Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor
Bryan Mercurio's brief accurately describes the inflection point of the global trading system as world governments retreat from free and fair trade. Chief among them is the United States, whose recent reversal is sending shockwaves throughout the rules-based economic world order. The United Sta...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | World trade review 2024-05, Vol.23 (2), p.251-256 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 256 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 251 |
container_title | World trade review |
container_volume | 23 |
creator | Denamiel, Thibault |
description | Bryan Mercurio's brief accurately describes the inflection point of the global trading system as world governments retreat from free and fair trade. Chief among them is the United States, whose recent reversal is sending shockwaves throughout the rules-based economic world order. The United States' conflation of trade policy vis-à-vis China and national security, as well as the use of trade policy to garner political support from voters disenfranchised by the global trading system, have given way to industrial subsidies and protectionist tendencies. This article aims to build upon Mercurio's points and identify the underlying causes and long-term consequences of the current US direction. In addition, this piece differs from Dr Mercurio's assertions on three critical aspects of today's trade landscape. Firstly, industrial policy and economic security measures were first undertaken by China, and the United States and allied nations only followed suit. Secondly, the current US economic policy regarding China is severely constrained by today's political landscape, and the Biden administration's approach is moderate given these confines. Lastly, despite challenges, low-income countries can gain from the diversification movement as production shifts away from China. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S1474745623000502 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_econi</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3041180211</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1474745623000502</cupid><informt_id>10.3316/informit.T2024052400017600698056158</informt_id><sourcerecordid>3041180211</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-403d559926ba3479880df835df1f8bcf6701f2567e841e8416e4bd988f25c6563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UF1LwzAUDaLgnP4A3wo-CEL1pvlo-qhjfsBE0OlrSNtkZtimJp2wf2-6DfYgEi4J555z7slF6BzDNQac37xhmsfDeEYAgEF2gEYRYinBRBxu3jQd-sfoJIQlQEaB5iN09apD59qgk94ld36t2uRZ-2rlrbsMyUT9aNUn06brnT9FR0Z9BX22u8fo_X46nzyms5eHp8ntLK0oEX1KgdSMFUXGS0VoXggBtRGE1QYbUVaG54BNxniuBcVDcU3LOtIiWHHGyRhdbH07775XOvRy6Va-jSMlAYqxgAzjyMJbVuVdCF4b2XnbKL-WGOSwEvlnJVGTbDW6cq0Ne0URLQsa40fKx5biG9tLtbCh62XQylef0rbGbWDnF7J2dphECOb7xjwb9spiQUzAAXghgHHMBmOyy6ua0tt6offf-j_xL8Tthgg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3041180211</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Denamiel, Thibault</creator><creatorcontrib>Denamiel, Thibault</creatorcontrib><description>Bryan Mercurio's brief accurately describes the inflection point of the global trading system as world governments retreat from free and fair trade. Chief among them is the United States, whose recent reversal is sending shockwaves throughout the rules-based economic world order. The United States' conflation of trade policy vis-à-vis China and national security, as well as the use of trade policy to garner political support from voters disenfranchised by the global trading system, have given way to industrial subsidies and protectionist tendencies. This article aims to build upon Mercurio's points and identify the underlying causes and long-term consequences of the current US direction. In addition, this piece differs from Dr Mercurio's assertions on three critical aspects of today's trade landscape. Firstly, industrial policy and economic security measures were first undertaken by China, and the United States and allied nations only followed suit. Secondly, the current US economic policy regarding China is severely constrained by today's political landscape, and the Biden administration's approach is moderate given these confines. Lastly, despite challenges, low-income countries can gain from the diversification movement as production shifts away from China.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1474-7456</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-3138</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1474745623000502</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Biden, Joseph R Jr ; Debate ; Diversification ; Economic policy ; Export controls ; Fair trade ; Free trade ; Globalization ; Industrial policy ; International economic relations ; International trade ; Manufacturing ; National security ; Political campaigns ; Presidents ; Public opinion ; Semiconductors ; Supply chains ; Trade policy ; Trump, Donald J ; Voting rights</subject><ispartof>World trade review, 2024-05, Vol.23 (2), p.251-256</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Secretariat of the World Trade Organization</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474745623000502/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,776,780,27845,27903,27904,55606</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Denamiel, Thibault</creatorcontrib><title>Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor</title><title>World trade review</title><addtitle>World Trade Review</addtitle><description>Bryan Mercurio's brief accurately describes the inflection point of the global trading system as world governments retreat from free and fair trade. Chief among them is the United States, whose recent reversal is sending shockwaves throughout the rules-based economic world order. The United States' conflation of trade policy vis-à-vis China and national security, as well as the use of trade policy to garner political support from voters disenfranchised by the global trading system, have given way to industrial subsidies and protectionist tendencies. This article aims to build upon Mercurio's points and identify the underlying causes and long-term consequences of the current US direction. In addition, this piece differs from Dr Mercurio's assertions on three critical aspects of today's trade landscape. Firstly, industrial policy and economic security measures were first undertaken by China, and the United States and allied nations only followed suit. Secondly, the current US economic policy regarding China is severely constrained by today's political landscape, and the Biden administration's approach is moderate given these confines. Lastly, despite challenges, low-income countries can gain from the diversification movement as production shifts away from China.</description><subject>Biden, Joseph R Jr</subject><subject>Debate</subject><subject>Diversification</subject><subject>Economic policy</subject><subject>Export controls</subject><subject>Fair trade</subject><subject>Free trade</subject><subject>Globalization</subject><subject>Industrial policy</subject><subject>International economic relations</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Manufacturing</subject><subject>National security</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Public opinion</subject><subject>Semiconductors</subject><subject>Supply chains</subject><subject>Trade policy</subject><subject>Trump, Donald J</subject><subject>Voting rights</subject><issn>1474-7456</issn><issn>1475-3138</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UF1LwzAUDaLgnP4A3wo-CEL1pvlo-qhjfsBE0OlrSNtkZtimJp2wf2-6DfYgEi4J555z7slF6BzDNQac37xhmsfDeEYAgEF2gEYRYinBRBxu3jQd-sfoJIQlQEaB5iN09apD59qgk94ld36t2uRZ-2rlrbsMyUT9aNUn06brnT9FR0Z9BX22u8fo_X46nzyms5eHp8ntLK0oEX1KgdSMFUXGS0VoXggBtRGE1QYbUVaG54BNxniuBcVDcU3LOtIiWHHGyRhdbH07775XOvRy6Va-jSMlAYqxgAzjyMJbVuVdCF4b2XnbKL-WGOSwEvlnJVGTbDW6cq0Ne0URLQsa40fKx5biG9tLtbCh62XQylef0rbGbWDnF7J2dphECOb7xjwb9spiQUzAAXghgHHMBmOyy6ua0tt6offf-j_xL8Tthgg</recordid><startdate>20240501</startdate><enddate>20240501</enddate><creator>Denamiel, Thibault</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240501</creationdate><title>Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor</title><author>Denamiel, Thibault</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-403d559926ba3479880df835df1f8bcf6701f2567e841e8416e4bd988f25c6563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Biden, Joseph R Jr</topic><topic>Debate</topic><topic>Diversification</topic><topic>Economic policy</topic><topic>Export controls</topic><topic>Fair trade</topic><topic>Free trade</topic><topic>Globalization</topic><topic>Industrial policy</topic><topic>International economic relations</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Manufacturing</topic><topic>National security</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Public opinion</topic><topic>Semiconductors</topic><topic>Supply chains</topic><topic>Trade policy</topic><topic>Trump, Donald J</topic><topic>Voting rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Denamiel, Thibault</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>World trade review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Denamiel, Thibault</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor</atitle><jtitle>World trade review</jtitle><addtitle>World Trade Review</addtitle><date>2024-05-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>251</spage><epage>256</epage><pages>251-256</pages><issn>1474-7456</issn><eissn>1475-3138</eissn><abstract>Bryan Mercurio's brief accurately describes the inflection point of the global trading system as world governments retreat from free and fair trade. Chief among them is the United States, whose recent reversal is sending shockwaves throughout the rules-based economic world order. The United States' conflation of trade policy vis-à-vis China and national security, as well as the use of trade policy to garner political support from voters disenfranchised by the global trading system, have given way to industrial subsidies and protectionist tendencies. This article aims to build upon Mercurio's points and identify the underlying causes and long-term consequences of the current US direction. In addition, this piece differs from Dr Mercurio's assertions on three critical aspects of today's trade landscape. Firstly, industrial policy and economic security measures were first undertaken by China, and the United States and allied nations only followed suit. Secondly, the current US economic policy regarding China is severely constrained by today's political landscape, and the Biden administration's approach is moderate given these confines. Lastly, despite challenges, low-income countries can gain from the diversification movement as production shifts away from China.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1474745623000502</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1474-7456 |
ispartof | World trade review, 2024-05, Vol.23 (2), p.251-256 |
issn | 1474-7456 1475-3138 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3041180211 |
source | PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Biden, Joseph R Jr Debate Diversification Economic policy Export controls Fair trade Free trade Globalization Industrial policy International economic relations International trade Manufacturing National security Political campaigns Presidents Public opinion Semiconductors Supply chains Trade policy Trump, Donald J Voting rights |
title | Response to Bryan Mercurio's Caveat Emptor |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T04%3A15%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_econi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Response%20to%20Bryan%20Mercurio's%20Caveat%20Emptor&rft.jtitle=World%20trade%20review&rft.au=Denamiel,%20Thibault&rft.date=2024-05-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=251&rft.epage=256&rft.pages=251-256&rft.issn=1474-7456&rft.eissn=1475-3138&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1474745623000502&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_econi%3E3041180211%3C/proquest_econi%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3041180211&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1474745623000502&rft_informt_id=10.3316/informit.T2024052400017600698056158&rfr_iscdi=true |