By his own account, Ron Kirk has been having some teachable moments lately (as President Obama might have described them).  Unfortunately, the U.S. Trade Representative is having them at the expense of long-term American and global economic interests.  In the process, he’s acting nothing like the savvy pol described in so many glowing press reports, someone who “developed his negotiating skills as a Texas lawyer and Dallas mayor” (to quote BusinessWeek).   Instead, he looks like a tenderfoot.  

Explaining his qualms about unilateral carbon tariffs – as included in the House’s new climate change bill – Kirk argued that “whatever we do should not imperil our standing with the world community or put us in jeopardy of violating our WTO commitments.”  Fair enough.  That’s standard – though deluded – boilerplate even among the many PC critics of U.S. trade policy.

But Kirk then proceeded positively to shower America’s typically protectionist trade partners with crucial aid and comfort: “It does not help me when I go to China, or Canada, or anywhere else, and say, ‘play by the rules,’ if they can turn around and say, ‘Hey look, you're not playing by the rules’."

Presumably the USTR professionals who have been tutoring Kirk haven’t gotten around to telling him: According to a recent WTO report, provided certain conditions are met, “a border measure related to climate change...might...be sought under the general exceptions to the GATT....”  Are those conditions clearcut?  Of course not.  Nothing concerning the highly politicized WTO ever is.  But how nice if Kirk could have responded to these provocations with something more than a deer-in-the-headlights look.

Maybe Kirk was also talking about the barrage of criticism from U.S. trade partners of the stimulus bill’s Buy American provisions?  If so, why didn’t he simply tell them that (a) American governments at the state and local level are fully entitled to boycott Canadian products because their Canadian counterparts wanted no part of the WTO government procurement agreement; and (b) American governmental entities at all levels can boycott Chinese goods because Beijing has shunned the procurement pact completely?  More inadequate briefing?

But let’s try to be optimistic.  Maybe Kirk just needs actually to learn his new job.  Maybe he’ll even be led beyond the legalistic talking points, and learn to ask our trade partners when they’ll start dismantling their much higher trade barriers. Maybe he’ll even become insightful enough to remind them that, unless they stop free-riding economically, the entire world trading system will remain mired in crisis and dangerously lopsided.  Finally, maybe he’ll realize that he’s not supposed to be excusing foreign protectionism and representing foreign concerns to Americans, but, just the opposite, expertly and relentlessly promoting U.S. global interests, which in fact are the real global interests.  You know – like a lawyer.

---