Frank Gaffney Quotes

Protectionism has to be avoided. Protectionism is not only on goods but also in the area of services. Financial protectionism is also bad and should be avoided.

Trade wars aren't started by countries appealing to respected, independent trade authorities. Rather, trade wars begin when one country decides to violate international trade rules to undercut another country's industries.

Unfair foreign trade practices are not isolated acts.

Consider trade protectionism. It's been tried - and found wanting - since the Great Depression.

The E.U., China, and Japan all talk free trade, and they all practice protectionism.

We all know that China is not a free trader. That's the reality.

If the United States wants access to Chinese, Indian or Vietnamese markets, we must get access to theirs. U.S. protectionism is very subtle but it is very much there.

That foreign trade should be fair rather than free.

Internal protectionism in Europe would be deadly, really a disaster for European economies.

If China is helping its domestic industries charge an artificially low price for solar panels and other environmental goods, then China is violating international trade rules that it agreed to when it became a member of the World Trade Organization.

You can’t have free trade of others don’t play by the same set of rules that our guys play by…. Free trade works if we open our markets and they open theirs.

The British government should use every kind of cheating that other governments use to promote their products.

It's not just free trade verses protectionism any longer, you've got the concepts of managed trade and reciprocity, and environmental issues.

A lot of people believe, and I do at times, that some of our trade agreements are lopsided, and we've got to look at them. But that doesn't mean that we're going to put a tariff on everything.

China is the most protectionist country of the very large countries. They talk more about free trade than they actually practice.

While never the darling of pure free traders, measures to combat dumping, subsidies, and injurious import surges have always been deemed essential by open economies like the United States to maintain support for trade.

Chinese mercantilism is not free trade, but it is far better than American militarism.

The United States can't keep a completely open system if the rest of the world is less open. The United States may have to take a leaf out of the book of Japan, China, and Germany, and have protectionism inside the system.

Basically, the myth is that America has been founded on the free market; the government has done very little; it has thrived under free trade. But actually, if you look at the history, this is actually the country that has succeeded most with protectionist policies.

It's not like I'm anti-China. I just think it's ridiculous that we allow them to do what they're doing to this country, with the manipulation of the currency, that you write about and understand, and all of the other things that they do.

As President Obama clearly said just a few months ago, China must play by the international rules, the international trading system from which they've benefited so much.

The problem is you cannot have free global trade with highly restrictive, regulated domestic markets.

Before we move forward with new efforts to lower the barriers to international free trade, we must review the consequences of the policies of the past and address the problems of the present.

Beneficial in theory, so-called free trade agreements far too often have been detrimental to the United States economy and the manufacturing sector that forms its central pillar.

In China, export lobbies have fought for policies that favor their interests and limit foreign competition.