The United States and the European Union have a healthy and substantial trade relationship, but as trade grows between the nations, conflicts over subsidies, industrial policy and social and economic pressures are inevitable. Domestic or abroad, these conflicts must be solved to ensure the best trade relations possible. This book presents these trade problems and how they affect this mutually beneficial trade relationship.
The United States and European Union (EU) share a huge, dynamic, and mutually beneficial economic partnership. Not only is the U.S.-EU trade and investment relationship the largest in the world, but it is also arguably the most important. Agreement between the two partners in the past has been critical to making the world trading system more open and efficient. Given the high level of U.S.-EU commercial interactions, trade tensions and disputes are not unexpected. In the past, U.S.-EU trade relations have witnessed periodic episodes of rising trade tensions and conflicts, only to be followed by successful efforts at dispute settlement. This ebb and flow of trade tensions occurred again last year with high-profile disputes involving tax breaks for U.S. exporters and production subsidies for the commercial aircraft sector. Major U.S.-EU trade disputes have varied causes. Some disputes stem from demands from producer interests for support or protection. Trade conflicts involving agriculture, aerospace, steel, and 'contingency protection' fit prominently into this grouping. These conflicts tend to be prompted by traditional trade barriers such as subsidies, tariffs, or industrial policy instruments, where the economic dimensions of the conflict predominate. Other conflicts arise when the U.S. or the EU initiate actions or measures to protect or promote their political and economic interests, often in the absence of significant private sector pressures. The underlying cause of these agreements are different foreign policy goals and priorities of Brussels and Washington. Still other conflicts stem from an array of domestic regulatory policies that reflect differing social and environmental values and objectives. Conflicts over hormone-treated beef, bio-engineered food products, protection of the audio-visual sector, and aircraft hushkits, for example, are rooted in different U.S.-EU regulatory approaches, as well as social preferences. These three categories of trade conflicts -- traditional, foreign policy, and regulatory -- possess varied potential for future trade conflict. This is due mostly to the fact that bilateral and multilateral agreements governing the settlement of disputes affect each category of disputes differently. By providing a fairly detailed map of permissible actions and obligations, trade agreements can dampen the inclination of governments to supply protection and private sector parties to demand protection. In sum, U.S.-EU bilateral trade conflicts do not appear to be as ominous and threatening as the media often portray, but they are not ephemeral distractions either. Rather they appear to have real, albeit limited, economic and political consequences for the bilateral relationship. From an economic perspective, the disputes may also be weakening efforts of the two partners to provide strong leadership to the global trading system.
The United States and the European Union (EU) share a huge, dynamic, and mutually beneficial economic partnership. Not only is the U.S.-EU trade and investment relationship the largest in the world, but it is also arguably the most important. Agreement between the two partners in the past has been critical to making the world trading system more open and efficient. Given the high level of U.S.-EU commercial interactions, trade tensions and disputes are not unexpected. In the past, U.S.-EU trade relations have witnessed periodic episodes of rising trade tensions and conflicts, only to be followed by successful efforts at dispute settlement. This ebb and flow of trade tensions occurred again last year with high-profile disputes involving the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations and production subsidies for the commercial aircraft sector. Major U.S.-EU trade disputes have varied causes. Some disputes stem from demands from producer interests for support or protection. Trade conflicts involving agriculture, aerospace, steel, and `contingency protection' fit prominently into this grouping. These conflicts tend to be prompted by traditional trade barriers such as subsidies, tariffs, or industrial policy instruments, where the economic dimensions of the conflict predominate. Other conflicts arise when the U.S. or the EU initiate actions or measures to protect or promote their political and economic interests, often in the absence of significant private sector pressures. The underlying cause of these disputes over such issues as sanctions, unilateral trade actions, and preferential trade agreements are different foreign policy goals and priorities of Brussels and Washington. Still other conflicts stem from an array of domestic regulatory policies that reflect differing social and environmental values and objectives. Conflicts over hormone-treated beef, bio-engineered food products, protection of the audio-visual sector, and aircraft hushkits, for example, are rooted in different U.S.-EU regulatory approaches, as well as social preferences. These three categories of trade conflicts -- traditional, foreign policy, and regulatory -- possess varied potential for future trade conflict. This is due mostly to the fact that bilateral and multilateral agreements governing the settlement of disputes affect each category of disputes differently. By providing a fairly detailed map of permissible actions and obligations, trade agreements can dampen the inclination of governments to supply protection and private sector parties to demand protection. In sum, U.S.-EU bilateral trade conflicts do not appear to be as ominous and threatening as the media often portray, but they are not ephemeral distractions either. Rather they appear to have real, albeit limited, economic and political consequences for the bilateral relationship. From an economic perspective, the disputes may also be weakening efforts of the two partners to provide strong leadership to the global trading system.
David Ricardo's law of comparative advantage and his finding that free trade increases the wealth of all participating nations is one of the very few economic laws which is accepted by almost all economists. But economic reason and economic policy do not always follow the same path. This especially applies to trade policies. A substantial and growing part of trade between Japan, Europe and the US does not follow the principles of free trade, but is more accurately managed trade. The management of international trade, international trade negotiations, and the political dynamics of trade conflicts create a complex reality which follows its own laws without regard to economic policy prescriptions. This political-economic reality was the subject of the conference 'The Political Economy of Trade Conflicts' organizedjoindy by the German Institute for Japanese Studies and the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation together with the Institute of Modern Political Science and Economics of Waseda University in December 1993. We present the results of the conference in this reader. Three issues were of special importance: the US-Japanese conflict over the reduction of trade imbalances via quantitative import targets; the liberalization of trade in agricultural products, especially the opening of the Japanese rice market; and the trade tensions between the European Union, the US and Japan in high technology industries. The conference took place immediately before the conclusion of the Uruguay Round, and yet its subject continues to be of high political importance. In early 1994, the US-Japan conflict around quantitative import targets became more tense.
The European Union (EU) has now become the largest trade partner of China. While Sino-US trade relations and particularly the high-profile trade disputes between the US and China get considerable academic attention for geopolitical reasons, less research has been done on the Sino-EU trade disputes that gradually loom large on the horizon. This book delves into the trade disputes between China and the EU and identifies the causes for trade disputes. It examines how the disputes will shape China-EU trade relations, and offers a macro overview on how the issues can be resolved or at least how they should be managed.This timely book sheds light on Sino-EU trade disputes, putting these in global perspective and enriching the literature in this regard.
The United States and European Union (EU) share a huge and mutually beneficial economic partnership. Not only is the U.S.-EU trade and investment relationship the largest in the world, it is arguably the most important. Agreement between the two economic superpowers has been critical to making the world trading system more open and efficient. Given a huge level of commercial interactions, trade tensions and disputes are not unexpected. In the past, U.S.-EU trade relations have witnessed periodic episodes of rising trade tensions and even threats of a trade war, only to be followed by successful efforts at dispute settlement. This ebb and flow of trade tensions has occurred again last year and this year with high-profile disputes involving steel, tax breaks for U.S. exporters, and the EU ban on approvals of GMO products. Resolution of U.S.-EU trade disputes has become increasingly difficult in recent years. Part of the problem may be due to the fact that the U.S. and the EU are of roughly equal economic strength and neither side has the ability to impose concessions on the other. Another factor may be that many bilateral disputes now involve clashes in domestic values, priorities, and regulatory systems where the international ...
Contemporary trade policy is increasingly framed in geo-strategic terms. But how much of that rhetoric is reflected in actual policy choices by the EU or its trading partners? This book provides a first systematic study of the broader international context in which EU trade agreements are conceived, negotiated, and designed. Building on a refined conceptualisation of geo-economics, the book develops a cogent framework that combines insights from scholarship on the design of free trade agreements with ideas from foreign policy analysis. Empirically, the analysis focuses on the relations between the EU and the Asia-Pacific. Following the United States’ pivot to Asia and the EU’s Global Europe strategy, China’s backyard has become the main arena in which global powers’ geo-economic strategies overlap. Building on a series of case-studies, combining the perspectives from the EU and its trading partners, the book shows that the rhetoric of geo-economic competition is yet to catch up with the actual negotiation and design of free trade agreements. This volume will be of great interest to scholars, students and practitioners who want to gain a holistic understanding of contemporary trade negotiations.
The book makes an effort in investigating the present and future developments in the global economy, after the 2008 global financial and economic crisis. The results of the global crisis were devastating and destructive all around the world. The USA economy took significant damage when the crisis went into Europe, and it turned out a foreign debt crisis influencing European economies, including Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy. Consequently, the economic crises gave impetus to social uprisings and protest, and this led to giving populist and nationalist politicians the advantage to take the control of government. President Trump's “First USA Policy,” then, European populist and anti-EU politicians including, Le Pen, Wilders, Salvini, and Nigel Farage attack the post-war global economic order and structures like the European Union to vanish the full benefits and wealth of globalization process. After the crisis, the global economy evolved into protectionism, depending on the coming to power of populist leaders. President Trump entered into a great trade war with the European Union and China, later on. In this frame, the study examines the effects of populism/protectionism, which has upsurged after the 2008 crisis, on the global economy in various dimensions.
Agricultural trade, always a source of international friction, will remain a contentious issue in the years to come. The GATT agreement achieved only partial trade liberalization; recognizing this, the agreement calls for a continuation of the negotiation process to achieve the long-run goal of a “substantial reduction in agricultural support and protection.†In any case, it is clear that U.S.-European Union (EU) agricultural trade relations will remain central to any future negotiation. In this volume, leading experts present a comprehensive set of analyses of the U.S.-EU agricultural trade conflict. The discussions provide a unique perspective on the U.S.-EU agricultural trade confrontation in recent years and offer insights into both the final GATT agreement and forthcoming agricultural issues. Presenting a broad historical context, the book focuses on changes in U.S. and European trade and agricultural policies, looking at the implications of these changes for bilateral relations and global agricultural markets. Providing U.S., EU, and third-party perspectives, the contributors analyze the negotiation process in the Uruguay Round of the GATT. Finally, the book explores several additional dimensions of the U.S.-EU agricultural trade conflict, including the consequences of the EU integration and enlargement processes, the environmental impact of the Union’s agricultural policies, and the mechanisms and forces that determine agricultural policy formation in both the United States and in Europe.
