NAFTA: Role of Mainstream Discourse in the American Public Sphere - Research Paper Example

5 October NAFTA’s Frame and Structural Functioning: Role of Mainstream Dis of the AmericanPublic Sphere It is believed that when two or more than two countries become aware of the need of co-operational measures in different domestic and foreign aspect of their constituency they develop a broad philosophy, as an upshot of which ‘treaties’ or “Agreements” are born. According to Leslie Henry the former minor term of immense significance has been referred to as “Ordinarily treaties are simply agreements or contracts between two or more sovereignties obligating them to carry out the mutual promises contained therein” (776) Hence, one cannot name any country which is processing as a successful state without compromising and making agreements with its surrounding regions. Whilst discussing treaties and agreements, it is indispensable to leave out the diverse types of agreements which are considered the most important and imperative. Some of these essential conformities include International Investment Agreement, International Taxation Agreements and most importantly Trade and Commerce Agreements. The most widespread term that crops up as a ‘hear ye, hear ye’ in nature when trade agreements are conferred, is “NAFTA”. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is one of the most important accords signed by the American government. This agreement has been shared with the governments of two most central bordering areas of the United States i.e. Mexico and Canada. This agreement came into power on 1 January, 1994. The administrative centers of this agreement are in Mexico City, Ottawa, and Washington, D.C. NAFTA was signed between President George H. W. Bush of US, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada and Mexican President Carlos Salinas. Following were the advantages and rationales of the generation of this concurrence: 1. Increase in Trade: NAFTA was signed by the three countries to amplify the trade the trade process so that more and more items could be imported and exported to and from these countries. It was about time that the trio apprehend and grasped the magnitude of trade for their realms. As Tamarkin and Bayer have clarified that “The lifeblood of global connections is world trade. There is evidence of human trading from prehistoric times.” (288) 2. Augmented Immigration: As far as the area of benefit is concerned when it comes to the state of Mexico, signing this agreement was important because the NAFTA agreement ostensibly eggs on superior colonization among the trio. The increase immigration from Mexico to the US has become even more of a flashpoint. Whereas the case is not similar when it comes to the relationship between Canada and the US, or between Canada and Mexico. 3. Economic and Political Union: According to many observations NAFTA has been referred to as a union of the same genus as the European Union (EU). To unite on a political and economic stage it is believed that the government shall aid for programs “both bilaterally and through major multilateral partners.” (41) 4. Competitiveness In The Global Marketplace: It is estimated that each year in Canada the American corporations vend over one to one point five trillion dollars in merchandise and services. In barter, oil is sold to the United States by the Canadian administration. Dan Steinbock affirms that “The spirit of persistent determination is seized in the moment of adversity.” (65) This has resulted in the increase of competitiveness in the marketplace on a global level. 5. Protection and Enforcement Of Intellectual Property Rights: The protection and enforcement of the intellectual property rights of the immigrants was also a main point of contemplation and needed to be worked upon. Hence, when the NAFTA was signed this point was covered and any disputes in the relationships of these three countries were eliminated. 6. Elimination of Tariffs: The tax that is positioned on traded goods is called ‘tariff’. There are separate distinct tariffs for different countries. Joan Ferrante states that they “put the poorest ones at a disadvantage by applying tariffs” (218) This agreement was prepared to make it possible for the countries to be able to import and export goods without paying high tariffs. Such goods included cars, car parts, processors and computers, and food. The major question which falls under research and has been proven as a point of discussion and arguments is; ‘How did the American public sphere help in the framing of NAFTA since its perception?’ It is without doubt that any society and the people that form it play a vital function and responsibility in enclosing and outlining the diverse characteristics of a social order. As Larry May bids it is the role of people in a society that “set the reasonable limits on our responsibilities concerning collective inaction.” (119) Not that the government has no control over the implemented concord but the government cannot be in charge of the effects and enhancement let it be positive or negative regarding the introduced concurrence. The major important influential sources for the North African Free Trade Agreement from the mainstream of the public sphere were the administrations and overseer, the political wedge and the electronic and print media. Since the inception of NAFTA the mainstream discourses of the American public sector have casted the following effects An assessment of NAFTA was presented in black and white by Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Jeffrey J. Schott. The former writer was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Trade and Investment Policy of the US Treasury and the second writer has been an International Economist at the US Treasury. They collectively assessed the NAFTA and presented a brief analysis. They mentioned succinctly about the trade and employment, the market access by the sector, the rules and new issues, implications for non member countries and about NAFTA’s side agreements. They stated “According to our estimates the NAFTA will exert a modest but positive effect on the US labor market.” (14) In their perspective the signing of this agreement will create 170,000 net new jobs in the future. They believe that rejection of NAFTA would probably cause trouble for the capital and it might have to leave Mexico. Whereas according to other researchers a completely different analysis regarding the impact of NAFTA on jobs has been put forth. Hufbauer's research shows that income in the maquiladora sector has increased 15.5% since the implementation of NAFTA in 1994. As far as the immigration is concerned it has been said by Thomas J. Espenshade that “the state impact of immigration results from the vast expansion and diversification of the immigrant flow in 1965.” (232) it has been assessed that the mechanism of attaining and summiting labor apprehensions has worked well and it has now resulted in two-pronged agreements and better cooperation. As The research and analysis of the effects of NAFTA have also been described by Lederman et al. as “Assessing the trade effects of NAFTA is no easy matter because many other factors relevant for the trade flows of member and non member countries were also changing around the time of NAFTA’s perception.” (293) Lederman et al. also verified the drifts in the buy and sell stream before and after the perception of NAFTA. These trends in the trade flow were noticed mostly from 1980 to 2000. It was identified that no specific effects of NAFTA on the trade of non members LAC countries was verified. Two comparatively recent studies have used an approach of time series to study the aggregate flow of trade. But it was deemed by Ronald J. and Paul Wonnacott that “Once the question of adjustment is raised it must be recognized” (167) Therefore from the above study of Lederman et al. it has been briefly verified that jagged distinctions in the prototypes of trade at the commodity level can be causes by NAFTA. According to the research made by the Economic Research Service, USDA it was concluded that “NAFTA's influence on U.S. agriculture to date should provide a good indication of the agreement's long-term impact.” (V) According to this delving service, a grand effect on the expansion of the maritime systems has been familiarized. This is believed to be true because the ever more jam-packed US borders are being replaced by ports and maritime services in the trade lanes as an alternative. Isaac Cohen has expressed his views and probability of NAFTA as it is framed by the public sphere as he believed that the response that the formation of NAFTA gained from the public sources such as administrations and media has lead this agreement towards an epic up rise. He has verified so by articulating that “There are now approximately 20 quantitative models in use in the NAFTA discussions.” He also believes that after the achievement of such a wonderful response the runners of the agreement have started to work on the development of how it is starting to relate to people’s demands. He further expressed that “Each model attempts to measure the gains and losses that will be generated by the agreement” It has been verified that NAFTA trade distraction has not been caused by this concord, other than the industries of textiles and clothing in the US firms were made to rather Mexican producers by conferring the rules of foundation. Some famous controversies that surround the becoming of NAFTA as a vogue word was the dispute of 1999, when a company belonging to Santa Barbara of California named Sun Belt Water Inc., filed an Arbitration Claim worth $105 million. This claim was made under Chapter 11 of the NAFTA. This affected the agreement’s working between Canada and USA. Therefore this in turn resulted in Canada's prohibition on the export of mass water by aquatic tanker. But this step did not prove as an advantage to the Sun Belt’s business venture as it majorly destroyed it. This dispute still lingers unresolved. There is another characterization of negative effects of NAFTA by Graham Purchase as he says that NAFTA might cause “the destruction of the ejidos (peasant cooperative village holdings) by corporate interests, and threatens to completely reverse the gains made by rural peoples in the Mexican Revolution.” In order to accomplish this goal, Austin Bierbower believes “We should accordingly, undertake enterprises which require more than one and trust ourselves to control our fellows.” (129) Consequently, NAFTA regardless the controversies it raised, has created an atmosphere of regional unity and cooperation specifically due to the role of the mainstream public sphere. Yet David H. McKay, David Patrick Houghton and Andrew Wroe state that “the opposition of organized labor has not diminished in the years since NAFTA was passed.” (187) In this concise conclusion Greg Chapman, leaves us with an important and brisk analytical phrase and develops to make an agreement a sensation one shall solicit “Is it stronger? Does it last longer? Is it better designed? Does it look better?” (74) Well, if the answer is in ‘Nada’ we better turn them into a ‘Roger’ and might as well make it to the end. Works Cited Bierbower, Austin. How to Succeed. New York: R. F. Fenno & Company, 1900. Print Chapman, Greg. The Five Pillars of Guaranteed Business Success: Why Most Businesses Stay Small and What You Can Do About Yours. Australia: Empower Business Solutions, 2008. Print. Economic Research Service, USDA. “The Effects of NAFTA on Agriculture and the Rural Economy.” Economic Research Service, USDA, 2011. Web. 3 October 2011.http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/wrs0201/wrs0201a.pdf> Espenshade, Thomas J. Keys to Successful Immigration: Implications of the New Jersey Experience. Washington, Urban Institute, 1997. Print. Ferrante, Joan. Sociology: A Global Perspective. India: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print Great Britain: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Trade and Investment for Growth. UK: The Stationary Office, 2011. Print. Henry, Leslie. “When Is a Treaty Self-Executing” Michigan Law Review 27.7 (1929): 776-785. Print. Hufbauer, Gary Clyde and Schott, Jeffrey J. NAFTA: An Assessment. Washington: Peterson Institute, 1993. Print. Lederman, Daniel, et al. Lessons from NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington: World Bank, 2004. Print. May, Larry. Sharing Responsibility. London: University of Chicago, 1992. Print. McKay, David H., Houghton, David Patrick, and Wroe, Andrew. Controversies in American Politics and Society. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002. Print. Purchase, Graham. Anarchism and Environmental Survival. Arizona: See Sharp Press, 1994. Print. Steinbock, Dan. Winning across Global Markets: How Nokia Creates Strategic Advantage in a Fast-Changing World. California: Jossey-Bass, 2010. Print. Tamarkin, Kenneth and Bayer, Jeri W. McGraw-Hill's GED Social Studies. New York: The McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Wonnacott, Ronald J. and Wonnacott, Paul. Free Trade between the United States and Canada: The Potential Economic Effects. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1967. Print. Read More