Global Trade Wars,
Unilateralism & the Providence of Multi-lateralism
Interview transcript - RL Vol XII No 308 MMXVIII
Costantinos Berhutesfa Costantinos, PhD
President, Lem Ethiopia:
Environment and Development Society
Summary
Protectionism refers to government actions and policies that restrict or
restrain international trade, whose merits of protectionism are the subject of
fierce debate. Critics argue that over the long term, protectionism often hurts
the people it is intended to protect by slowing economic growth and pushing up
prices, making free trade a better alternative. Proponents of protectionism
argue that the policies provide competitive advantages and create jobs. The
three pillars of the ‘America First’ ideology — isolationism, protectionism and
restricting immigration — were gaining popularity before Mr. Trump became
president and may outlast his tenure. In international relations, unilateralism
is any canon that nations take as a parochial action, a neologism which is
already in common use; it was coined to be an antonym for multilateralism,
which is the doctrine which asserts the benefits of participation from as many
parties as possible. With the advent of Global Governance Institutions after
the catastrophic World War II, multilateralism flourished to maintain world
order, economic prosperity and human rights. The Breton Woods institutions (IMF
& World Bank) were founded as the financial agencies of the world, the WTO
to regulate world trade and the UN Security Council to maintain world order.
Others were formed to undertake human and structural development across the
globe.
The US is the richest and most stable economy and its role is seen as a
leader of the free world to create a global architecture for freedom from fear
and freedom from want. Nevertheless the ‘America First’ slogan is fast removing
it from leading the multilateralism process. One can observe that the US is
trying to contrast itself with developing nations such as China that has been
feared as a communist giant and countries that are gradually emerging from
authoritarian rule of the Cold War. The stability of Asia, Africa and Latin
America is paramount for US peace and hence the US must pay any price to
maintain human security in these regions through principally trade. Otherwise,
it will have to send its troops such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya to
name a few. Yes, indeed, the U.S. administration's inward looking approach of
‘America-first’ will hurt multilateralism. For a good reason. America has been
the largest supporter of the Breton Woods institutions, it has contributed to
the UN peace keeping more than any other nation, and its bilateral aid has been
instrumental in fighting poverty and diseases. The US contribution to NATO has
also been substantial. The Marshall Plan had reconstructed Europe after WWII
and American capital has heralded capital development in East Asia and Latin
America. Now all this is under question mark, with the US threatening to
withdraw aid from nations that do not support it in the UN General Assembly.
The US stance on global governance institutions is also another threat to
multilateralism, with WTO fast becoming irrelevant given the US unilateral
action. The World Bank warns trade tensions could trigger a 2008-level crisis.
Key words: China, United States, trade wars, developing
nations, protectionism, WTO, UNCTAD
See paper here or https://www.academia.edu/37582029/Global_Trade_Wars_Unilateralism_and_the_Providence_of_Multilateralism_RL_Vol_XII_No_308_MMXVIII