Europe and Canada sign the free trade agreement

The free trade agreement signed between the European Union and Canada, as well as the possible economic benefits, acquires, in this historical phase, a high symbolic significance. With a return to protectionism, and also to a greater claim of national sovereignty against supranational organizations, instances coming both from either the right, as from the left, the agreement between Ottawa and Brussels assumes a value, which seems to go in contrast to the anti-globalization sentiments . The question seems to be felt in equal measure, albeit for different reasons, by the two poles opposed the policy and threatens to become a detonator able to blow up the fragile internal equilibrium of the old continent, especially in a pre election period. Right view the signing of the free trade treaty it appears as the negation of the instances most felt on this side of politics: the opposition to the uniformity imposed by Union law, the waiver of further parts of national sovereignty and an even more invasive influence of Brussels with regard to local customs. For populist and anti-European parties is virtually a declaration of war, which will be used as propaganda in the coming election campaigns of Holland, France and Germany. From this point of view you signed it at a time so immediate attention before the elections in some of the most important European countries, means, undoubtedly, a gamble: the Brussels strategy seems to be the choice of exaggerating the issue, to act as alternative symbol to that chosen by the Member States, with the new president. If the White House and the United Kingdom have opted for closure to the world, Europe, and Canada, he wants to prove with this agreement the will to break the dominant trend represented isolationism, both political and economic. However, from the perspective of the will counter the arguments of the right, the ones that enclose the populist and anti-European movements, the signature at the moment, seems to be a pure risk, because from here the three upcoming elections, it will be impossible, provided that will actually post present , noted the practical and positive effects of the agreement just signed. It will be impossible, ie, quantify the benefits and the economic benefits that the agreement will produce, especially in terms of increase in GDP and reduction in unemployment. The signature appears to represent, therefore, a risk, it is unknown how calculated, against the arguments of opponents of the EU. But the face of opponents is not only right: even in the left there are significant voices against the agreement signed with Canada. The reasons relate to the increasing globalization, with its deleterious effects on the labor market, that sees more rights and safeguards more compressed, the consequences of an increasingly unbridled deregulation. But the reserves also concern sectors in which the left is very sensitive, such as the protection of health and environment, in which you could record the progressive invasion of the private sector in areas, for Europe, traditionally managed by public agencies. Again there is a real risk of a rise in feelings against Europe from the left side of the political spectrum, thanks to the already substantial social fabric against globalization, understood as the mortification of labor rights and wage compression. The reasons for the favor of the agreement that go beyond the symbolic aspect and beyond even the high expectations about the economic returns, concern the will to govern the phenomenon of globalization and, if possible, exploit it. It is a reasonable way, provided that it is implemented so as to create a redistribution of wealth eventually generated without increasing the already significant social imbalances and differences in income, which increased just with the advent of globalization. This seems to be, in fact, the crux to solve, even from the political point of view to give credit to the European institutions, too little present right on the side of the government, in the political sense, of globalization. What has occurred so far, in fact, was an economic dominance, without legalization, politics, who assisted in a passive way the effects of globalization. The big differences that have been created have created significant imbalances and poverty, which has generated deep discontent, directed precisely towards the European institutions. The occasion of the free trade agreement can be a turning point, but also a worsening of the situation, with very negative outcomes on the European experience below.