NAFTA’s "collateral damage"
BY NIDIA DIAZ—Special for Granma International—
February 8, 2008
Granma Internacional
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2008/febrero/vier8/6tlcan.html

Summary:
The United States, Canada, and Mexico signed a “free trade” agreement in 1994 called NAFTA. Mexico thinks that this agreement has caused nothing but problems for their country especially in the terms of the destruction or rural areas, the loss of food sovereignty, and the mass impoverishment of its people. Before the agreement Mexico was very self sufficient but now they import many agricultural items while their agriculture decreases. Rural workers in Mexico are demanding a renegotiation of the agreement in terms of the agriculture rules. Around February 6th, some 200,000 people in Mexico took a stand and took part in a mega-march on the capital. According to Mexico, they said that there is evidence that the Untied States dragged them into the agreement because they we are a stronger country. It is true that Mexico is not balanced at all in terms of wealth, population, and food with the other North American countries, but people say that the agreement should be renegotiated, and Mexico should get back what is theirs.

A. This article has to do with the impact of interaction among and within major societies because Mexico, Canada, and the United States had an agreement of free trade between each country. They are interacting with each other in that they are each importing and exporting certain goods.
B. Created on January 1, 1994, NAFTA is still the largest known trading bloc in the world in terms of combined gross domestic product of its members. The original document was signed by George H. W. Bush, so when President Bill Clinton came to office, he did not alter the original agreement but complemented it.
C. The country of Mexico in general is the author of this article because it keeps talking about how Mexico’s economy is getting hurt by this agreement, but so are the other countries too.
D. The author’s point of view definitely impacted this article because they are inferring that the United States forced Mexico to join the agreement because they were stronger, even though the leader of Mexico at the time, Vincente Fox, promoted the idea of enhancing NAFTA.
E. To understand and have a full grasp on everything that should be interpreted in this article, we should hear from an American or Canadian talking about how it has also affected their country and how Mexico isn’t the only one that got hurt.
F. When I read this article, I had no clue that any of this took place. I thought that we still had to pay money to ship things to Canada and Mexico. I learned that this is a big issue coming up in the presidential campaigns this year. After reading this article I definitely have a better grasp of some thing that are going on with our country right now and look forward to learning more about the issue.