On September 20th President Barrack Obama addressed the full body of the United Nations for the last time as President of the United States. After a brief summary of worldwide progress in certain areas; he quickly moved into lengthy list of warnings. In a very analytical and professorial-like speech, he warned of all the challenges the world must meet in order to avoid further environmental and human cataclysmic events. He warned that unless people are able to overcome “tribalism”, the world would continue to see further conflict and mass migrations that threaten to further destabilize governments. He warned that “aggressive nationalism” and “crude populism” would further isolate nations and return us to a darker age; “…we, the nations of the world, cannot return to the old ways of conflict and coercion… A nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself”. He then went on to make his case for free trade.
After critiquing the isolationist mindset that longs to return to a better age he laid out the case for globalization and the TPP. He highlighted the necessity to interconnect the world’s economies in order to avoid conflict and improve the plight of the poor by saying that “the integration of our global economy has made life better for billions of our women and children…our international order has been so successful we take it as a given that great powers no longer fight wars.” And therein lies the crux of his case for the TPP and other similar trade agreements. He believes that the price of free trade is worth the resulting peace that can arise out such agreements. He went on to make two more points about free trade. The first acknowledged that too often the poor and working class were not sharing in the benefits of free trade. So he urged nations to put policies in place that would address income inequality or risk facing political instability and further growth in isolationist movements. However, in his second point, he also highlighted that free trade had the potential to improve workers rights and the environment. He went on to say that “together, we can eradicate extreme poverty and erase barriers to opportunity…We can promote growth through trade that meets a higher standard. And that’s what we’re doing through the Trans-Pacific Partnership — a trade agreement that encompasses nearly 40 percent of the global economy; an agreement that will open markets, while protecting the rights of workers and protecting the environment that enables development to be sustained.”
This speech seems to encompass his hope and support for free trade agreements. It also acknowledges the fact that he is aware of the consequences of free trade. It appears to me that his TPP problem is that he has not acknowledged the side effects of free trade with accompanying legislation that would help address income inequality and the manufacturing job losses that are sure to follow such an agreement.