The Making of NAFTA: How the Deal was Done (review)

The Making of NAFTA is a very well written book, which examines the asymmetry of power among the three nations as they negotiated this agreement. To give readers a clear understanding of the perspectives and strategies involved, Cameron and Tomlin interviewed most of the Mexican, U.S., and Canadian NAFTA negotiators. The authors apply a clear theoretical framework to this subject matter.

Cameron and Tomlin show that the negotiations of pacts such as NAFTA are affected by such variables as the nature of the government (authoritarian vs. pluralist, centralized vs. decentralized), the relationship between government and domestic interest groups, timing and political elections, and above all the country's "best alternative to a negotiated agreement" (BATNA). The economically advanced U.S., with its huge domestic market, told Mexico: "You want access to our market-what are you willing to pay?" Mexico's then-president, Carlos Salinas, was willing to pay a lot. Mexico opened access to its highly sensitive energy sector and was willing to damage important domestic industrial and agricultural interests in order to obtain access to the U.S. market.

The power differentials lay not only in market size but also in government structure. Ironically, a less unified and centralized government, such as the U.S., was able to win greater concessions precisely because of its disunity. It could threaten, "this will never sell" with some congressional block or industrial interest group. Mexico had no such leverage because its authoritarian government had no need to "sell" anything.

The Canadian government was able to secure its interests quite well because its BATNA was seen as perfectly acceptable—without NAFTA, Canada would still have had its existing Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S. Both the U.S. and Mexico (especially Mexico) more intensely wanted to achieve a NAFTA.

Domestic electoral considerations affected both the Mexican and U.S. bargaining posture at crucial points. The Salinas government desperately wanted NAFTA as its legacy, and George Bush's need for an agreement before the 1992 elections at one point pushed the U.S. into its first major concessions.

Overall, The Making of NAFTA is excellent in its command of negotiation theory, actual analysis of process, and retrospective analysis of the resulting NAFTA treaty. And it includes a complete explanation of the final features of NAFTA.

For labor educators, some of the most interesting issues are hidden in smaller sections or are present only by implication. This book makes it apparent that U.S. trading policy is heavily controlled by U.S. based corporations, not only in the diffuse sense that it faithfully serves their interests, but more immediately in that they are consulted on a daily basis to ensure that the government is doing their bidding.

Equal deference is not given to organized labor, environmental interests, or other popular sectors, although of course they are consulted in a more minor fashion. In the NAFTA negotiations, domestic interests representing working class or non-business interests were seen as a "problem" to be placated and circumvented. The disdain for democracy and the subservience to capital could hardly be clearer, although the authors do not emphasize or remark critically on this phenomenon.

In short, this is an excellent book within its own self-defined parameters. There is a lot to learn about the application of negotiation theory to trade pacts between economically stronger and weaker nations. There is also a wealth of data on NAFTA itself, as well as clearly written and engaging discussion of the governmental perceptions of self-interest among the three countries negotiating the pact. If this book could be rewritten from a labor angle, it would be very useful in credit labor studies classes. As it is, however, labor issues are considered and analyzed only in a small part of the book, and therefore it will probably prove more useful...