Re: The Steel decision

["Charles Jannuzi" <jannuzi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> "The US decision to go down the route of protectionism is a
> major setback for the world trading system," said EU Trade
> Commissioner Pascal Lamy, who added that the European bloc would
> avoid unilateral actions and remain within the WTO.

But the US has its free trade and highly complementary hinterland intact.
Canada and Mexico. This has always been more important than upholding WTO or
even putting forth achievable proposals at int'l meetings (though the US is
always willing to make a lot of rhetoric out of its 'free trade principles'
while going for the impossible).


> The tariffs are the strongest action taken by a US
> administration to protect a domestic industry since president
> Ronald Reagan pressured South Korea, Japan, and other countries
> to implement voluntary import restraints on steel and
> automobiles in the mid-1980s.

The actions taken over computer chips surpass it. Considering the Wintel
monopoly that it created, perhaps far more serious. The next question is how
will Detroit arrange limits on Japanese cars again. As soon as the
inflammatory rhetoric starts, the Japanese tend to back off and limit their
exports to the most profitable.


> Bush shrugged off the possibility of a trade war. "We're a
> free-trading nation, and in order to remain a free-trading
> nation, we must enforce law," he said.

And if anything it will boost his standing on 'domestic economy' issues.

Charles Jannuzi