from Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies

U.S. Trade Strategy: Free Versus Fair

A Critical Policy Choice

Report

Overview

Trade is an issue of growing importance that lies at the intersection of two of the biggest concerns facing the American people: the economy and foreign policy. Today, trade policy affects more issues on the U.S. political agenda than ever before; at the same time, the decisions Washington makes have a great impact on the United States and the world.

Daniel W. Drezner

Professor of International Politics, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University

This Critical Policy Choice, in the form of a memorandum to the president, suggests two distinct approaches that the United States could take on trade policy. The first approach—“Free Trade”—argues that American prosperity and security are best served by aggressively seeking to lower trade barriers, even if it means that some industries lose out. The second approach—“Fair Trade”—contends that the economic benefits of freer trade are overstated and that the U.S. government should slow or even halt efforts to lower trade barriers in order to promote goals such as community stability and income security. The policy options in this book are accompanied by four white papers that examine the major issues in the trade debate and explore the relevant challenges in greater detail.

More on:

Trade

United States

More on:

Trade

United States

 

More on:

Trade

United States

Top Stories on CFR

Middle East and North Africa

CFR experts Steven A. Cook and David J. Scheffer join Amnesty International’s Agnes Callamard and Refugee International’s Jeremy Konyndyk to discuss the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Japan

The highlights from Kishida Fumio's busy week in Washington.

Genocide and Mass Atrocities

Thirty years ago, Rwanda’s government began a campaign to eradicate the country’s largest minority group. In just one hundred days in 1994, roving militias killed around eight hundred thousand people. Would-be killers were incited to violence by the radio, which encouraged extremists to take to the streets with machetes. The United Nations stood by amid the bloodshed, and many foreign governments, including the United States, declined to intervene before it was too late. What got in the way of humanitarian intervention? And as violent conflict now rages at a clip unseen since then, can the international community learn from the mistakes of its past?