Toward a North American Community: Lessons from the Old World for the New
Because of Pastor's links to previous Democratic administrations, the sensible proposals outlined here are not likely to find a receptive ear in the current White House. That would be a pity. This comprehensive account of NAFTA since its implementation in 1994 concludes that integration's rapid pace demands more concrete policy responses from Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Specifically, Pastor sees a need for both a "widening" and a "deepening" of NAFTA. "Widening" requires enlarging the market to permit larger economies of scale -- i.e., a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). "Deepening" involves reducing internal trade barriers and distortions -- a more complicated task because it runs up against domestic politics and national identity. He then proposes a "North American Commission" of distinguished individuals appointed by the three NAFTA governments -- but who are not in government -- to formulate a comprehensive agenda. This approach would include a far-ranging plan for transportation and infrastructure (funded initially by the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank) and better management of cross-border flows of people, arms, and drugs. It would also create a development fund targeted at North America's poorest regions, just as the European Union has done for its poorer members. Despite the political difficulty of these initiatives, Pastor concludes, they are essential to the continent's future; as he correctly points out, "a problem in one part of North America can no longer be contained from affecting other parts."
Related
The Salinas regime has ardently pursued the North American Free Trade Agreement as a silver bullet to kill myriad political and economic problems. But NAFTA as it stands would exacerbate many of Mexico's enduring disparities and injustices. Short term adjustment costs and the possibility of backsliding on political reform have largely been overlooked. NAFTA must be designed to contribute to political reform. Otherwise, postponing the accord would not weaken Mexico-only Salinas.
Exaggerated claims and charges are obscuring the facts about the North American Free Trade Agreement. Over time, in almost every instance, what's good for Mexico would also be good for the United States.
To the United States, the labor and environmental costs of NAFTA would be minimal and the economic benefits real, but small. The trade agreement is really about helping a friendly and important neighbor in its yet uncompleted economic and political reform.

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