Financial Times FT.com

Why fairer trade does not mean an end to free trade

By John Sweeney

Published: November 29 2006 02:00 | Last updated: November 29 2006 02:00

There has been much lamentation in recent weeks that America could take a turn towards protectionism in the wake of the US mid-term elections. -Editorialists have weighed in with concerns that the new Congress will reject the so-called free trade policies of the Bush administration, stifling global growth and trampling the aspirations of the world's poor. "Free trade has definitely left the building," wrote Jacob Weisberg (Comment, Financial Times, November 8).

It is true that trade played a crucial role in the public debate leading up to the recent election. Many candidates who defeated incumbents on November 7 staked out positions critical of current US trade policy. They called for reorienting trade, tax and currency policies away from protecting the interests and profits of companies operating abroad. They argued in favour of policies that would support the creation and retention of good jobs in the US and its trading partners, strengthen workers' rights and environmental protections in trade agreements and defend the ability of national governments to regulate in the public interest. They vowed to press the Bush administration to enforce US and World Trade Organisation trade rules more aggressively with countries such as China that breach international trade and human rights obligations.

You have viewed your allowance of free articles. If you wish to view more, click the button below.

Read this