3 ms·

This is not about WTO. Iran, TPP, NAFTA, Paris Agreement, Korea free trade agreement (KORUS), ... There is a very long list. I believe it goes both sides on bo

This is not about WTO. Iran, TPP, NAFTA, Paris Agreement, Korea free trade agreement (KORUS), ... There is a very long list. I believe it goes both sides on both parties, but what is there today is what is relevant to countries today. No country is going to look back at the "great old times" of USA as the benchmark for today's decisions. We can cook up a reason for each, and pretend the senate is a happy body working together in the spirit of democracy on foreign policy and trade. But reality is, other nations cannot and do not treat US as a role model for foreign policy continuity anymore.

CountSessine 6y ago
You don’t get it. The WTO was the landmark achievement in US foreign and economic policy of the 1990’s and until recently was emblematic of US engagement with the rest of the world. US foreign and economic policy have actually been exceptionally consistent up until very recently. Every one of the issues you brought up - NAFTA, TPP, the Paris agreement - these were all ripped up during Trump’s term. But remember that it was Lighthizer and co who gave Trump the scissors. Other nations can think whatever they want about “US [...] foreign policy continuity” and can find whatever role models they like. The US just isn’t playing anymore - they neither aspire to nor are interested in being such a role model and the truth is that the rest of the world needs them a great deal more than they need it. Multilateralism is dead in Washington and the US will continue to engage with the world, but piecemeal and one country at a time. Anyone can opt out, but it means foregoing the biggest consumer market in the world and the largest and most efficient finance markets in the world.
- dirtyid 6y ago
  Trump picked Ligthinzer for USTR, Ligthinzer didn't make Trump president. The scissors were never Ligthinzer's to give. Multilateralism isn't so much as dead as no longer orthodoxy. Though it's hard to say if Biden can rebuild multilateralism if he chooses to in 4 years or if generations of institutional momentum has been lost. Reality is, US relative share of global GDP continues to decline, and may decline faster if it abdicates softpower afforded by having influence in multilateral organizations. Long term US is fine, just by virtue of being massively ahead, and while Asian century is far from certain, American lead and influence continues erode.

CountSessine 6y ago

You don’t get it. The WTO was the landmark achievement in US foreign and economic policy of the 1990’s and until recently was emblematic of US engagement with the rest of the world. US foreign and economic policy have actually been exceptionally consistent up until very recently. Every one of the issues you brought up - NAFTA, TPP, the Paris agreement - these were all ripped up during Trump’s term. But remember that it was Lighthizer and co who gave Trump the scissors. Other nations can think whatever they want about “US [...] foreign policy continuity” and can find whatever role models they like. The US just isn’t playing anymore - they neither aspire to nor are interested in being such a role model and the truth is that the rest of the world needs them a great deal more than they need it. Multilateralism is dead in Washington and the US will continue to engage with the world, but piecemeal and one country at a time. Anyone can opt out, but it means foregoing the biggest consumer market in the world and the largest and most efficient finance markets in the world.

dirtyid 6y ago
Trump picked Ligthinzer for USTR, Ligthinzer didn't make Trump president. The scissors were never Ligthinzer's to give. Multilateralism isn't so much as dead as no longer orthodoxy. Though it's hard to say if Biden can rebuild multilateralism if he chooses to in 4 years or if generations of institutional momentum has been lost. Reality is, US relative share of global GDP continues to decline, and may decline faster if it abdicates softpower afforded by having influence in multilateral organizations. Long term US is fine, just by virtue of being massively ahead, and while Asian century is far from certain, American lead and influence continues erode.