The bad news is that “fast-track” authority is running into trouble in the Congress. There is considerable hesitation in the Congress to extend it to President Obama. The good news is that the Congress has begun to address issues of international taxation, the Bali Ministerial seems to be on track, and writers are beginning to recognize the downside of more regional agreements at the expense of a multilateral approach via the WTO. There is a growing need for inclusion not exclusion in the global trading system — especially as this relates to developing countries and China. Here are some of the specifics.
Obama’s trade agenda is in deep trouble. Seems that a bipartisan coalition is growing against it and against extending “fast track” (TPA). This is jeopardizing TPP and TTIP negotiations. Interesting comments on the role of the Congress and the President in trade relations. “Obama’s Trade Jeopardy.” Wall Street Journal (Nov. 19 2013).
A watered down version of the Doha trade agenda may be adopted at the forthcoming Bali ministerial. The three main elements relate to trade facilitation, agriculture and development. This would actually be a major success in light of the prior ten tears or so of negotiations and fear of failure. The adoption of these new trade rules would remove the fear to a certain extent that he WTO was becoming irrelevant. “WTO on Verge of Global Trade Pact.” Financial Times (11.22.13).
Good review of the movement away from military issues to trade issues as the principal dimension of power in international relations today. It reviews three ongoing trade negotiations (TPP, TTIP, EU-China), in light of current failure of Doha, as moving away from multilateralism. (But pending agreements in the forthcoming Bali Ministerial may lessen this conclusion a bit.) It also discusses services negotiation and investment agreements along with negotiations over climate and millennium development goals. It highlights that China has been a big winner from the global economy and is sometimes viewed as a free-rider. It concludes “Globalization without global rules may work for a while but it will not last.” “From Missiles to Trade — From Geopolitics to Geoeconomics.” Financial Times (Nov. 22, 2013).