The notion that “no trade is free” has deep historical roots. The Harvard economist Dani Rodrik and former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, among others, have argued that trade is inherently political, shaped by national priorities, regulatory frameworks, and strategic interests. While economic theory and thought dating back to Adam Smith and David Ricardo champion free trade as an ideal, history tells a different story—one in which trade has always been controlled by power, politics, and protectionism. The statutory warning is clear: if the lessons of history are unheeded by those in power, we will invariably repeat past mistakes.
The earliest deviations from free trade appeared in the form of mercantilist policies of early modern Europe, especially the colonisers – Spain, Portugal, England, and France. The colonies provided raw materials and markets for finished products, enriching one partner at the expense of another. But the whole idea of modern trade is not to impoverish either partner(s), it is to enrich both; or else why trade at all! Colonists engaged in coercive trade; today’s trade is completely voluntary. No one holds a gun to my head and forces me to trade. And yet while all countries gain from trade, i.e. trade is a positive sum game, the distribution of those gains could be asymmetric; in fact, in most cases, they are! Some nations feel the partner benefits more and hence resort to overt protectionist measures. The Trump regime in the US is one such example, and they have the firepower to try and bully the rest of the world to ‘buy’ this narrative.
