President Trump`s strategy to remove the United States from participation in multilateral agreements should be allowed until this experiment is concluded. Trump might prove it right that more U.S.-controlled trade through bilateral agreements will lead the United States to more strength and prosperity. Certainly, its trade policy plunges us from deep amnesia and complacency in fresh thinking and action. A multilateral contract contains guidelines from which the minimum price and maximum purchase price are set, so that importers have an indication of guaranteed quantities of purchase and that producing countries know what guaranteed quantities they will sell to importers. Multilateral treaties are expected to increase trade. However, they have failed to fully deliver the trade benefits expected by the United States. Because of nafta, many U.S. production jobs have gone to Mexico, where many industrialized countries were eroded after NAFTA came into force. On January 23, 2017, President Trump signed a « Presidential Memorandum » in which he asked the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to « remove the United States as a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), withdraw the United States from the TPP negotiations and, where possible, conduct bilateral trade negotiations to promote U.S. industry.
, to protect American workers and raise U.S. wages. » During his campaign, the President expressed a strong preference for bilateral trade agreements with individual countries over agreements with several countries. Second, the details of the negotiations are particularly related to Cer`s business and business practices. Public opinion is often wrong. As a result, they receive a lot of press, controversies and protests. The United States has a gross domestic product (GDP) of about $17 trillion and a high GDP per capita. Faced with a huge market, U.S. negotiators actually hold a lot of cards at the negotiating table.
However, several bilateral agreements, with many technical provisions, can make it more expensive and more difficult for U.S. exporters to use market opening opportunities. In theory, it would be possible to have uniform rules on issues such as rules of origin and transshipments, through bilateral agreements. In practice, there are usually discrepancies in the measures, which creates a cat cradle of commercial rules. As a result, many U.S. companies have started to take common steps that can be made available through multilateral agreements. The World Trade Organization (WTO), the most well-known multilateral trade organization, is under enormous pressure from the liberalization of world trade and global markets. The main theme of the April 2006 negotiations in Geneva and Brussels was the liberalisation of the agricultural and industrial raw materials markets. The organization is working to reduce agricultural subsidies and export opportunities for raw materials and industrial services.
Due to the sharp reduction in tariffs, the WTO is the subject of a great critical debate. Their behaviour is causing a crisis of aggravation because they do not pay attention to the deindustrialization of developing countries and the decline of industries that are still growing and not yet competitive.