EU Must Stand Firm on Investor Disputes

By Shaun Donnelly

Investment Policy Central

“It is looking increasingly likely that investment issues, and especially the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provision, will be among the more controversial elements of the U.S.-EU negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Most recently, the Directorate General for Trade (DG Trade) within the European Commission, charged with leading negotiating efforts for TTIP, has called for a ‘pause’ in those investment negotiations.”

Read the full post: http://www.investmentpolicycentral.com/content/tell-european-union-where-go%E2%80%A6%E2%80%A6on-investment

America’s International Trade Agenda: An Opportunity for Growth

By Peter Robinson, USCIB President and CEO

Remarks at the International Trade Association of Greater Chicago.

“The United States is pursuing a rejuvenated trade agenda, the most ambitious in many years. The business community has pushed hard for progress in a number of areas, and business engagement will be essential going forward. We need to get all our oars in the water to move ongoing trade talks toward a successful conclusion.”

Read the full speech: https://uscib.org/docs/2014_01_15_robinson_chicago_remarks.pdf

Hooray for FDI…. But Let’s Clap with Both Hands!

By Peter Robinson, USCIB President and CEO

Investment Policy Central

“We at the United States Council for International Business heartily congratulate the U.S. Department of Commerce and the entire administration for the very successful “Select USA Investment Summit” held late last week. While it was truly heartening to have the administration fully and publically on board with a strong message that inward foreign direct investment (FDI) is good for the U.S. economy, for U.S. jobs, competitiveness, and communities, we could still do more.”

Read the full column: http://www.investmentpolicycentral.com/content/select-usa-investment-summit-hooray-fdi%E2%80%A6-let%E2%80%99s-clap-both-hands

Renewed Action on Trade: A Boost to Companies of All Sizes

By Peter Robinson, USCIB President and CEO

DHL Delivering Tomorrow Blog

“After something of a lull during President Obama’s first term, liberalization of international trade and investment is back at the top of the global economic agenda. I strongly feel this has the potential to give a shot in the arm to companies of all sizes, including the emerging class of “SME multinationals” – the growing roster of small firms that have gone global and are actively participating in dynamic worldwide production and value chains.

Read the full post: http://www.delivering-tomorrow.com/renewed-action-on-trade-a-boost-to-companies-of-all-sizes/

China Daily (Hong Kong edition): A revitalized global trading system needed to avert protectionism

By Victor K. Fung

As a key component of the global economy, international trade is a major source of economic revenue and a major source of employment for any country. The present financial crisis and a looming recession will undoubtedly have a negative impact on trade and severely curtail growth because of liquidity and deteriorating consumer sentiment.

To avert disaster, leaders of the industrialised world have reacted swiftly to restore trust and confidence in the banking system. Such a brave move is now required to ensure that the global trading system does not collapse under the burden of an unstable world. But it is vital that, at this crucial moment, we should reflect upon where we have come from, before taking potentially disastrous measures that may precipitate protectionist action.

The last 20 years have witnessed an unprecedented expansion of the global market and unprecedented global economic growth and welfare. During the last two halcyon decades, it perhaps hasn’t been surprising that people were not especially interested in the apparent complex intricacies of trade negotiations.

The stark paradox of the last decade is that while the global market boomed, the global trade policy process stalled. More and more countries joined the WTO — growing from about 90 in 1990 to 153 now — but they then proved incapable of moving the agenda forward.

The paralysis may, in part, be a consequence of the system’s success. The multiple reforms of the latter part of the 20th century in developing countries have resulted in many more actors, big and small, engaged in global trade. The trade regime is no longer the sole province of the OECD countries as it was throughout most of its existence until recently.

Not only the fast-growing economies of China and India, but many other countries, such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Chile, Argentina, Mexico, Turkey, Morocco, Kenya, and Egypt, increasingly want to have a say in the trade-policy process, because their stakes in the trade regime have increased significantly.

Vietnam has probably experienced, in proportionate terms, a greater poverty reduction, within the shortest period of time, than any country in history; the growth that drove that poverty reduction in considerable part emanated from the trade regime that Vietnam joined in the mid-1990s.

One consequence of this feverish   activity has been to question why one should bother with what appears remote and arcane trade negotiations, when in the real world, things were going so well.

Another rather different consequence has been that the increase and diversity of actors has made the process far more complex. The repeated failures of the Doha Agenda since its launch in 2001 can be ascribed to two forces: a lack of sustained public interest and support, including from the business community; and incapacity on the part of negotiators to bridge the cultural and economic divides.

In appealing for the application of global solutions to the present financial turmoil, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated: “Successful market economies need trust, which can only be built through shared values”. Given the immense benefits that trade has generally conferred upon the people of many nations, it follows that one of the potentially strongest foundations on which to build shared values is in a solid and fair rules-based multilateral trade system that reflects the new realities of this potentially exciting and dynamic new global age. In this context, it is encouraging to note that China has committed to strengthen multilateral trade and economic cooperation, as stated in the country’s 11th Five-Year Program and in the 17th National Party Congress.

The financial crisis has prompted urgent and unprecedented globally co-ordinated actions. Without doubt, the world economy requires emergency surgery. At the latest Asia-Europe Meeting Summit convened in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao called for enhanced efforts to prevent the financial crisis from evolving into trade protectionism. The host country also proposed to establish a mechanism for multilateral trade cooperation and facilitation.

What is being recognized is that at the very heart of a global and sustainable economic revival, the multilateral trading system must be strengthened. We still live in perilous times; we live in a global environment in which, as Cordell Hull, Franklin Roosevelt’s secretary of state and a subsequent Nobel Peace Prize winner, wrote “The welfare of nations is indissolubly connected with friendliness, fairness, equality and the maximum practicable degree of freedom in international trade.”

To escape from the abyss of protectionism, the world needs a revitalized global rules-based multilateral trading system that will provide a robust global framework and restore a sense of global trust.

The author is Chairman of the International Chamber of Commerce.

More on USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee

ICC website

The New York Times: Saving Our Oceans

To the Editor:

Your timely Jan. 21 editorial, “Until All the Fish Are Gone,” correctly underscores the growing negative environmental and social effects of overfishing. What once seemed simply a conservation concern is now a global issue with tremendous social and economic ramifications.

We are fast approaching a critical crossroads in the future of our oceans. But unlike many other global issues, where business and the environmental community are often at odds, here we completely agree on a solution.

Members of the World Trade Organization are now negotiating new trade rules to reduce the government subsidies that promote overfishing. These subsidies provide fleets with money, fuel and incentives to fish longer, harder and farther than ever before. As a result, fish populations are declining, along with the quality of life of people around the world who depend on fishing for food and livelihood.

Reducing fishing subsidies is the single greatest action that can be taken to protect the world’s oceans.

Will the W.T.O. members seize the opportunity to stop overfishing and begin restoring the health of the oceans, and in turn, the health of mankind? That is the question.

Peter M. Robinson
Andrew F. Sharpless
New York, Jan. 22, 2008

Mr. Robinson is president and chief executive of the United States Council for International Business. Mr. Sharpless is chief executive of Oceana, an international environmental ocean advocacy group.

More on USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee

Oceana website

Journal of Commerce: Year-End Essay

The major challenge facing U.S. business is in keeping markets open to investment at a time when many seek to close them, often for protectionist purposes. The U.S. economy benefits enormously from inward investment in terms of jobs created, R&D expenditures and outlays for new plants and equipment. U.S. investors likewise spur world economic growth, ensuring the most productive use of the world’s financial and natural resources.

However, the sheer volume of foreign investment, coupled with the entry of new players often using sovereign wealth funds to place their new-found fortunes, have sparked calls here and abroad for greater governmental control over investment flows. Several governments have tightened regulations regarding foreign investment, while others threaten to do so. Many countries also use informal barriers to restrict outside investment, declaring that certain industries are off limits and must be protected as national champions. Is this the wave of the future? Do we really want investment protectionism?

Congress last year enacted a sensible reform of the process for reviewing the national security implications of proposed foreign takeovers. The Bush administration followed with a major statement – the first in 10 years – reaffirming long-standing U.S. policy of openness to foreign investment. That is the right direction for the U.S. and world economy.

More on USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee

Shipping Digest: Losing the bigger picture

By Peter M. Robinson

The thing that saddens me at this time of declining confidence in trade is that people are losing the bigger-picture perspective of the benefits of trade, while reaching for the latest and closest facts and figures, many of which are questionable, to supposedly justify their negative opinion.

Two of those bigger-picture benefits are particularly timely in today’s world: peace and climate. In the first case, trade is a deterrent to war. It is the exchange of goods and services that necessarily brings people together from different cultures and bridges political divides. Without trade, the world would be in an even more dangerous state.

In the second case, trade can help save our climate. It is trade that will facilitate the necessary transfer of clean, affordable technology to countries with the biggest emissions problems, a situation that ultimately knows no boundaries and which all the citizens of the world will share.

When we think of the world that we are preparing our children to inherit, I want one that will have as much peace and stability as possible, and one that will be as clean as possible. Trade is a big facilitator of those things and we too often lose that perspective as we go for shortterm, quick-fix solutions in response to the necessary adjustments and changes that trade does involve.

America is the land of innovation, of strength, and the proven ability to compete. Trade clearly benefits our society in the long run. Our leaders need to recognize this and act accordingly.

Peter M. Robinson is president of the United States Council for International Business. He can be reached at (212) 354-4480 or probinson@uscib.org.

More on USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee

The International Herald Tribune: U.S. trade policy

Letters to the Editor

Regarding the editorial ”Beating up on trade is not the answer” (July 28): How ironic that Congress has been considering yet another incomprehensible farm bill, yet it cannot be bothered to take the necessary steps to ensure the country benefits from future trade agreements, nor even to ratify the bilateral trade agreements America has signed with Korea, Peru and others.

The business community agrees that we need to invest in the future of our people and to deal better with the problems caused by trade. But it is hard to engender strong support for these positions with the strident anti-trade rhetoric emanating from so many in Washington.

To retain America’s leadership in the world, we must better engage emerging markets like China and India, where so much of tomorrow’s economic growth will take place. But we will never do so as long as America’s leaders cannot see beyond tomorrow’s elections.

Peter M. Robinson, New York

More on USCIB’s Trade and Investment Committee