The good news about the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is that there is little news about NAFTA. That quiet, so different from the protests that greeted the the deal's creation a decade ago, reflects NAFTA's clear achievement in facilitating and integrating economic exchange among its three partners. Next week's meeting between the Mexican and US presidents should take advantage of this success to push NAFTA forward in creative new ways.
Fox's suggetion
Luckily, a road map for NAFTA exists. When the then president-elect Vicente Fox of Mexico traveled to the US and Canada in the fall of 2000, he carried a bold proposal: after eight years it was time for Canada, the US and Mexico to establish a longer-term goal of creating a North American Community. Although his unorthodox suggestion met with skepticism, his ideas established an agenda that NAFTA's three partners should pursue. Why fix what is not broken? Because, from Mexico's perspective, NAFTA has not yet achieved one of its key goals: to deliver the benefits of free trade to all of the country's regions and sectors. For NAFTA to realize its full potential and move the convergence process, opening borders to trade and reducing tariff barriers are not enough.
ILLUSTRATION: YU SHA
Since its founding in 1994, NAFTA has been characterized (at best) by a bilateral management of issues and problems. Too often, the US has taken a unilateral approach. Trilateral or sub-regional cooperation is our goal.
As it stands, Mexico and Canada have been limited to dealing with the US on an individual basis because the three countries -- for different reasons -- prefer to keep separate bilateral links with their neighbors. The result of this is to neglect the overall North American perspective while giving preference to a domestic or bilateral vision that sometimes fails to promote the larger objective of integration.
To promote a regional perspective, Mexico, Canada and the US must consider establishing an institutional forum where such discussions can take place and where recommendations to governments can emerge. This is especially the case as the three countries assess the feasibility of common migration policies, border development and infrastructure, shared natural resources, environmental protection, economic and social policy coordination, and other issues of common concern.
Several concrete proposals have been advanced on how to achieve this. At a minimum, a North American Commission or coordinating mechanism should be set up to begin the process. While the European Commission model may not be what NAFTA needs, the governments of Canada, Mexico and the US should establish a permanent mechanism for channeling ideas and proposals, and transforming those ideas into action.
One area ripe for an institutional mechanism is energy. North America shares one of the richest and most varied energy resource pools in the world. Having excluded energy from the original NAFTA talks, Canada and Mexico are now willing to engage with the US on a common energy strategy. Indeed, talks on the subject have taken place among ministers from the three countries. As each advances its domestic energy strategy, identifying synergies can help in rationalizing and making optimum use of what energy resources are available.
Post Sept. 11
Another example of the new regional agenda can be found in the aftermath of the attacks of Sept. 11. Protecting North America and securing its borders has become a major priority in the fight against international terrorism and there must be a common response. Having created a functioning, regional, open trade area, the three countries must ensure that the new imperative to secure borders does not obstruct legitimate flows of goods, services and people. A NAFTA-wide security perimeter could transform internal borders in much the same way that the Schengen Agreement transformed borders within much of continental Europe.
The recasting of the bilateral agenda on migration between Mexico and the US, well underway prior to Sept. 11, must be reconciled with the US' new concept of homeland security. While some argue that the fight against terrorism is the natural enemy of regularizing migration, others agree that now more than ever the countries of North America need to address this issue trilaterally.
Migration, security, energy, labor and the other issues that make up the North American agenda must be discussed, managed and implemented in trilateral bodies with the expertise necessary to identify, harmonize and eventually converge policymaking for the region. This requires greater communication between decision-makers in all three NAFTA members. The agenda and timetable for convergence must be set by NAFTA's elected leaders, but implementation should be in the hands of a new commission.
Possible subjects for that commission's agenda include: financial, fiscal and customs harmonization; transport infrastructure; natural resources and regional development. There are, of course, many other issues, some of which already receive intensive cooperative efforts, especially in the fields of combating organized crime, drug and human trafficking, and the cross-border flow of contraband. In any case, problems need to be identified so that opportunities for cooperation are created.
Today's challenge is to renew NAFTA by adding the concept of partnership to it. Although recognizing that much still divides us, major common goals do provide a solid foundation for future cooperation. All three countries now find themselves at a juncture favorable to building a North American Commission to address the needs of the North American Community. We should seize the moment and proceed with negotiations to create such a forum.
Ambassador Andres Rozental is president of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.