During the last several years, international trade has been dramatically challenged, and the COVID-19 pandemic remains one of the main reasons. Still, political experts and leaders prefer to examine other causes of unpredictable shifts in international relations, with a special focus on the United States, China, and some European countries. Despite addressing globalization as the best outcome of technological progress to strengthen the nation’s economic background, this argument has many controversies, including the promotion of protectionism, global competition, and local priorities. Using protectionism in today’s age of globalization is characterized by multiple pros and cons, comparing improved conditions for domestic trade and a better local economy with increased prices and limited consumer choices.
Most changes in the political and economic spheres are usually associated with negative attitudes and misunderstandings. Thus, some con implications of protectionism during globalization remain inevitable. The main idea of protectionism is to impose restrictions on foreign products and limit international trade for underlying the worth of domestic products and services (Kolb, 2018). As a result, the US government supported the drawbridge-up strategy and used “Americanism” as its credo (“Drawbridges up,” 2016, p. 16). Domestic organizations were free to increase prices for consumers because no other options were available. However, the journalists of The Economist correctly define the US-China relationship as “lose-lose” in terms of economic nationalism, leading to the trade war that “only adds to the headache” (“Lose-lose ordeal,” 2022, p. 57). It means that there are no winning parties in the decision to apply protectionism as a leading policy in international relations. In addition, it is hard to diversify domestic products, and local consumers continue facing a problem of limited choices and alternatives. Thus, protectionism has negative outcomes that cannot be ignored in today’s political and trade relationships between many countries.
At the same time, the decision to apply protectionism in the era of globalization has multiple supporters. People believe this method, as opposed to trade liberalization, helps identify the strongest groups within a particular country and emphasizes the importance of their development and governmental support (Kolb, 2018). No one else but the local government is responsible for local economic prosperity. Society blames its leaders if there are failures or inconsistencies in trade, employment, or national identity. Thus, Trump took a serious step to disavow most international deals and decrease the number of immigrants in the country (“Drawbridges up,” 2016). Americans got a unique chance to contribute to the US economic strength and avoid the consequences of the US-China trade war due to improved domestic trade opportunities within their region. With time, the United States got enough evidence to consider itself superior because the world needed the US dollar and the English language (James, 2021). Economic nationalism allowed the country to eliminate the most negative consequences of globalization, proving the pro implications of using protectionism.
In conclusion, the analysis of the offered readings and a personal reflection contribute to several clear explanations to support and oppose protectionism in the age of globalization. On the one hand, globalization erases many international boundaries to stabilize fair trade and cooperation, and protectionism is necessary to maintain the national identity and economic prosperity of each country separately. The United States needs this step to prove its superiority and control over other nations. On the other hand, if one nation initiates distinction policies, other countries follow the same way and use their resources. The US-China trade relationships become an example of how protectionism worsens economic conditions due to limited trade ways and consumer dissatisfaction. Thus, protectionism must be carefully applied during globalization to achieve positive outcomes and avoid problems.
References
Drawbridges up. (2016). The Economist, 16-18.
James, H. (2021). Globalization’s coming golden age: Why crisis ends in connection. Foreign Affairs, 100(3). Web.
Kolb, M. (2018). What is globalization? And how has the global economy shaped the United States? PIIE. Web.
Lose-lose ordeal. (2022). The Economist, 57.