Global Stimulus

On Monday, I attended "The Future of Trade and Economic Cooperation," an event put on by the CSIS Scholl Chair in International Business that featured Senator and former U.S. Trade Representative William Brock, Ambassador and former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Stuart Eizenstat, and Ambassador and former U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills. The panel emphasized the perils of returning to economic nationalism, the challenge of taking affirmative action in a time of personal difficulty, and the importance of utilizing the G-20 as a new meaningful multilateral mechanism. Among these discussions, a few key points stood out to me.

First, Carla Hills made an incisive point about the United States’ notorious agricultural protectionism. While I was well aware of this interest-oriented protectionism, it is easy to forget that it is the poorest who usually make their living off the soil. Our agricultural protectionism must be addressed if we are truly serious about elevating this bottom billion. Second, a larger yet still insightful point was Ambassador Eizenstat’s wariness of President Obama engaging the current economic downturn in exclusively domestic terms. As the Ambassador put it, now is a wonderfully appropriate time for Obama to point out that 1 in 5 jobs in the U.S. are affected by trade, and as a result (even regardless) the U.S. must take a role in leading the world. When we talk of domestic recovery, we have to think of world recovery (and do so in part by focusing on world trade and maintaining openness).

Hi When it comes to the

Submitted by on Tue, 03/03/2009 - 1:51pm.

Hi
When it comes to the issues of the global politics and the way it is perceived by the masses, a lot of things can be viewed as half-truth or false information wrapped into shiny paper to attract the attention and make people look away from the real problems. Unfortunately, most of us read only the headlines, and don't pay attention to what is really going on in the places like Africa, Gaza strip or the Balkans. Do we think about what is really done to improve the situation in those places by the organizations that are founded to interfere where it is needed and secure the lives of innocent people? Do we engage in dialogues only when we are the ones being endangered, or do we have a conscience that says that this world is a home to us all, and every nation suffering should be given a helping hand? We should understand that if some conflicts do not effect us directly, indirectly we are all effected as a species that seems to work hard against its own survival. I found some very interesting thoughts on this subject in the book called The Age of Nepotism, you should look it up and read about current affairs in the world from the perspective of Iranian American entrepreneur traveling through the Balkans.