Regional economic integration refers to efforts to promote free and fair trade on a regional basis. Decolonization began in the late 1940s with the withdrawal of the British from South Asia and the Middle East and the withdrawal of the Dutch from Indonesia. The pace of decolonization accelerated after 1956 after the French and British defeats during the Suez War and the French catastrophe at Dienbenphu, which paralyzed their efforts to forcibly restore imperial power. Over the next 10 years, 26 African countries gained independence from British, French and Belgian rule. By 1965, with a few exceptions – the Portuguese colonies in Africa – most of the world had been decolonized and nation-state republics had been established in their place. Nevertheless, smaller markets such as Peru have been the biggest beneficiaries of MILA, as they provide access to a wider range of investors and products while ensuring liquidity and depth. It also draws the attention of global institutional investors to smaller markets, as they may not have shown this level of interest on their own. In addition, as a common platform, it can provide access to a wide range of sectors, which, given the sectoral imbalance in each market, may not be likely if exchanges market separately. Mutual funds that would invest in the platform have also emerged, and these can become vehicles for raising retail funds in the markets. MILA is a good example of a slow and steady path to integration, a definite advantage.
Kennan and Riezman (1990) examined whether countries can win by forming a customs union once the customs response of third countries is taken into account. They looked at a foundation economy with three assets and three countries that are symmetrical to the point of renaming foundation assets, with a linear spending system in all countries. In this context, they compared the result in a Nash equilibrium, in which two of the countries allow internal free trade and at the same time choose an optimal external tariff, with the result of a Nash equilibrium without any cooperation and the result of an equilibrium with global free trade. Whenever each country`s endowment with its export goods is not too large compared to the total global endowment, each pair of countries performs better in a customs union balance than in a country with global free trade. Therefore, the possibility of forming customs unions undermines the prospects for a multilateral trade agreement Given the global economic recession of 2008 and the difficult impact on the EU, NAFTA is unlikely to move from free trade area status to something more comprehensive (e.g. B, the Economic Union of the EU). In the introductory case study, you can read about the pressure on the EU and the resistance of all governments in Europe to make policy adjustments to counter the recession. The United States, as the largest member of NAFTA, will not give up its right to independently determine its economic and trade policies. Observers point out that there could be an opportunity for NAFTA to expand to other Latin American countries. William M. Pride, Robert James Hughes, and Jack R. Kapoor, Business, 9th Edition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2008), p.
89, accessed 30. April 2011, books.google.com/books?id=z2tEhXnm1rAC&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&dq=will+chile+join+nafta+2009 &source=bl&ots=iohSe7YV0E&sig=BjQr2KOx0lsrAGhv5vMqeb9LhFU&hl=en&ei=hLu8 TZ3LPNDAgQeZusjqBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDoQ6A EwBQ#v=onepage&q=will%20chile%20join%20nafta%202009&f=false. Chile was originally scheduled to be part of NAFTA in 1994, but President Clinton was hampered by Congress in his ability to formalize that decision. David A. Sanger, “Chile Is Admission as North American Free Trade Partner,” New York Times, December 12, 1994, accessed April 30, 2011 www.nytimes.com/1994/12/12/world/chile-is-admitted-as-north-american-free-trade-partner.html. Since then, Canada, Mexico and the United States have each negotiated bilateral trade agreements with Chile, but it is still mentioned on occasion that Chile may one day join NAFTA. Anthony DePalma, “Passing the Torch on a Chile Trade Deal,” New York Times, January 7, 2001, accessed April 30, 2011 www.nytimes.com/2001/01/07/business/economic-view-passing-the-torch-on-a-chile-trade-deal.html. The components of MERCOSUR account for almost half of the wealth created throughout Latin America and 40% of the population. Joanna Klonsky and Stephanie Hanson, “Mercosur: South America`s Fractious Trade Bloc,” Council on Foreign Relations, August 20, 2009, accessed April 30, 2011, www.cfr.org/trade/mercosur-south-americas-fractious-trade-bloc/p12762.
The group has strategically focused on developing the economies of its constituents and helped them become more competitive internationally so they don`t have to rely on the closed market. MERCOSUR has brought together long-standing rival nations. While this is an economic trade initiative, it has also been designed with clear policy objectives in mind. MERCOSUR is committed to consolidating democracy and maintaining peace throughout the Southern Cone. For example, it has made progress in concluding agreements between Brazil and Argentina in the nuclear field. Joanna Klonsky and Stephanie Hanson, “Mercosur: South America`s Fractious Trade Bloc,” Council on Foreign Relations, August 20, 2009, accessed April 30, 2011, www.cfr.org/trade/mercosur-south-americas-fractious-trade-bloc/p12762. The Caribbean Community and common market (CARICOM), or simply the Caribbean Community, was established in 1973 by the Caribbean countries with the aim of creating a single market with the free movement of goods, services, labour and investment. Web site of the Secretariat of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), accessed 30. April 2011, www.caricom.org/index.jsp. . .
.
