Should the United States pursue free-trade agreement Essay

Should the United States pursue free-trade agreement - Essay Example The benefits of the free trade agreements for the United States and other relevant arguments will be discussed further to support this statement. First of all, free-trade agreements (FTAs) provide the United States with greater opportunities to open up foreign markets to U.S exporters (Textbook, 41). Reduction of trade barriers and tariffs for export, diplomatic and national security, increased stability and transparency of both investment and trading environment, positive public relations with potential investors – are the main benefits the U.S. and its FTA partner country/countries will gain (Trade.gov, n.p.). As FTA’s involve smaller number of countries, the negotiation process is more flexible and has substantially greater chance for success than multilateral trade negotiations (Ewing-Chow, 264). Not only the United States will benefit from the new FTAs but also the other countries involved. Moreover, some experts believe that the other countries will be even in more beneficial position than the USA due to smaller sizes of their economies (Arnold, n.p.). Proponents of the multilateral trade agreements and trade liberalization might criticize this position, arguing that this will undermine the role of WTO and Doha Round multilateral trade liberalization agreement. Even though, the WTO has undertaken some efforts and initiatives for global trade liberalization and increased market openness, the final agreement has not been achieved. The Doha Development Agenda, launched in 2001 as the first round of global trade negotiations, has reached an impasse (Francois, van Meijl, van Tongeren, 350). One of the reasons of the series of launch-delays is the divide of the interests of the major players: developed and developing countries (Evenett, 143). With the increased global â€Å"weight† of such countries as China, and India, it might be very challenging to reach mutual agreement. Developing countries do not want to being taken advantage of by the developed

How the Treaty of Versailles Created More International Conflict after Research Paper

How the Treaty of Versailles Created More International Conflict after World War II than It Resolved - Research Paper Example The Treaty of Versailles failed to resolve the primary causes of World War I and created problems and conflicts across the globe after the completion of the treaty. Examining the meanings behind the treaty and the associations which were incorporated with the history which it carried then led to changes and alterations with the political regime of the time. Roots of Conflict The approach to the Treaty of Versailles began with the need for Eastern Europe, Western Europe and the USA to reach an agreement to end the war. The goal was to create an end to the war while establishing peace among the different regions. The roots of the conflict began when the U.S. Senate failed to ratify the Versailles treaty. This was established with Woodrow Wilson who had the power to amend the treaty and alter the considerations that were required in developing a different approach to secure the end of the war. The failure to take the responsibility was not only established from the US Senate but also ca me from conflicts that were based on internal debates. Isolationists and divisions between political parties were not interested in the issues which were conveyed through the treaty and did not believe there was the correct establishment or development. The failure then came from the lack of establishment of what the treaty could have established to bring peace to the different regions of Europe (Boemake et al, 1998). The conflicts which took place with the lack of establishing the Treaty of Versailles led to world conflicts. The complexities of those who did not follow or establish the treaty led to a mixed message to various countries about the ideologies of the treaty. Without the establishment of peace after the war, a cognitive illusion was established. This was based on the inability to understand why the treaty would not be supported by different regions of the world while the political conflicts reflected the complexities of the war instead of ending the problem. The global repercussions led to divisions among various countries as well as framing of various countries from the illusion that there was disagreement among those which were associated with the treaty. The inability to establish the system from the treaty and the disregard then led to further conflict, tension and devastation, eventually leading to the beginning of World War II (Bottom, 2003). Preliminary Issues The issues which were associated with the root problems were inclusive of the pressures which were developed across political arenas. There were sets of domestic pressures that were first established, all which were developed specifically because of problems and disagreements about the specific treaty. This was combined with civilians that began to reflect the disassociations with the government through civilian losses and communities were not able to create and establish peace outside of the main problems. This was combined with the destruction of World War I that came from the lack of agreement. The political tensions that were established developed pressures and alliances as well as ties. This furthered to form enemies among those that were a part of the various regions (Krause, 2001). The political and social tensions that were established led to disconnections and re-establishment with the earlier conflicts which occurred. The earlier treaties which were accepted and rejected had formatted personal enemies and opponents politically