The Making of NAFTA: How the Deal Was Done; Conflict Amid Consensus in American Trade Policy
Although other books have done more on the work to gain congressional approval for the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, Cameron and Tomlin have written the best book so far on the substantive negotiations themselves, which were almost entirely conducted during the Bush administration. The American team was constrained by Congress and interest groups, but the constraints paradoxically enhanced its negotiating power against the disciplined Mexican team that badly wanted an agreement. Yet the Mexicans were so disciplined and committed because they were so unrepresentative of the Mexican institutions that they hoped NAFTA would transform.
The Gibson book, in contrast, tries to reconstruct the fluctuating areas of partisan agreement and conflict over trade within Congress, but the author understandably has trouble finding a very usable pattern. Both books agree on the theoretical power of analyzing trade issues as multilevel games, at once both international and domestic. But the theoretical framework does not do much to explain how the games will play out. Gibson writes, "The nested-games or any multilevel framework, then, should be viewed as a heuristic tool that complements research at more finite levels." Indeed.
Related
A look back at perhaps the most important foreign policy success of the postwar period. Edited by Peter Grose, with contributions by historians Diane B. Kunz and David Reynolds, a memoir by Charles P. Kindleberger, a profile of Marshall and Acheson by James Chace and one of Will Clayton by Gregory Fossedal and Bill Mikhail. And reflections from Roy Jenkins, Walt Rostow, and Helmut Schmidt.
A look back at perhaps the most important foreign policy success of the postwar period. Edited by Peter Grose, with contributions by historians Diane B. Kunz and David Reynolds, a memoir by Charles P. Kindleberger, a profile of Marshall and Acheson by James Chace and one of Will Clayton by Gregory Fossedal and Bill Mikhail. And reflections from Roy Jenkins, Walt Rostow, and Helmut Schmidt.
"So clearly is communism neither the wave of the future nor the major challenge to American security", that a fundamental re-appraisal of US foreign policy is needed, recognizing weaknesses of both the US and Soviet economies. Neither can afford the war economy. Proposes instead (1) regional US-Soviet co-operation (2) further arms control (3) 30% cut in military spending over ten years (4) support for Third World 'democratic centrist forces' with military intervention as the exception (e.g. Cambodia under Pol Pot) (5) environmental and anti-hunger priorities (6) recognition of interdependency of national and international problems (e.g. drugs) (7) greater use of the UN. Inveighs against US presidential malpractice (covert actions, hasty campaign pledges). US presidential candidate, 1972.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.