I applaud Senator Hawk for the constant application of the ‘Hawk Doctrine’ which takes on board many of my own foreign policy concerns. While it has proven controversial and not to everyones taste, I believe it is being applied fairly to each nation based on strict criteria linked with human rights and democracy yet still remaining flexible
I appreciate those supportive
comments of my approach to free trade. While it's certainly not to everyone's tastes and I don't in the least think it controversial. I don't see anything wrong with free trade being a means to promote such progressive values as democracy, freedom and civil rights while simultaneously encouraging economic development and the benefits it brings
Firstly, there are those countries worthy of free trade period. I refer, or course, to the liberal democracies of the Western world whose political, and economic, conditions compare favorably with that of our own
Secondly, there are those countries, which although on good terms with Atlasia, where there human rights records are tenuous, who are worthy of free trade but with a principle that they commit themselves to becoming fully-functioning liberal democracies, with respect for political freedoms and civil rights. I appreciate that this is never going to happen over night but we must encourage it as a matter of principle
Thirdly, there are those countries with whom Atlasia should not be considering free trade with period. I refer, of course, to overtly hostile nations, many of which have an atrocious record as far as human rights are concerned. China might not be overtly hostile politically towards Atlasia any more but it is economically and its human rights records are atrocious
The 'Hawk Doctrine' is visionary in that it robustly espouses free trade as means of promoting such progressive values in addition to facilitating economic development. It is not protectionist, neither in essence nor in principle, but it risks becoming protectionist should the recalcitrant ever need to be brought to heel. And, ultimately, it is down to those trading partners (i.e. nations), subject to it, as to whether such penalties would be incurred. And I, for one, most sincerely hopes it never comes to that
And yes, I am inclined to think that free trade has been done to death by the Senate, of late. The Atlasian-South Korean Free Trade Bill evolved as the love-child born of a Greek tragedy and a Roman farce, in that it failed as a result of the President's veto after weeks of being obstructed
'Hawk'
