Abstract
Part III addressed how convergence of policy making elites toward market democracies provided an ideological base for the development of a hemispheric free trade area. However, while this convergence facilitated preliminary dialogues, the successful implementation of the idea still depended on the sustained political commitment of all parties involved, particularly of the United States and Brazil. This chapter shifts the focus from the international to the domestic level to explore why in the United States the FTAA idea did not attract sufficient political support to transform it into an effective policy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For a discussion on the development of multilateralism and its principles of conduct, see John G. Ruggie, “Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution,” in Multilateralism Matters. The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), 3–47.
For a history of the USTR, see Steve Dryden, Trade Warriors. USTR and the American Crusade for Free Trade (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1995).
Marcus Noland, “Chasing Phantoms. The Political Economy of USTR,” International Organization 51.3 (Summer 1997), 367.
Jon E. Huenemann, “On the Trade Policy-Making Process in the United States,” The Trade Policy-Making Process. Level One of the Two-Level Game: Country Studies in the Western Hemisphere, ed. Inter-American Development Bank, Inter-American Dialogue and Munk Centre for International Studies (Buenos Aires: INTAL, ITD, STA, 2002), 67–73.
Michael Mastanduno, “The United States Political System and International Leadership: A ‘Decidedly Inferior’ Form of Government?,” Paper presented at the Darmouth College-International House of Japan Conference, “The United States and Japan on the Eve of the 21st Century: Prospects for Joint Leadership,” June 27–28, 1994. Reprinted in American Foreign Policy. Theoretical Essays, ed. G. John Ikenberry (London; Boston: Scott, Foreman and Co., 1989), 243.
See James M. McLindsay, Congress and the Politics of US Foreign Policy (London; Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).
Max Weber, “Parlamentarismo e Governo numa Alemanha Reconstruída,” in Ensaios de Sociologia e OutrosEscritos, trans. Mauricio Tragtenberg (Sao Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1974), 32.
On the role of bureaucrats in advocating and creating policies in Europe, see Hugh Heclo, Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden. From Relief to Income Maintenance (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1974).
Joel Aberbach, Robert Putnam, and Bert Rockman, Bureaucrats and Politicians in Western Democracies (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), 16–23.
For a detailed historical comparative study on the evolution of bureaucratic structures, including France, Japan, the United States and Great Britain, see Bernard Silberman, Cages of Reason: the Rise of the Rational State in France, Japan, the United States, and Great Britain (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1993).
Margareth Weir, “Ideas and the Politics of Bounded Innovation,” in Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Perspective, ed. Sven Steinmo, Katheen Thelen, and Frank Longstreth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 192–193; Silberman, Cages of Reason, 227–283.
For a study on the institutional development and structure of the White House, and the institutional leadership performance of various presidents in the United States, see John P. Burke, The Institutional Presidency, Organizing and Managing the White House from FDR to Clinton, 2nd ed. (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000).
Graham T. Allison, Essence of Decision. Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Boston: Little Brown, 1971).
Stephen D. Krasner, “Are Bureaucracies Important? (Or Allison Wonderland),” Foreign Policy 7 (Summer 1971).
Reprinted in G. John Ikenberry, American Foreign Policy. Theoretical Essays (London; Boston: Scott, Foreman and Co., 1989), 419–433.
Sharyn O”Halloran, Politics, Process and American Trade Policy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994), 2.
Judith Goldstein, Ideas, Interests, and American Trade Policy (Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press, 1993).
For a classic study of the domestic interests and pressure politics leading to the Smoot-Hawley Act, see E.E. Schattschneider, Politics, Pressure, and the Tariff: a Study of Free Private Enterprise in Pressure Politics, as Shown in the 1929–1930 Revision of the Tariff (Hamnden: Archon Books, 1935).
Karen E. Schnietz, “The Institutional Foundation of U.S. Trade Policy: Revisiting Explanations for the 1934 Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act,” Journal of Policy History 12.4 (2000), 418.
In 1936, the United States signed its first international agreement for monetary cooperation—the Tripartite Agreement—with Great Britain and France. See Jeff Frieden, “Sectoral Conflict and U.S. Foreign Economic Policy, 1914–1940,” International Organization 42.1 (Winter 1988), 59–90.
W. Michael Weis, “Pan American Shift: Oswaldo Aranha and the Demise of the Brazilian-American Alliance,” in Beyond the Ideal. Pan-Americanism in Inter-American Affairs, ed. David Shenin (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000), 138.
Various authors describe the RTAA as a congressional choice to diminish the burden of tariff legislation and the continuous political pressures from interest groups. Destler credits the change to the decision of Congress to get out of “the business of making product-specific trade law,” in I.M. Destler, American Trade Politics, 4th ed. (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2005), 13.
Robert A. Pastor, Congress and the Politics of US Foreign Economic Policy 1929–1976 (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1980).
Robert A. Pastor and Rafael Fernandez de Castro, eds., The Controversial Pivot: The US Congress and North America (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1998).
George Myconos, The Globalizaytions of Organized Labour: 1945–2005 (Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 53.
See Robert A. Pastor, “Cry-and-Sigh Syndrome: Congress and Trade Policy,” in Making Economic Policy in Congress, ed. Allen Schick (London; Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1983), 165–167.
Michael J. Hiscox, “The Magic Bullet? The RTAA, Institutional Reform, and Trade Liberalization,” International Organization 53.4 (Autumn 1999), 669–698.
Gilbert Winham, International Trade and the Tokyo Round Negotiation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986), 131.
Dick K. Nanto and Thomas Lum, “US International Trade: Data and Forecasts,” Congressional Research Service Report No.IB96038 (Washington, DC: U.S. Library of Congress/CRS, 2003).
John W. Sloan, The Reagan Effect. Economics and Presidential Leadership (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1999), 205.
Miguel Rodriguez Mendoza, “Latin America and the US Trade and Tariff Act,” Journal of World Trade Law 20.1 (January-February 1986), 47–60.
For an analysis of the value placed in the ideal of multilateralism in the United States, see John Ruggie, “Third Try at World Order? America and Multilateralism after the Cold War,” Political Science Quarterly 109.4 (1994), 553–570.
Charles S. Pearson, Free Trade, Fair Trade? The Reagan Record, FPI Papers in International Affairs (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. Lanham, MD: Distributed by University Press of America, 1988), 72–76.
On the politics and motivations for the U.S.-Israel free trade agreement, see W. Charles Sawyer and Richard Sprinkle, “U.S.-Israel Free Trade Area. Trade Expansion Effects of the Agreement,” Journal of World Trade Law 20.5 (September-October 1986), 526–539.
Howard Rosen, “Free Trade Agreements as Foreign Policy Tools: The US-Israel and US-Jordan FTAs,” in Free Trade Agreements. U.S. Strategies and Priorities, ed. Jeffrey J. Schott (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2004), 51–61.
Anne O. Krueger, American Trade Policy. A Tragedy in the Making (Washington, DC: The American Enterprise Institute, 1995), 87–92.
Hugh Heclo, “Ronald Reagan and the American Public Philosophy,” in The Reagan Presidency. Pragmatic Conservatism and Its Legacies, ed. W. Elliot Brownlee and Hugh Davis Graham (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2003), 17–39.
President Reagan’s “crusade for democracy” in Central America was a powerful example. See Thomas Carothers, In The Name of Democracy: US Policy Toward Latin America in the Reagan Years (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991).
Judith Goldstein, “International Forces and Domestic Politics: Trade Policy and Institutional Building in the United States,” in Shaped by War and Trade, ed. Ira Katznelson and Martin Shefter (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2002), 213.
Gary Hufbauer and Jeffrey Schott, Western Hemisphere Economic Integration (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1994), 17.
In the United States, Sidney Weintraub explored the benefits of a U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement in a 1984 publication. See Sidney Weintraub, Free Trade Between Mexico and the United States? (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1984).
Alan Zarembo, “Bush Family Ties: The Texas Clan Came to Mexico for Oil and Have Built a Complex Web of Friends and Partners,” Newsweek International, 26 February 2001, 28.
Maxwell Cameron and Brian Tomlin, The Making of NAFTA. How the Deal Was Done (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2000), 68–78.
Henry Raymont, Troubled Neighbors. The Story of US-Latin American Relations, from FDR to the Present (New York: Westview Press, 2005), 260.
Bill Clinton, Announcement Speech, Old State House, Little Rock, Arkansas, October 3, 1991. Reprinted in Bill Clinton and Al Gore, Putting People First. How We Can All Change America. (Toronto; New York: Times Books, 1992), 191.
According to Allan Metz, Clinton’s disapproval by “both ends of the ideological spectrum” turned to be an asset, as he was able to appeal for the majority of the voters at the center. In Allan Metz, Bill Clinton: A Bibliography (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002), xi.
See accounts of the period in Elizabeth Drew, On the Edge (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 107–113; Christopher J. Bailey, “Clintonomics,” in The Clinton Presidency. The First Term, 1992–1996, ed. Paul S. Herrnson and Dilys M. Hill (Basingstoke: Macmillan Press, Ltd/New York: St. Martin Press, 1999), 85–103.
Michael Cox, US Foreign Policy after the Cold War. Superpower without a Mission? (London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1995), 24–27.
Laura D’Andrea Tyson. Who’s Bashing Who? Trade Conflict in High-Technology Industries (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1992).
Jeffrey E. Garten, A Cold Peace: America, Japan, Germany and the Struggle for Supremacy (New York: Times Books, 1992).
Doug Henwood, “Impeccable Logic: Trade, Development and Free Markets in the Clinton Era,” NACLA Report on the Americas 26.5 (May 1993), 23–28.
Leonard Silk, “Head off a Trade War,” New York Times, February 4, 1993, A23.
Michael Prowse, “A Prussian in the White House,” Financial Times, February 21, 1994, 16.
Paul Krugman, “Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession,” Foreign Affairs 73.2 (March-April 1994), 28–45.
Rachel L. Holloway, “A Time for Change in American Politics: The Issue of the 1992 Presidential Election,” in The 1992 Presidential Campaign. A Communication Perspective, ed. Robert E. Denton, Jr. (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1994), 129–167.
Steven E. Schier, “A Unique Presidency,” in The Postmodern Presidency. Bill Clinton’s Legacy in US Politics (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2000), 9.
On gaps between policymakers’ perceptions and public opinion, see Steven Kull, I.M. Destler, and Clay Ramsay. The Foreign Policy Gap. How Policymakers Misread the Public. Report by the Center for International and Security Studies and its Program on International Policy Attitudes, University of Maryland, October 1997; Lawrence R. Jacobs and Robert Y. Shapiro, “Public Opinion in President Clinton’s First Year: Leadership and Responsiveness,” in The Clinton Presidency. Campaigning, Governing & the Psychology of Leadership, ed. Stanley A. Renshon (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995), 195–211; Leonie G. Murray, Clinton, Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Intervention. Rise and Fall of a Policy (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2008).
On gaps between policymakers’ perceptions and public opinion, see Steven Kull, I.M. Destler, and Clay Ramsay. The Foreign Policy Gap. How Policymakers Misread the Public. Report by the Center for International and Security Studies and its Program on International Policy Attitudes, University of Maryland, October 1997; Lawrence R. Jacobs and Robert Y. Shapiro, “Public Opinion in President Clinton’s First Year: Leadership and Responsiveness,” in The Clinton Presidency. Campaigning, Governing & the Psychology of Leadership, ed. Stanley A. Renshon (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995), 195–211; Leonie G. Murray, Clinton, Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Intervention. Rise and Fall of a Policy (Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2008).
Fred I. Greenstein, The Presidential Difference. Leadership Style from FDR to Clinton (New York: Martin Kessler Books/Free Press, 2000), 174.
John P. Burke, The Institutional Presidency, Organizing and Managing the White House from FDR to Clinton, 2nd ed. (Baltimore; London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 180.
David Mitchell, Making Foreign Policy. Presidential Management of the Decision-Making Process (Aldershot; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005), 141. For a multidisciplinary collection of articles on Clinton’s leadership style, see Renshon, Clinton Presidency.
Mitchell, Making Foreign Policy, 141–173; Phillippe R. Girard, Clinton in Haiti: the 1994 US Invasion of Haiti (Houndmills, Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).
George A. MacLean, Clinton’s Foreign Policy in Russia. From Deterrence and Isolation to Democratization and Engagement (Aldershot; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006).
Sidney Weintraub, “The North American Free Trade Agreement as Negotiated: A US Perspective,” in Assessing NAFTA: A Trinational Analysis, ed. Steven Globerman and Michael Walker (Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1992), 24–31.
Bob Woodward, The Agenda. Inside the Clinton White House (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 317–319.
Ross Perot and Pat Choate, Save your Job, Save your Country: Why NAFTA Must be Stopped-Now! (New York: Hyperion Books, 1993).
Eric M. Uslaner, “Let the Chits Fall Where They May? Executive and Constituency Influences on Congressional Voting on NAFTA,” Legislative Studies Quarterly 23.3 (August 1998), 347–371.
Robert A. Pastor, Exiting the Whirlpool. U.S. Foreign Policy Toward Latin America and the Caribbean. 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2001), 114.
For an account on the Mexican domestic politics preceding the crisis, see Peter H. Smith, “The Mexican Peso Crisis,” in East Asia and Latin America. The Unlikely Alliance, ed. Peter H. Smith, Kotaro Horisaka, and Shoji Nishijima (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2003), 187–208.
John Bailey, “Deterioro del Apoyo de la Opinión Pública al TLC en Estados Unidos. Dinámica Regional y Partidista, 1994–1996,” in Impactos del TLC en México y Estados Unidos. Efectos Subregionales del Comercio y la Integración Económica (Mexico, DF: Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales/Georgetown University, 2003), 271–299.
Marc Levinson, “Kantor’s Cant. The Hole in Our Trade Policy,” Foreign Affairs (March/April 1996), 7.
The results in the House of Representatives followed party lines: on the Republican side, there were 151 votes in favor against 71 rejecting ratification. Among Democrats, rejection votes reached 171 against 29 in favor of the agreement. For a review of the process in Congress, see Lenore Sek, “Trade Promotion Authority (Fast-Track Authority for Trade Agreements): Background and Developments in the 107th Congress,” CRS Issue Brief for Congress, updated January 14, 2003 (Washington, DC: U.S. Library of Congress/CRS, 2003).
Allen Myerson, “In Texas, Labor is Feeling Trade Accord’s Pinch,” The New York Times, May 8, 1997, 1.
Manuel Pastor, Jr. and Carol Wise, “Trading Places: U.S. Latinos and Trade Liberalization in the Americas,” in Borderless Borders. U.S. Latinos, Latin Americans, and the Paradox of Interdependence, ed. Frank Bonilla et al. (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1998), 35–51.
On the Seattle battle, see Mary Kaldor, “‘Civilising’ Globalisation? The Implications of the ‘Battle in Seattle,’” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 29.15 (2000), 105–114.
Ronaldo Munck, “The Anti-Globalization Movement. From Seattle (1999) to the Future,” in Globalization and Contestation. The New Great Counter-Movement (London; New York: Routledge, 2007), 57–74.
David E. Sanger, “The shipwreck of Seattle,” The New York Times, December 5, 1999, 26.
Nancy Bernkopf Tucker, “The Clinton Years: The Problem of Coherence,” in Making China Policy: Lessons from the Bush and Clinton Administrations, ed. Ramon Myers, Michel Oksenberg, and David Shambaugh (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2001), 68–69.
For the tone of discussions between economists, see Jeffrey Frankel, “The Crusade for Free Trade: Evaluating Clinton’s International Economic Policy,” Foreign Affairs 80.2 (March-April 2001), http://www.foreignaf-fairs.org/20010301fareviewessay4270/jeffrey-frankel/the-crusade-for-free-trade-evaluating-clinton-s-international-economic-policy.html
William J. Clinton, Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union, February 4, 1997, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=53358
Palmer, David Scott Palmer, US Relations with Latin America during the Clinton Years (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2006), 92–95.
In the U.S. foreign policy to the Caribbean, for instance, the lack of an articulated vision on foreign policy led to an increasing interference of domestic groups representing particular interests of individual nations in the region. Thomas Carothers, “Lessons for Policymakers,” in Haitian Frustrations. Dilemmas for US Policy. A Report of the CSIS Americas Program, ed. George Fauriol (Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1995), 121–122.
Economist Jeffrey E. Garten articulated the strategy at the beginning of the first Clinton administration, identifying as the ten emerging markets: China, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Poland, Turkey, and South Africa. His ideas were later published in his book The Big Ten: Big Emerging Markets and How They will Change our Lives (New York: Basic Books, 1997). A brief assessment of the strategy is offered by Richard A. Melanson, American Foreign Policy since the Vietnam War. The Search for Consensus from Richard Nixon to George W. Bush, 4th ed. (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2005), 270–280.
George W. Bush, State of the Union Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on Administration Goals, February 27, 2001. Available at the “American President Project” website, at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=29643
Robert B. Zoellick, “A Republican Foreign Policy,” Foreign Affairs 79.1 (2000), 63–78.
Kenneth Kidd, “Baker Says Free Trade May Prod Other Nations. Pact Could Result in ‘Market Liberalization Club’,” Toronto Star, June 23, 1988, ME2.
William Kristol and Robert Kagan, “Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy,” Foreign Affairs 75.4 (July/August 1996), 18–32.
On the Bush Doctrine, see Robert Jervis, “Understanding the Bush Doctrine,” in American Foreign Policy in a New Era (Abingdon; New York: Routledge, 2005), 79–101.
George W. Bush’s interview with Bob Woodward. Quoted in Bob Woodward, Bush at War (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002), 96.
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., “Eyeless in Iraq: The Bush Doctrine and Its Consequences,” in War and the American Presidency (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004), 35.
Peter Singer, The President of Good & Evil. The Ethics of George W. Bush (Melbourne: The Text Publishing Company, 2004).
George W. Bush, Steel Products Proclamation to Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition from Imports of Certain Steel Products, by the President of the United States. White House, Office of the Press Secretary, March 5, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020305-7.html
Kevin K. Ho, “Trading Rights and Wrongs: The 2002 Bush Steel Tariffs,” Berkeley Journal of International Law 21 (2003), 825–846.
Critical views of this politicization of trade pacts can be found in Jeffrey Schott, “Assessing US FTA Policy,” in Free Trade Agreements, 359–381; Sidney Weintraub, “History Repeats Itself in Trade Policy,” CSIS Issues in International Political Economy 34 (October 2002), http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/issues200210.pdf
Office of the United States Trade Representative, 2003 Trade Policy Agenda and 2002 Annual Report on the Trade Agreements Program (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2003), 29.
Griswold’s analysis of the trade-related votes of the 107th Congress (2001–2002) shows that while Republicans are more willing to vote for tariff cuts, there was no substantial difference between parties in the issue of agricultural subsidies. Daniel T. Griswold, “Free Trade, Free Markets. Rating the 107th Congress,” Center for Trade Policy Studies, January 2003, http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-022.pdf
Edmund E. Andrews, “How CAFTA Passed House by 2 Votes,” The New York Times, July 29, 2005.
Lula da Silva then commented that he would not respond to “the deputy of the deputy of the American deputy secretary”. Neil King and Jonathan Karp, “A Global Journal Report: US, Brazil Key to Trade Quest-Nations Need to Open their Markets in Hemisphere’s Treaty Plan,” Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2002, A13.
John G. Ruggie, “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order,” International Organization 36.2 (Spring 1982), 379–415.
For the concept of whirlpool in U.S. foreign policy to Latin America, see Robert Pastor, Exiting the Whirlpool. U.S. Foreign Policy Toward Latin America and the Caribbean, 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2001).
Copyright information
© 2011 Zuleika Arashiro
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Arashiro, Z. (2011). U.S. Foreign Trade Policy: Leadership in a Constrained System. In: Negotiating the Free Trade Area of the Americas. Studies of the Americas. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230119055_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230119055_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-29473-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-11905-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Business & Management CollectionBusiness and Management (R0)