CAFTA VS. NAFTA The United States of America is the leading country in North America. Partnership and cooperation with neighbor countries is important for it’s economical and social position in the world. NAFTA and CAFTA agreements unite the US with neighbor countries on variety of issues, the main of which is free trade. The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, is an agreement set up in 1994 among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The purpose of NAFTA is establishing free trade between those countries. The main benefit of NAFTA is eliminating duties on the export of goods between countries. As NAFTA went into effect, the shipping of US goods to Canada and Mexico became easier, establishing a platform for further, more effective cooperation between NAFTA participant countries. Following free trade benefits, NAFTA also provides protection of intellectual property rights, broader investment opportunities, environmental regulations. NATO allows an effective economical cooperation between three neighbor countries-participants in which each benefits in own way. Compared to other free trade treaties, NAFTA has a wider scope of concerns, including environmental and social issues. The Central American Free Trade Agreement is a treaty among the United States and six countries of Central America. The agreement was approved by US Senate in the year of 2005 but there are still negotiations about it. Though the treaty was recently approved by all of the countries except Costa Rica, it may not yet fully come into effect. In general, the aims and provisions of CAFTA are similar to those of NAFTA. Export duties reduction is the most important issue of CAFTA. The agreement is aimed to broaden and improve economical relationships between the United States and Central American countries for common advantages. There is much controversy in both agreements, and there are supporters, as well as opponents. CAFTA is supported by the US President George W. Bush and leading politicians of Central American countries. Politicians consider CAFTA to open new horizons and possibilities in many spheres of influence. Their views are based at the perspective that free trade improves economical cooperation. The United States will attain new markets in Central America bringing progress to the above countries` economy. Labor and environmental situation will be improved by CAFTA provisions as well. From economists` point of view, establishing free trade between countries is an advantageous agreement for all participants in terms of material benefits. On the other hand, CAFTA is a tool of globalization. An example with poverty of Mexican farmers as the result of NAFTA may occur in Central American countries as well. Progress may have negative impact upon certain spheres of life in Central American countries. Opponents of CAFTA are economists, environmentalists, socialists, anti-globalists. Environmentalists find reasons to fear CAFTA because it is known that development often negatively affects nature. Central American businesses may fail to compete with American ones because consumers will choose American products which would become more affordable than before instead of national ones. Perhaps, transnational cooperation has less guarantees for improvement and protection than risks to deregulate economical, environmental, and social situation within participant countries. So, the arguing sides differ in their views considering to what builds progress, economical growth, and prosperity. Free trade may bring profits and material benefits but have negative impact on other spheres and affect society. The situation is especially unequal in case when there is a leader country on one side and developing countries on the other. It is obvious that politics is a complicated science which rules over millions of lives. Even if the majority of one country’s population is not participating in politics, it is affected by political decisions. Often, politics is a weapon. NAFTA and CAFTA are political decisions. Like many others, they are intended to gain economical benefits. In doing so, politics often omit culture. However, when there is a question of finding links between different countries, the first thing to consider should be cultural perspectives. Presidents and ministers are responsible for decisions, in this case they do not ask people. But what if their decision will make their citizens suffer? Though economy indicates that NAFTA is a necessary treaty, there are farmers who suffered from it and Mexican companies which went bankrupt. The United States of America is and will be a prosperous country. It “uses” world developing countries in order to satisfy it’s own needs. NAFTA and CAFTA is profitable for the US. But what is left to developing countries? Guarantees of better working conditions, environmental control, and protection often fail. Developing countries agree with the United States, they have no choice. And then, the US, for example, plans to build a huge wall on Mexican border not to allow poor emigrants, treating them as enemies. Developing countries around the US suffer from it’s influence, and there are unequal relations between them. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Greider, William. “One World, Ready or Not”. Penguin Press. 1997. 2. DR. Jerry Haar. “Can DR-CAFTA Compete?”. Florida International University. January, 2006