A New Zealand-US free trade agreement is a key element to any significant improvement in trade between the two countries. The FTA would appear to be in the best interests of both nations, but political issues from both sides have dogged pursuit of the accordBy George Lauriat, AJOTOn September 11th 2007, the second US-NZ Partnership Forum was held in Auckland, New Zealand. The sponsoring group (US-NZ Council and counterpart NZ-US Council), composed of leaders from both nations, is dedicated to fostering closer political and economic relations between the two countries. At a glance, this would seem unnecessary – what disagreements could the US and New Zealand have - but since the 1980s, US foreign policy has often been at odds with New Zealand’s. The Forum’s primary purpose was to bridge the gap and specifically to lay the ground for a trade agreement between the US and New Zealand. The US sent a high powered delegation that included US Assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill and senior agriculture official Mark Rey and a number of former officials with ties to New Zealand. Perhaps more importantly, the group had representatives from US companies doing business in New Zealand, such as Boeing, Pratt & Whitney, and Dairy Farmers of America. At the Forum, former US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage quipped that the pursuit of a New Zealand-US Free trade Agreement, “It’s just like dating. I think we are on a date now.” If that analogy holds true, than it is looking more like a double date plus one as in late December 2007. According to a report released by Bloomberg, talks were initiated with the US to explore the framework of potential US involvement in an existing four-country trade agreement with New Zealand. Under the new scenario the US would join a Pacific region agreement between Chile, Singapore, Brunei and New Zealand. The agreement dubbed P4, appeals to Bush administration as a stepping-stone to a wider accord, possibly with APEC. But as New Zealand’s Trade Minister Phil Goff said, “I don’t want to overstate the case, the discussions are at this stage exploratory.” Goff added that talks had already been held with the US and other members of P4. While renewed talks are expected to take place any day now, it is an uphill struggle to put together any FTA in the current economic and political environment in the US. A major obstacle was the expiry of the President’s Trade Promotion Authority on June 30th 2007. The Democratic controlled Congress rejected renewing President Bush’s fast track trade powers. Without the President’s Trade Promotion Authority, Congress either accepts or rejects but cannot amend trade deals. Also with the Presidential elections looming, the atmosphere in Washington is highly charged – Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney has already stated that the renewal of the President’s Trade Promotion Authority is essential to promoting US trade. Romney’s position isn’t without a degree of logic. Neither side is willing to risk alienating the farm lobby before the election. Oddly, Democrats might agree with Romney’s stance but certainly would agree more with the proposition, should one of their Party’s candidates end up sitting in the Oval Office. All of which points to a very long and convoluted negotiations. THE FLIGHT OF THE KIWIOf course, there are many in New Zealand that view the P4 accord more along the lines of ‘kissing your sister’ than the genuine bilateral agreement that they had hoped. Besides, the P4, New Zealand, already has a comprehensive trade agreement with Australia – a neighboring nation that the US initiated a free trade agreement with in 2005 (see article). Perhaps the best leverage that New Zealand has in negotiations with the US is that it has opened up talks with China on a free trade deal. Party affiliations aside, no one inside the Beltway wants to follow(italics) China in a free trade pact in New Zealand – particularly with most favored nation status in the works. However, even if the US were to endorse t