Skip to content

Has a trade war been averted or merely postponed?


Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

The other day Adam blogged about his concerns that the Ghosts of Smoot & Hawley had risen. He feared the commencement of a trade war in which New Zealand would suffer. Therefore, it was with some relief that Adam read in a Times article today:-

Last night Mr Obama gave a strong signal that he would remove the most provocative passages from the Bill.

“I agree that we can’t send a protectionist message,” he said in an interview with Fox TV. “I want to see what kind of language we can work on this issue. I think it would be a mistake, though, at a time when worldwide trade is declining, for us to start sending a message that somehow we’re just looking after ourselves and not concerned with world trade.”

What does concern Adam though is that it would appear that it was not until the EU threatened retaliatory measures that the Obama White House appeared to have recognized the problem. Has a trade war been averted or merely postponed?

Adam is left wondering:

a) did the Obama team think that we would not notice?

b) did the Obama team let this go in, with the intent of then pulling it – but claiming it was due to the need to accommodate allies?

c) was it all a smokescreen to insert watered down wording that is still protectionist in nature?

d) was it incompetence and/or arrogant naivety?

e) was it all of  the above

  1. lucy permalink
    05/02/2009 07:33

    Its a worry.


  2. 04/02/2009 21:59

    I agree that it was a disastrous clause, however my understanding is that although it is based on his suggestions, Obama and his team don’t themselves write the initial version of the legislation – this is up to other elected Democrats and their staff.



  1. Rising Tide of Protectionism « The Inquiring Mind

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: