This paper examines the ongoing debates between free trade and protectionism to derive policy implications applicable to the Korean economy. Despite strong acceptance of a strategic trade policy as an positive economics for trade protectionism, economic criticisms oppose the reliability of strategic trade policy as adequate policy tool. This paper surveys the Super 301 as an example of bilateral trade laws which possibly undermine multilateral negotiations of free trade with emphasis on Korean example. This paper provides a recent suggestion to achieve global free trade through a grand bargain.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BergstenC. F. (1996). “Globalizing Free Trade,”Foreign Affairs, May/June, 120–150
2.
BoltuckR.LitanR. (1995). “America's Unfair Trade Laws,” in KingPhilip (ed), International Economics and International Economic Policy: A Reader, McGraw-Hill, 113–128
3.
BhagwatiJ. (1995). “Aggressive Unilateralism: An Overview,” in KingPhilip (ed), International Economics and International Economic Policy: A Reader, McGraw-Hill, 85–112
4.
BrandesJ. A.SpencerB. J. (1983). “International R&D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy,”Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 50, 707–722
5.
JohnsonBryan T. (1994). “A U.S. Strategy toward Trade with Japan that Will Work,”Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 999, August 30, 1–11
6.
DestlerI. M. (1999). “Trade Policy at a Crossroads,”Brookings Review26–30
7.
KrugmanP. (1997). “What Should Trade Negotiators Negotiate About?”Journal of Economic Literature, March, Vol. 35, 113–120
