The ashes of World War I was fertile soil for the rise of major world authoritarian powers. The three that most come to mind are Germany, the Soviet Union and Japan.
Although the League of Nations organization and limitations on naval construction were instruments in trying to make World War I “the war to end all wars,” it did not stop these regimes from seeking international dominance. It did not help that the Great Depression of the 1930s brought the world to the brink of disaster.
The economic conditions in the world along with the quest for political power led to the hostilities that triggered World War II. Once at war, the American industrial base and military superiority showed its colors to the point that the United States was left as the leader of the free world and the caretaker of those nations aspiring to a democratic way of life.
With the collaboration of its allies, America as a superpower, set about supporting the development of democracies and among other things, used trade relationships to further that goal. Negative trade imbalances, including tariffs by countries with weaker industries, were allowed in order that those countries could prosper and buy more goods from the U.S.
Also, since we were in competition with Communism and the Soviet block, it was understood that trade to create wealth in developing countries could best assure the building of democracies. America as a world leader could do no less.
After the recovery from the devastation of World War II, economic prosperity created by our partnerships and the fall of the Soviet Union, the notion of fair trade was introduced along with the building of trade blocks designed to add strength to regions like those of Europe and North America.
The trade landscape has been further changed by the emerging economic power of China and its projection as the near future number 1 economy in the world. That growing military and economic force is being met by a blanket set of tariffs not only on China, but all friends and foes alike.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) signed in 1992 by the United States, Mexico and Canada and replaced by the United States, Mexico and Canada Agreement (USMCA) signed in 2020 appear to be overridden by a 25 percent tariff on all Mexican and Canadian goods beginning April 2nd. The tariff move by President Trump has already sent Canada scurrying to find alternative markets for its products.
In the case of Mexico, there seems to be an undercurrent of confidence that there will be options available to the leadership. Among them is China.
Unlike the United States and Canada, Mexico has no political enemies and can deal with international economic realities in ways that make the most sense. Since it is an agricultural, manufacturing and industrial power closely tied to the United States, one would think that U.S. tariffs will be greatly felt.
That is true. However, that concern is combined with a feeling that the United States stands to lose more than Mexico on this matter.
President Trump is pressing his subordinates to get even more aggressive with tariffs as a way of transforming the economy. That strategy comes at the cost of a major change in the world order where the United States is no longer the global leader and allies are no longer in an interdependent relationship.
This also represents another push toward the decline of the West. And authoritarian China is in a position to take over.
The views expressed by David Conde are not necessarily the views of LaVozColorado. Comments and responses may be directed to News@lavozcolorado.com.
