Ma is maybe guilty of conflating individual agreements between nation states and these kind of larger partnerships like Nafta, EU, Euratom etc (or not being sufficiently nuanced for effect).
Of course, these large supranational agreements (rather than trading agreements per se) seem to be what Trump is opposing.
Also, maybe the US should be careful what it wishes for. The UN, for instance, was set up post WWII to project US / Wilsonian values around the world. While trade deals / supranational agreements are inconvenient sometimes, the US may end up missing them when they're gone and the US has to deal with a truly multipolar world again.
Same in the US I think. I wasn't talking about democrats (the US "centre-left", but about the actual left.
>Also, maybe the US should be careful what it wishes for. The UN, for instance, was set up post WWII to project US / Wilsonian values around the world. While trade deals / supranational agreements are inconvenient sometimes, the US may end up missing them when they're gone and the US has to deal with a truly multipolar world again
Let it come, I say!
That's more wishful thinking though. Many touted the same thing in early 20th century: that the increased trade between European powers, economic interdependence, etc. will mean the end of war.
Then WWI and WWII came along.
Trade is itself a kind of soft war (for resources, for markets, etc) and can easily be extended to full war when those are not ample enough.