These views are completely at odds with the historical record. The glorious thing about free trade is that if the conditions are in place to allow it to flourish, no-one needs to lose out."Ī few days earlier, he told an audience in Manchester that the recent success of countries such as China and Vietnam was all down to free trade. "Just look at the effect on the populations of developing countries that have started down the path of opening up their markets, and ask yourself whether there has been a greater emancipator of the world's poor than free trade. At a speech to the World Trade Organisation in Geneva, Fox outlined free trade as a panacea for the poor, saying that Britain would "carry the banner" for it: Yet this appears to be precisely what Britain's current International Trade Secretary, Liam Fox, still clings to.įox has given two extraordinary speeches, both in September, extolling the wonders of free trade. The idea that developing countries should simply open up their economies through free trade is now rejected, often ridiculed, around the world. Robert Pollin, an economist at the University of Massachusetts, estimates that, excepting China, developing countries lost roughly $480 billion per year in potential GDP as a result of so-called 'structural adjustment' policies. The result has largely been a disaster, with cheap imports undermining local industry and agriculture, putting fledgling companies out of business and undermining the prospects for local economic development. In the 1980s, ideologues in Washington and London began pushing neo-liberal economic policies on the poor, arguing that opening up their markets would increase their competitiveness. While free trade can be beneficial between countries of high and similar levels of development, pushing free trade as a route for developing countries to work their way out of poverty takes us back three decades. For example, Trade Minister Greg Hands has said, the government will "drive even greater openness with international partners' including the Commonwealth." It is clear that the UK's championing of free trade refers not only to other developed countries but also to the poorest developing countries as well. Similarly, Trade Minister Mark Garnier says that policy is to "ensure that Britain becomes the global leader in free trade once we leave the EU." We will seize the opportunities of our departure from the EU to forge a new role for the UK in the world." "The UK will remain the most passionate, consistent and convincing global advocate of free trade. Prime Minister Theresa May has, for example, said that: These policies are based on an outdated vision of empire which contains deeply worrying implications for the battle against poverty, inequality, climate change and war.įirst, there is one big policy that the government has constantly been highlighting since the June referendum: the UK is now positioning itself as the 'global leader' for free trade. Use its military power to secure its financial and economic interests Increasingly privatise development aid to the benefit of big corporate interestsĭevelop closer ties with authoritarian regimes, including expanding arms sales In particular we are concerned that Britain's post-Brexit policy will:Įmbed an extreme version of free trade that pushes developing countries to open their markets There are four key trends when it comes to policies towards developing countries. This picture can be gleaned from what government officials are doing and saying, and it is not pretty. Nearly six months on, a picture is gradually emerging of what kind of policies the current government is likely to pursue in a post-Brexit world. Some have stressed the dangers, others the opportunities. Since the EU referendum on 23rd June, many people have theorised on what the consequences for British foreign policy might be.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |