Nevertheless, there is something great about this confusion between NAFTA and the letters of globalization. The agreement “launched a new generation of trade agreements in the Western Hemisphere and other parts of the world,” the CRS writes, so NAFTA has rightly become an acronym for 20 years of broad diplomatic, political and trade consensus that free trade is generally a good thing. NAFTA has not eliminated regulatory requirements for companies wishing to act internationally, such as rules of origin and documentation obligations, that determine whether certain products can be traded under NAFTA. The free trade agreement also provides for administrative, civil and criminal sanctions for companies that violate the laws or customs procedures of the three countries. NAFTA is often held responsible for things that could not be its fault. In 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote about a town in Arkansas that it would “collapse, like so many NAFTA ghost towns that have lost jobs in the needle trade and in production in places like Sri Lanka or Honduras.” Sri Lanka and Honduras are not parties to the agreement. NAFTA is a free trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada that came into force on January 1, 1994. Supporters have capped NAFTA because it has opened up Mexican markets to U.S. companies like never before. The Mexican market is growing rapidly, which promises more export opportunities, which means more jobs.
However, proponents have struggled to convince the American public that NAFTA would do more good than harm. Their main efforts have been to convince citizens that all consumers have as wide a choice of products at as low a price as possible, which means that consumers would be the main beneficiaries of lowered trade barriers. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents the interests of small businesses, was one of THE most active supporters of NAFTA and organized small and medium-sized business owners and employees to support the agreement. This support was essential to counter the efforts of organized work to put an end to the agreement. Given that the agreement is more than 23 years old, there are many clarifications and technical improvements that could be made in all nafta trade areas, such as labour, the environment or culture. NAFTA would also benefit from the inclusion of new trade zones, such as e-commerce, which are not currently covered to ensure that the agreement is aligned with current economic realities. NAFTA was built on the success of the former Canada-U.S. The Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA), which came into force in 1989, complements World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements with deeper commitments in key areas. The debate on the impact of NAFTA on its signatory countries continues.