Brookings this week released a new analysis arguing that although the first USMCA review successfully followed the procedures established by the agreement and by Congress, it left important opportunities for modernisation, increased certainty, and renewed political legitimacy only partially realised by becoming entangled in a broader set of negotiations beyond the agreement itself.
The analysis states that future reviews should concentrate on the distinctive governance functions the Article 34.7 mechanism was uniquely designed to perform — evaluating the agreement’s operation, identifying warranted improvements, and renewing its political legitimacy — rather than carrying the weight of broader bilateral disputes.
Quote from the analysis:
The result should not be understood as a failure of the review mechanism. Rather, it illustrates a broader lesson about institutional design. Governance mechanisms are most effective when they are used for the purposes they are uniquely equipped to perform. The first USMCA review successfully implemented the procedures established by the agreement and by Congress, but it left important opportunities for modernization, increased certainty, and renewed political legitimacy only partially realized.
Read the full analysis: USMCA review reviewed: lessons from the first use of USMCA’s review mechanism