The New Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
Andreas Pinkwart, former minister of science, technology, research and innovation, and now president of Handelshochschule Leipzig in Germany, said that if innovation and free trade are maintained, they will stimulate open borders. He sees negotiations on agriculture as a key impediment to progress in a transatlantic partnership but expects its success.
The TTIP, a newly inaugurated trade negotiation between the United States and the European Union may lead to further open export markets, expand the U.S. and E.U.’s investment partnership, address non-tariff barriers, and increase cooperation on issues including combatting discriminatory localization trade barriers and promoting SMEs’ global competitiveness.
The three key challenges that the partnership must address are climate problems, terrorism and economic imbalances. Also, the TTIP collaboration will serve well as a political and economic counterweight to China, even though the European Union and the U.S. combined are likely to soon have a lower GDP than China.
Speaking on behalf of the German government, Peter Fischer, head of economic affairs at the embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany, suggested strong encouragement of a TTIP. Since the E.U. and the U.S. are the largest economies in the world, their collaboration could only strengthen world trade, in particular with a convergence of regulatory approaches. Results would be achieved within 18 to 24 months, he said.
Howard Fogt, a partner at Washington, D.C.-based law firm Foley & Lardner LLP who specializes in international trade regulation, took issue with such a time frame. He believes that the implementation of an agreement would be long, slow and expensive. Politically, he sees the leadership for a TTIP as emerging from the bottom, if major movements are to be achieved. He also stated repeatedly that culture matters and economics cannot be negotiated by itself, particularly when fundamental issues such as food are to be discussed. (For example, the acceptance or rejection of hormone-injected beef demonstrates national differences.)
This article is a part of a series written by Michael Czinkota and Charles Skuba who report on the March 2013 meeting on trade policy and international marketing, a collaboration between the American Marketing Association, Georgetown University and the U.S. International Trade Administration. View part 4 here. Guest writer Charles Skuba teaches international business and marketing at Georgetown University. He served in the George W. Bush Administration in trade policy positions in the U.S. Department of Commerce.