The National Security Implications of "Free" Trade

I was slated to go on CNBC today and talk about America's dangerous and misguided "free" trade policy that continues to be foisted on us by elites in Washington. The appearance got cancelled because a train derailed here in Helena, but in getting ready for the interview, I delved into an issue that is rarely talked about on the Washington cocktail party circuit: the frightening national security implications of the Establishment's "free" trade orthodoxy.

Here are a few nuggets of news to consider over the last few months to get you thinking about what I am talking about:

- Airbus recently announced it is working with the Chinese government to potentially build a new airplane manufacturing plant in China. The development of this plant would clearly benefit from the international free trade regime, which basically eliminates almost every rational obstacle to trade, no matter how repressive the trading partner is.

- When Boeing signs purchase orders from China, the Chinese government regularly requires the company to produce more and more of its parts in China. Boeing now has substantial operations there, and has been cited for skirting direct military technology-transfer rules.

- Free traders in the U.S. Congress recently ignored bipartisan concerns and rammed through legislation to grant a British company, Westinghouse, billions in loan guarantees to build nuclear reactors in China. The free trade orthodoxy is so pervasive, these huge taxpayer-financed subsidies will ultimately go through Westinghouse to a Chinese state-run firm which, according to Reuters, has been "accused of transferring sensitive technology to Iran and Pakistan."

- "Free" traders in France and Germany are now, according to Reuters, "campaigning for the European Union to drop an embargo on arms sales to China that was imposed after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, in which tanks were sent to crush pro-democracy protests." They are advocating for the end of these trade sanctions even after the U.N. recently reported that despite denials, China still employs some of the most violent and brutal anti-democratic practices on its own population.

Remember, these policies are all being either pushed by "free" trade advocates in government, or by corporations exploiting the industrialized world's "free" trade orthodoxy. And the implications are staggering when you think about it. Basically, the "free" trade system is permitting an unbridled transfer of technology to China - technology that is clearly military-applicable. Worse, governments are actually using their own resources to aid the transfer of things like nuclear technology and arms - things that aren't just military-applicable, but ready-made for potential military use by China's unpredictable communist government, which we already know could be a serious military competitor in the future. This is the epitome of government putting corporate profits over all other concerns.

Obviously, there is an argument to be made that technology transfer to the developing world is important to help bring economies into the 21st century. But the fact that "free" trade orthodoxy means we don't even discuss what kinds of technology transfers are acceptable or should be restricted and what the implications of that technology transfer is for our own security shows that "free" trade orthodoxy is trumping all other priorities, whether they be domestic economic concerns or national security.

All we hear about are the supposed benefits of this corporate written trade policy, even though those benefits are often highly questionable or just plain fabricated. But we never hear about how "free" trade policy is now being used not only to destroy America's job base, but to help arm what could be one of America's most dangerous military competitors (we barely hear it from the "strategic class" of foreign policy elites in D.C., we don't even hear it from the Bush neoncons, who purport to be serious hawks, but whose silence on this issue shows they are hawks only when it doesn't offend their corporate benefactors). That should concern not only the workers who have been displaced by corporate-written trade policies, but every single American who is interested in the long-term security of this country.