Tuesday, 12 July 2016

Why Britain Belongs in a New Nafta - WSJ

Some good thoughts here from Bob Zoellick former World Bank president.
Obama should never have "pivoted" away from old allies. And the U.K. needs the US now. They should not be stuck at "the back of the queue", as Obama notoriously (and most unhelpfully) said on his April visit to Britain.
Another article I read recently suggested that the US could not negotiate a trade agreement with Britain before it had finalized one with the EU. I don't see why the two should be connected. Still, joining NAFTA would be a way to bring it into the fold.
At critical moments over the past century, the United States has acted boldly and creatively to secure Europe's peace and prosperity. After the fighting of two devastating wars across Europe, America's Marshall Plan spent $120 billion (in current dollars) over four years to spark Western Europe's economic recovery and political integration. In 1949 the U.S., Canada, and Western European states invented NATO as a trans-Atlantic shield. In 1989 President George H.W. Bush moved rapidly yet deftly to unify Germany within NATO and the European Community, setting the cornerstones of a Europe "whole and free."
From the Marshall Plan through German unification, U.S. diplomacy in Europe was most effective when Americans recognized that Europeans must decide to help themselves. The United States can be a catalyst, organizer, source of ideas and provider of critical assistance in their decisions. U.S. activism inevitably sparks criticism. But Washington cannot afford strategic detachment from Britain and Europe. The next U.S. president will be as important for Europe’s future as were Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Full article:

Sent from my iPhone