The New York Times
January 13, 2004
Letter: Nafta and Fairness
To the Editor:
Joseph E. Stiglitz ("The Broken Promise of Nafta," Op-Ed, Jan. 6) correctly identifies the geopolitical benefits of the North American Free Trade Agreement as being far more important than its modest economic benefits. But we take issue with his attack on Nafta's foreign investment provisions.
The main issue is fairness, not some new set of corporate rights. Nafta obliges governments to treat foreign investors equally vis-a-vis their domestic counterparts, including in matters of expropriation. This precept is deeply embedded in United States law and practice. Thus Nafta raised the bar for legal protection of private property in Canada and Mexico.
Nafta does not inhibit the ability of governments to regulate in areas like the environment, health or safety. It simply says that government regulations must be applied fairly and not serve as a cloak for protectionism.
THOMAS M. T. NILES
President, United States Council
for International Business
New York, Jan. 7, 2004
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
More on USCIB’s Investment Committee
