merchandise trade remains important in many agreements. But they increasingly cover a range of other issues—services, investment, competition policy, government procurement, e-commerce, labor, and en- vironmental standards. This paper examines, both theoretically and empirically, the effects of the trade and nontrade provisions of PTAs on the trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) flows of member and nonmember countries. 5.1 Theoretical Review The first wave of PTAs in the 1950s to 1970s were generally limited in scope, with preferential liberalization of merchandise trade playing a cen- tral role (the European Union [EU] was an important early exception).
    [Show full text]
  • The Oppressive Pressures of Globalization and Neoliberalism on Mexican Maquiladora Garment Workers
    Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee Volume 9 Issue 1 Article 7 July 2019 The Oppressive Pressures of Globalization and Neoliberalism on Mexican Maquiladora Garment Workers Jenna Demeter The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons, Economic History Commons, Gender and Sexuality Commons, Growth and Development Commons, Income Distribution Commons, Industrial Organization Commons, Inequality and Stratification Commons, International and Comparative Labor Relations Commons, International Economics Commons, International Relations Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Labor and Employment Law Commons, Labor Economics Commons, Latin American Studies Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Macroeconomics Commons, Political Economy Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, Public Economics Commons, Regional Economics Commons, Rural Sociology Commons, Unions Commons, and the Work, Economy and Organizations Commons Recommended Citation Demeter, Jenna (2019) "The Oppressive Pressures of Globalization and Neoliberalism on Mexican Maquiladora Garment Workers," Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee: Vol. 9 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit/vol9/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by
    [Show full text]
  • Globalization: What Did We Miss?
    Globalization: What Did We Miss? Paul Krugman March 2018 Concerns about possible adverse effects from globalization aren’t new. In particular, as U.S. income inequality began rising in the 1980s, many commentators were quick to link this new phenomenon to another new phenomenon: the rise of manufactured exports from a group of newly industrializing economies. Economists – trade economists, anyway – took these concerns seriously. After all, standard models of international trade do say that trade can have large effects on income distribution: the famous 1941 Stolper-Samuelson analysis of a two-good, two-factor economy showed how trading with a labor-abundant economy can reduce real wages, even if national income grows. There was every reason to believe that the same principle applied to the emergence of trade with low-wage economies exporting not raw materials but manufactured goods. And so during the 1990s a number of economists, myself included (Krugman 1995), tried to assess the role of Stolper-Samuelson-type effects in rising inequality. Inevitably given the standard framework, such analyses did in fact find some depressing effect of growing trade on the wages of less-educated workers in advanced countries. As a quantitative matter, however, they generally suggested that the effect was relatively modest, and not the central factor in the widening income gap. Meanwhile, the political salience of globalization seemed to decline as other issues came to the fore. So academic interest in the possible adverse effects of trade, while it never went away, waned. 1 In the past few years, however, worries about globalization have shot back to the top of the agenda, partly due to new research, partly due to the political shocks of Brexit and Trump.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update
    The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update Note Version 2.00 Abstract This document provides an update to the technical documentation for the Dynamic Gravity dataset, describing changes from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00. For full descrip- tion of the contents and construction of the dataset, see full technical documentation for Version 1.00 on the dataset page at https://www.usitc.gov/data/gravity/dgd.htm. This documentation is the result of ongoing professional research of USITC Staff and is solely meant to represent the opinions and professional research of individual authors. It is not meant to represent in any way the views of the U.S. International Trade Commission or any of its individual Commissioners. It is circulated to promote the active exchange of ideas between USITC Staff and recognized experts outside the USITC, professional development of Office Staff and increase data transparency by encouraging outside professional critique of staff research. Please address all correspondence to [email protected]. 1 1 Introduction The Dynamic Gravity dataset contains a collection of variables describing aspects of countries and territories as well as the ways in which they relate to one-another. Each record in the dataset is defined by a pair of countries or territories and a year. The records themselves are composed of three basic types of variables: identifiers, unilateral character- istics, and bilateral characteristics. The updated dataset spans the years 1948{2019 and reflects the dynamic nature of the globe by following the ways in which countries have changed during that period. The resulting dataset covers 285 countries and territories, some of which exist in the dataset for only a subset of covered years.1 1.1 Contents of the Documentation The updated note begins with a description of main changes to the dataset from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00 in section 1.2 and a table of variables available in Version 1.00 and Version 2.00 of the dataset in section 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • 10Chapter Trade Policy in Developing Countries
    M10_KRUG3040_08_SE_C10.qxd 1/10/08 7:26 PM Page 250 10Chapter Trade Policy in Developing Countries o far we have analyzed the instruments of trade policy and its objectives without specifying the context—that is, without saying much about the Scountry undertaking these policies. Each country has its own distinctive history and issues, but in discussing economic policy one difference between countries becomes obvious: their income levels. As Table 10-1 suggests, nations differ greatly in their per-capita incomes. At one end of the spectrum are the developed or advanced nations, a club whose members include Western Europe, several countries largely settled by Europeans (including the United States), and Japan; these countries have per-capita incomes that in many cases exceed $30,000 per year. Most of the world’s population, however, live in nations that are substantially poorer. The income range among these developing countries1 is itself very wide. Some of these countries, such as Singapore, are in fact on the verge of being “graduated” to advanced country status, both in terms of official statistics and in the way they think about themselves. Others, such as Bangladesh, remain desperately poor. Nonetheless, for virtually all developing countries the attempt to close the income gap with more advanced nations has been a central concern of economic policy. Why are some countries so much poorer than others? Why have some coun- tries that were poor a generation ago succeeded in making dramatic progress, while others have not? These are deeply disputed questions, and to try to answer them—or even to describe at length the answers that economists have proposed over the years—would take us outside the scope of this book.
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Trade in a Wal-Mart World: What Does Globalization Portend for the Triple Bottom Line?
    Chicago-Kent Journal of International and Comparative Law Volume 14 Issue 2 Article 1 1-1-2014 Fair Trade in a Wal-Mart World: What Does Globalization Portend for the Triple Bottom Line? Linda L. Barkacs Craig B. Barkacs Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjicl Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Linda L. Barkacs & Craig B. Barkacs, Fair Trade in a Wal-Mart World: What Does Globalization Portend for the Triple Bottom Line?, 14 Chi.-Kent J. Int'l & Comp. Law 1 (2014). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjicl/vol14/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Journal of International and Comparative Law by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Article Fair Trade in a Wal-Mart World: What Does Globalization Portend for the Triple Bottom Line? Linda L. Barkacs* & Craig B. Barkacs** Abstract Globalization is characterized by such business practices as aggressive outsourcing, ultra-efficient logistics, and the relentless pursuit of cheap labor. Conversely, “fair trade” is an economic and social movement that works through private enforcement mechanisms to ensure that transnational supply chains do not exploit human and social rights.1 Accordingly, fair trade practices are very much in accord with the well-known “triple bottom line” goals of looking out for people, planet, and profits.
    [Show full text]
  • FTA Tariff Tool New Online Tool Highlights Tariff Benefits of Free Trade Agreements for American Businesses
    U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration FTA Tariff Tool New Online Tool Highlights Tariff Benefits of Free Trade Agreements for American Businesses http://www.export.gov/FTA/FTATariffTool/ • Are you an exporter seeking a market where the United States The FTA Tariff Tool: has an existing competitive advantage? • Are you spending time looking through pages of legal texts • consolidates and distills tariff to figure out the tariff under a trade agreement for your schedules down to a simple products? search function • Would you like to perform instant and at-a-glance searches • allows users to see how for trade and tariff trends in one easily accessed location particular sectors are treated online? under the agreements or recent trends in exports to the trade The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Tariff Tool will ease your exporting agreement partner markets process and could help you increase your exports to U.S. trade agreement partner markets. It will streamline your industrial and • helps reduce costs and consumer product tariff searches by making information on tariff uncertainty for U.S. businesses benefits companies receive under U.S. trade agreements more accessible. The FTA Tariff Tool consolidates and condenses trade, tariff and sectoral information into a user-friendly public interface. The tool is provided free of charge by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Businesses are able to see the current and future tariffs applied to their products, as well as the date on which those products become duty free. By combining sector and product groups, trade data, and the tariff elimination schedules, users can also analyze how various sectors are treated across multiple trade agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook on Preferential Market Access for Asean Least Developed Countries
    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK ON PREFERENTIAL MARKET ACCESS FOR ASEAN LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES Part III: ASEAN-FTA Agreements Layout and Printing at United Nations, Geneva – 2017833 (E) – March 2021 – 730 – UNCTAD/ALDC/2019/5 “Mazzarello - geometrie del dare, nuovo futuro” is the work of Maurizio Cancelli. Its architectural perspective emphasizes the interactions of governments, societies and economies from around the globe under the United Nations Framework. This collaboration highlights the earth, its resources and potentials, and fosters a recognition of local communities and their right to exist in their places of origin, with their own distinction and diversity. Maurizio Cancelli started his artistic research on the right to live in one’s place of birth more than thirty years ago. His work is inspired by the mountainous terrain surrounding the village of Cancelli in the heart of Umbria, Italy. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK ON PREFERENTIAL MARKET ACCESS FOR ASEAN LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES Part III: ASEAN-FTA Agreements Geneva, 2021 © 2021, United Nations This work is available through open access, by complying with the Creative Commons licence created for intergovernmental organizations, at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its officials or Member States. The designations employed and the presentation of material on any map in this work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Life of Things: Globalization & Fair Trade
    Social Life of Things: Globalization & Fair Trade DR. BALMURLI NATRAJAN PRESENTATION AT RAMAPO COLLEGE, NJ OCTOBER 26, 2018 The Globe in our Hand…? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBCHcnvwfzA (42 s) 1. Globalization is latest phase of Capitalism 1. FLOWS 2. CONNECTIONS 3. INEQUALITY Globalization: Flows 2-minute 1-slide view of Capitalism and Gobalization Colonialism, Slavery ---------- Decolonial Wars ----------- Neocolonialism--------------Neoliberal Globalization Industrialist capitalists Fordism / Assembly MNCs on Rise Line Investment Bretton Woods bankers / Banks for monopoly Institutions Global capitalists / Free Crisis & finance Trade doctrines World Wars Merchant capitalists 1400 – 1770s 1770 - 1870 1850s 1900s 1914-1950s 1970s - present Globalization As Flows capital higher volume images/ideas Longer distance flows more freedom goods/services More volatile flows greater speed technology/ Highly uneven flows knowledge people Globalization: Connections Coffee: Bean to Cup Fries: Potato to Plate Globalization: Inequalities Also: World Institute of Development Economics and Research (WIDER) report http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/working-papers/research-papers/2007/en_GB/rp2007-01/ Income growth over time for Fractiles, USA http://www.epi.org/publication/pay-corporate-executives-financial-professionals/ https://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/world-s-top-100-economies-31-countries-69-corporations CEOs and the average worker pay, USA 2. Capitalism Mystifies Itself 1. PRODUCER/CONSUMER 2. PROFITS 3. FREEDOM PRODUCERS CONSUMERS D I V I D I N G W A L L “…a definite social relation between men [sic], that assumes, in their eyes, the fantastic form of a relation between things” Karl Marx, Capital v 1. ch 1, section 4 D e m y s t i f i c a t i o n http://www.theyesmen.org/ https://antiadvertisingagency.com/ 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalization and Varieties of Capitalism: Lessons for Latin America
    Robert Schuman Globalization and Varieties of Capitalism: Lessons for Latin America Sebastián Royo Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 8 No. 18 September 2008 Published with the support of the EU Commission. The Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series The Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series is produced by the Jean Monnet Chair of the University of Miami, in cooperation with the Miami-Florida European Union Center of Excellence, a partnership with Florida International University (FIU). These monographic papers analyze ongoing developments within the European Union as well as recent trends which influence the EU’s relationship with the rest of the world. Broad themes include, but are not limited to: ♦ EU Enlargement ♦ The Evolution of the Constitutional Process ♦ The EU as a Global Player ♦ Comparative Regionalisms ♦ The Trans-Atlantic Agenda ♦ EU-Latin American Relations ♦ Economic issues ♦ Governance ♦ The EU and its Citizens ♦ EU Law As the process of European integration evolves further, the Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Papers is intended to provide current analyses on a wide range of issues relevant to the EU. The overall purpose of the monographic papers is to contribute to a better understanding of the unique nature of the EU and the significance of its role in the world. Miami - Florida European Union Center Jean Monnet Chair Staff University of Miami Joaquín Roy (Director) 1000 Memorial Drive Astrid Boening (Associate Director) 101 Ferré Building María Lorca (Associate Editor) Coral Gables, FL 33124-2231 Phone: 305-284-3266
    [Show full text]
  • Free Trade Agreement with Serbia
    FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION AND ITS MEMBER STATES, OF THE ONE PART, AND THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA, OF THE OTHER PART The Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter referred to as “the EAEU”) and the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as “the EAEU Member States”), of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter referred to as “Serbia”), of the other part: BUILDING UPON free trade relations previously established between the Republic of Serbia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation; SEEKING to promote and deepen mutual trade and economic cooperation between the EAEU Member States and Serbia in the areas of mutual interest; CONFIRMING their commitment to the principles of market economy, as the basis for trade and economic relations, and their intention to participate actively and to encourage expansion of mutually beneficial trade and economic relations between the EAEU Member States and Serbia; CREATING the necessary conditions for the free movement of goods and capital in accordance with the Law of the EAEU, laws and regulations of the EAEU Member States and Serbia, as well as the rules of the World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as “the WTO”); EXPRESSING their readiness and full support to the successful accession to the WTO and recognizing that the WTO membership of the EAEU and the Republic of Belarus and of Serbia will create favourable conditions
    [Show full text]
  • Itc) for the Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Lldcs
    STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE (ITC) FOR THE MEETING OF THE MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF LLDCS PARTNERING FOR ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VIENNA PROGRAMME OF ACTION FOR LLDCS AND ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN LLDCS IN THE ERA OF COVID-19 TUESDAY, 23 SEPT 2020 DOROTHY TEMBO ACTING EXECUTIVE DORECTOR Your Excellency Minister Tileuberdi, Chair of the Group of LLDCs, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Excellencies, During this period of continued uncertainty, it is important to recall the most essential ingredients of resilience: partnership, technical collaboration, and the stability of the multilateral system. The Vienna Programme of Action for LLDCs (VPoA) remains a central actionable component of helping LLDCs to meet the SDGs and building back better for the ‘new normal’. As the joint agency of the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, the International Trade Centre is fully committed to supporting the implementation of the VPoA through enhancing trade in LLDCs and their transit countries. Our approach is focused on assisting micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) to connect to global markets, and for that we work closely with private sector institutions. ITC contributes to two of the six priority areas of the VPoA: 1) International trade and trade facilitation, and 2) Regional integration and cooperation. Since 2014, ITC has implemented more than 40 projects for almost all LLDCs including our global projects such as of public goods on data and intelligence. Still, in this period of COVID-19, we have seen demand for trade related assistance increasing as LLDCs and their MSMEs seek help in coping with the pandemic.
    [Show full text]