# data[].attributes.body
Launched centuries of European exploration and colonization of the American continent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Christopher Columbus - Facts, Voyage & Discovery

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The explorer Christopher Columbus made four voyages across the Atlantic Ocean from Spain: in 1492, 1493, 1498 and 1502. His most famous was his first voyage, commanding the ships the Nina, the Pinta and the Santa Maria to the Americas.

# data[].attributes.body
Destroyed the Aztec empire, and the Spanish began to consolidate control over what became the colony of New Spain.

# data[].attributes.body
The first English attempt at a permanent and stable English settlement in North America. It failed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The establishment of the Roanoke Colony ( ROH-ə-nohk) was an attempt by Sir Walter Raleigh to found the first permanent English settlement in North America. The English, led by Sir Humphrey Gilbert, had claimed St. John's, Newfoundland, in 1583 as the first English territory in North America at the royal prerogative of Queen Elizabeth I. The first Roanoke colony was founded by governor Ralph Lane in 1585 on Roanoke Island in what is now Dare County, North Carolina, United States.(pp 45, 54-59) Following the failure of the 1585 settlement, a second expedition, led by John White, landed on the same island in 1587, and set up another settlement that became known as the Lost Colony due to the subsequent unexplained disappearance of its population.

Lane's colony was troubled by a lack of supplies and poor relations with the local Native Americans. While awaiting a delayed resupply mission by Sir Richard Grenville, Lane abandoned the colony and returned to England with Sir Francis Drake in 1586. Grenville arrived two weeks later and also returned home, leaving behind a small detachment to protect Raleigh's claim.

In 1587, Raleigh sent White on an expedition to establish the "Cittie of Raleigh" in Chesapeake Bay. During a stop to check on Grenville's men, flagship pilot Simon Fernandes forced White's colonists to remain on Roanoke.(pp 81-82, 89) White, however, returned to England with Fernandes, intending to bring more supplies back to his colony in 1588. The Anglo-Spanish War delayed White's return to Roanoke until 1590, and upon his arrival he found the settlement fortified but abandoned. The cryptic word "CROATOAN" was found carved into the palisade, which White interpreted to mean the colonists had relocated to Croatoan Island. Before he could follow this lead, rough seas and a lost anchor forced the rescue mission to return to England.

The fate of the approximately 112-121 colonists remains unknown. Speculation that they had assimilated with nearby Native American communities appears in writings as early as 1605.(pp 113-114) Investigations by the Jamestown colonists produced reports that the Roanoke settlers had been massacred, as well as stories of people with European features in Native American villages, but no hard evidence was produced.(pp 116-125) Interest in the matter fell into decline until 1834, when George Bancroft published his account of the events in A History of the United States. Bancroft's description of the colonists, particularly White's infant granddaughter Virginia Dare, cast them as foundational figures in American culture, and captured the public imagination.(pp 128-130) Despite this renewed interest, modern research has failed to find archaeological evidence to explain the disappearance of the colonists.

The Outer Banks were explored in 1524 by Giovanni da Verrazzano, who mistook Pamlico Sound for the Pacific Ocean, and concluded that the barrier islands were an isthmus. Recognizing this as a potential shortcut to China, he presented his findings to King Francis I of France and King Henry VIII of England, neither of whom pursued the matter.

In 1578, Queen Elizabeth I granted a charter to Sir Humphrey Gilbert to explore and colonize territories "unclaimed by Christian kingdoms". Gilbert had helped to crush the first of the Desmond Rebellions in Ireland 's Munster province in the early 1570s. The terms of the charter granted by the Queen were vague, though Gilbert understood it to give him rights to all territory in the New World north of Spanish Florida. Following Gilbert's death in 1583, Queen Elizabeth divided the charter between his brother Adrian Gilbert, and his half-brother Sir Walter Raleigh. Adrian's charter gave him the patent on Newfoundland and all points north, where geographers expected to eventually find a long-sought Northwest Passage to Asia. Raleigh was awarded the lands to the south, though much of it was already claimed by Spain. Richard Hakluyt, however, had by this time taken notice of Verazzano's "isthmus" - located within Raleigh's claim - and was campaigning for England to capitalize on the opportunity.

Raleigh's charter, issued on March 25, 1584, specified that he needed to establish a colony by 1591, or lose his right to colonization. He was to "discover, search, find out, and view such remote heathen and barbarous Lands, Countries, and territories ... to have, hold, occupy, and enjoy". It was expected that Raleigh would establish a base from which to send privateers on raids against the treasure fleets of Spain.

Amadas-Barlowe expedition

Raleigh quickly arranged an expedition to explore his claim. It departed England on April 27, 1584. The fleet consisted of two barques; Philip Amadas was captain of the larger vessel, with Simon Fernandes as pilot, while Arthur Barlowe was in command of the other. There are indications that Thomas Harriot and John White may have participated in the voyage, but no records survive which directly confirm their involvement.

The expedition employed a standard route for transatlantic voyages, sailing south to catch trade winds, which carried them westward to the West Indies, where they collected fresh water. The two ships then sailed north until July 4, when they sighted land at what is now called Cape Fear. The fleet made landfall on July 13 at an inlet north of Hatorask Island, which was named "Port Ferdinando" after Fernandes, who discovered it.

The Native Americans in the region had likely encountered, or at least observed, Europeans from previous expeditions. The Secotan, who controlled Roanoke Island and the mainland between Albemarle Sound and the Pamlico River, soon made contact with the English and established friendly relations. The Secotan chieftain, Wingina, had recently been injured in a war with the Pamlico, so his brother Granganimeo represented the tribe in his place.

Upon their return to England in the autumn of 1584, Amadas and Barlowe spoke highly of the tribes' hospitality and the strategic location of Roanoke. They brought back two natives: Wanchese, a Secotan, and Manteo, a Croatan whose mother was the chieftain of Croatoan Island. The expedition's reports described the region as a pleasant and bountiful land, alluding to the Golden Age and the Garden of Eden, although these accounts may have been embellished by Raleigh.

For the first colony in Virginia, Raleigh planned a largely military operation focused on the exploration and evaluation of natural resources. The intended number of colonists was 69, but approximately six hundred men were sent in the voyage, with about half intended to remain at the colony, and were to be followed by a second wave later. Ralph Lane was appointed governor of the colony, and Philip Amadas would serve as admiral, although the fleet commander Sir Richard Grenville led the overall mission. Civilian attendants included metallurgist Joachim Gans, scientist Thomas Harriot, and artist John White. Manteo and Wanchese, returning home from their visit to England, were also passengers on the voyage.

The fleet consisted of seven ships: The galleass Tiger (Grenville's flagship, with Fernandes as pilot), the flyboat Roebuck (captained by John Clarke), Red Lion (under the command of George Raymond), Elizabeth (captained by Thomas Cavendish), Dorothy (Raleigh's personal ship, perhaps captained by Arthur Barlowe) and two small pinnaces.

On April 9, 1585, the fleet departed Plymouth, heading south through the Bay of Biscay. A severe storm off the coast of Portugal separated Tiger from the rest of the fleet, and sank one of the pinnaces. Fortunately, Fernandes had advised a plan for such an occurrence, wherein the ships would meet up at Mosquetal, on the south coast of Puerto Rico. Proceeding alone, Tiger made good speed for the Caribbean, arriving at the rendezvous point on May 11, ahead of the other ships.

While awaiting the fleet, Grenville established a base camp, where his crew could rest and defend themselves from Spanish forces. Lane's men used the opportunity to practice for building the fortifications that would be needed at the new colony. The crew also set about replacing the lost pinnace, forging nails and sawing local lumber to construct a new ship. Elizabeth arrived on May 19, shortly after the completion of the fort and pinnace.

The remainder of the fleet never arrived at Mosquetal. At least one of the ships encountered difficulties near Jamaica and ran out of supplies, causing its captain to send twenty of his crew ashore. Eventually Roebuck, Red Lion, and Dorothy continued to the Outer Banks, arriving by mid-June. Red Lion left about thirty men on Croatoan Island and departed for privateering in Newfoundland. In the meantime, Grenville established contact with local Spanish authorities, in the hopes of obtaining fresh provisions. When the Spanish failed to deliver the promised supplies, Grenville suspected they would soon attack, so he and his ships abandoned the temporary fort.

Grenville captured two Spanish ships in the Mona Passage, adding them to his fleet. Lane took one of these ships to Salinas Bay, where he captured salt mounds collected by the Spanish. Lane again built fortifications to protect his men as they brought the salt aboard. Grenville's ships then sailed to La Isabela, where the Spanish set aside hostilities to trade with the well-armed English fleet. On June 7, Grenville left Hispaniola to continue to the Outer Banks.

The fleet sailed through an inlet at Wococon Island (near present-day Ocracoke Inlet) on June 26. Tiger struck a shoal, ruining most of the food supplies and nearly destroying the ship. There are indications that Grenville's fleet was supposed to spend the winter with the new colony, perhaps to immediately begin using it as a privateering base. The wreck of Tiger, however, made that impossible. The remaining provisions could not support a settlement as large as had been planned. Moreover, the shallow inlets of the Outer Banks made the region unsuitable for a base to support large ships. The colony's top priority would now be to locate a better harbour.

After repairs, Tiger continued with the rest of the fleet to Port Ferdinando, where they reunited with Roebuck and Dorothy. The men left behind by Red Lion were presumably also located during this time. On August 5, John Arundell took command of one of the faster vessels and set sail for England, to report the expedition's safe arrival.

The loss of provisions from the Tiger meant that the colony would support far fewer settlers than originally planned. Grenville decided that only about one hundred would stay with Lane, which would be enough to fulfill the colony's objectives until another fleet, scheduled to leave England in June 1585, could deliver a second wave of colonists and supplies. However, Grenville could not know that this expedition had been redirected to Newfoundland, to alert fishing fleets that the Spanish had begun seizing English commercial vessels in retaliation for attacks by English privateers. Until a resupply mission could be arranged, Lane's colony would be heavily dependent on the generosity of the natives.

While the Tiger was under repair, Grenville organized an expedition to explore Pamlico Sound and the Secotan villages of Aquascogoc, Pamlico, and Secotan. His party made contact with the locals, presenting Harriot and White with an opportunity to extensively study Native American society.(pp 102-110) Although much of their research did not survive the 1586 evacuation of the colony, Harriot's extensive survey of Virginia's inhabitants and natural resources was published in 1588, with engravings of White's illustrations included in the 1590 edition.(pp 157-158)

Grenville set sail for England aboard the Tiger on August 25, 1585. Days later, in Bermuda, Grenville raided a large Spanish galleon, the Santa Maria de San Vicente, which had become separated from the rest of its fleet. The merchant ship, which Grenville took back to England as a prize, was loaded with enough treasure to make the entire Roanoke expedition profitable, spurring excitement in Queen Elizabeth's court about Raleigh's colonisation efforts.

The Roebuck left Roanoke on September 8, 1585, leaving behind one of the pinnaces under the command of Amadas. Records indicate 107 men remained with Lane at the colony, for a total population of 108. However, historians disagree as to whether White returned to England with Grenville, or spent the winter at Roanoke despite his absence from the list of colonists.

Amadas spent the winter exploring Chesapeake Bay, traveling as far as Cape Henry and the James River. While there his party made contact with the Chesapeake villages of Chesepioc and Skicóak. The Secotans had described Skicóak as the largest city in the region, possibly leading the English to expect something like the wealthy Inca and Aztec kingdoms encountered by the Spanish. Amadas instead found a more modest settlement, although he was impressed with the area's climate and soil quality. Harriot and Gans explored the Virginia territory, meeting Native American tribes and taking stock of natural resources. During his travels, Harriot and his assistants collected data that would eventually be used to produce White's La Virginea Pars map.

Although 16th-century science could not explain the phenomenon, Harriot noticed that each town the colonists visited quickly suffered a deadly epidemic, which may have been influenza or smallpox. Some of the Secotan suspected the disease was caused by supernatural forces unleashed by the English. When Wingina fell sick, his own people could not treat him, but he recovered after requesting prayers from the English. Impressed, Wingina asked the colonists to share this power with other stricken communities, which only hastened the spread of disease. The epidemic likely had a severe impact on the fall harvest, at a time when Lane's colony would be heavily dependent on its neighbors to supplement its limited food supply.

In March, Lane consulted Pemisapan about a plan to explore the mainland, beyond Secotan territory. Pemisapan supported the plan and advised Lane that the Chowanoke leader Menatonon was meeting with his allies to plan an attack on the English, and that three thousand warriors had gathered at Choanoac. At the same time, Pemisapan sent word to Menatonon that the English would be coming, ensuring both sides would expect hostilities. When Lane's well-armed party arrived at Choanoac, he found representatives of the Chowanoke, Mangoak, Weapemeoc, and Moratuc. Since this gathering was not planning an attack, Lane caught them by surprise. He easily captured Menatonon, who informed him that it was Pemisapan who had requested the council in the first place.

Based on this information, Lane envisioned a detailed plan in which his forces would divide into two groups - one traveling north up the Chowan River, the other along the Atlantic coast-to resettle at Chesapeake Bay. However, he decided to defer this mission until the colony received fresh supplies, which Grenville had promised would arrive by Easter. In the meantime, Lane ransomed Menatonon and had Skiko sent back to Roanoke as a hostage. He proceeded with forty men for about 100 miles (160 km) up the Roanoke River in search of Chaunis Temotan, but they found only deserted villages and warriors lying in ambush. Lane had expected the Moratuc to provide provisions for him along his route, but Pemisapan had sent word that the English were hostile and villagers should withdraw from the river with their food.

In June, the colonists made contact with the fleet of Sir Francis Drake, on his way back to England from successful campaigns in Santo Domingo, Cartagena, and St. Augustine. During these raids, Drake had acquired refugees, slaves, and hardware with the intent of delivering them to Raleigh's colony. Upon learning of the colony's misfortunes, Drake agreed to leave behind four months of supplies and one of his ships, the Francis. However, a hurricane hit the Outer Banks, sweeping the Francis out to sea.(pp 134-137)

After the storm, Lane persuaded his men to evacuate the colony, and Drake agreed to take them back to England. Manteo and an associate, Towaye, joined them. Three of Lane's colonists were left behind and never heard from again. Because the colony was abandoned, it is unclear what became of the slaves and refugees Drake had meant to place there. There is no record of them arriving in England with the fleet, and it is possible Drake left them on Roanoke with some of the goods he had previously set aside for Lane. Drake's fleet, along with Lane's colonists, reached England in July 1586. Upon arrival, the colonists introduced tobacco, maize, and potatoes to England.

Despite the desertion of the Lane colony, Raleigh was persuaded to make another attempt by Hakluyt, Harriot, and White. However, Roanoke Island would no longer be safe for English settlers, following the hostilities between Lane's men and the Secotan, and the death of Wingina. Hakluyt recommended Chesapeake Bay as the site for a new colony, in part because he believed the Pacific coast lay just beyond the explored areas of the Virginia territory. On January 7, 1587, Raleigh approved a corporate charter to found "the Cittie of Raleigh" with White as governor and twelve assistants.(pp 81-82, 202) Approximately 115 people agreed to join the colony, including White's pregnant daughter Eleanor and her husband Ananias Dare. The colonists were largely middle-class Londoners, perhaps seeking to become landed gentry. Manteo and Towaye, who had left the Lane colony with Drake's fleet, were also brought along. This time, the party included women and children, but no organized military force.

The expedition consisted of three ships: The flagship Lion, captained by White with Fernandes as master and pilot, along with a flyboat (under the command of Edward Spicer) and a full-rigged pinnace (commanded by Edward Stafford). The fleet departed on May 8.(pp 268-269)

White dispatched Stafford to re-establish relations with the Croatan, with the help of Manteo. The Croatan described how a coalition of mainland tribes, led by Wanchese, had attacked Grenville's detachment. The colonists attempted to negotiate a truce through the Croatan, but received no response.(pp 120-123) On August 9, White led a pre-emptive strike on Dasamongueponke, but the enemy (fearing reprisal for the death of Howe) had withdrawn from the village, and the English accidentally attacked Croatan looters. Manteo again smoothed relations between the colonists and the Croatan. For his service to the colony, Manteo was baptized and named "Lord of Roanoke and Dasamongueponke".

After a difficult journey, White returned to England on November 5, 1587. By this time reports of the Spanish Armada mobilizing for an attack had reached London, and Queen Elizabeth had prohibited any able ship from leaving England so that they might participate in the coming battle.(pp 119-121)

During the winter, Grenville was granted a waiver to lead a fleet into the Caribbean to attack the Spanish, and White was permitted to accompany him in a resupply ship. The fleet was set to launch in March 1588, but unfavorable winds kept them in port until Grenville received new orders to stay and defend England. Two of the smaller ships in Grenville's fleet, the Brave and the Roe, were deemed unsuitable for combat, and White was permitted to take them to Roanoke. The ships departed on April 22, but the captains of the ships attempted to capture several Spanish ships on the outward-bound voyage (in order to improve their profits). On May 6 they were attacked by French mariners (or pirates) near Morocco. Nearly two dozen of the crew were killed, and the supplies bound for Roanoke were looted, leaving the ships to return to England.

The Spanish Empire had been gathering intelligence on the Roanoke colonies since Grenville's capture of Santa Maria de San Vicente in 1585. They feared that the English had established a haven for piracy in North America, but were unable to locate such a base. They had no cause to assume Lane's colony had been abandoned, or that White's would be placed in the same location. Indeed, the Spanish greatly overestimated the success of the English in Virginia; rumors suggested the English had discovered a mountain made of diamonds and a route to the Pacific Ocean.

Eventually, Raleigh arranged passage for White on a privateering expedition organized by John Watts. The fleet of six ships would spend the summer of 1590 raiding Spanish outposts in the Caribbean, but the flagship Hopewell and the Moonlight would split off to take White to his colony. At the same time, however, Raleigh was in the process of turning the venture over to new investors.

Hopewell and Moonlight anchored at Croatoan Island on August 12, but there is no indication that White used the time to contact the Croatan for information. On the evening of August 15, while anchored at the north end of Croatoan Island, the crews sighted plumes of smoke on Roanoke Island; the following morning, they investigated another column of smoke on the southern end of Croatoan, but found nothing. White's landing party spent the next two days attempting to cross Pamlico Sound with considerable difficulty and loss of life. On August 17 they sighted a fire on the north end of Roanoke and rowed towards it, but they reached the island after nightfall and decided not to risk coming ashore. The men spent the night in their anchored boats, singing English songs in hopes that the colonists would hear.

White and the others made landfall on the morning of August 18 (his granddaughter's third birthday). The party found fresh tracks in the sand, but were not contacted by anyone. They also discovered the letters "CRO" carved into a tree. Upon reaching the site of the colony, White noted the area had been fortified with a palisade. Near the entrance of the fencing, the word "CROATOAN" was carved in one of the posts. White was certain these two inscriptions meant that the colonists had peacefully relocated to Croatoan Island, since they had agreed in 1587 that the colonists would leave a "secret token" indicating their destination, or a cross pattée as a duress code.(pp 126-127)

Within the palisade, the search party found that houses had been dismantled, and anything that could be carried had been removed. Several large trunks (including three belonging to White, containing the belongings he left behind in 1587) had been dug up and looted. None of the colony's boats could be found along the shore. The party returned to Hopewell that evening, and plans were made to return to Croatoan the following day. However, Hopewell's anchor cable snapped, leaving the ship with only one working cable and anchor. The search mission could not continue given the considerable risk of shipwreck. Moonlight set off for England, but the crew of Hopewell offered a compromise with White, in which they would spend winter in the Caribbean and return to the Outer Banks in the spring of 1591. This plan fell through, though, when Hopewell was blown off course, forcing them to stop for supplies in the Azores. When the winds prevented landfall there, the ship was again forced to change course for England, arriving on October 24, 1590.(pp 102-103)

Although White failed to locate his colonists in 1590, his report suggested they had simply relocated and might yet be found alive. However, it served Raleigh's purposes to keep the matter in doubt; so long as the settlers could not be proven dead, he could legally maintain his claim on Virginia. Nevertheless, a 1594 petition was made to declare Ananias Dare legally dead so that his son, John Dare, could inherit his estate. The petition was granted in 1597.(pp 225-226)

Raleigh later sought to enforce his monopoly on Virginia - based on the potential survival of the Roanoke colonists - when the price of sassafras skyrocketed. He funded a 1602 mission to the Outer Banks, with the stated goal of resuming the search.(pp 112-113) Led by Samuel Mace, this expedition differed from previous voyages in that Raleigh bought his own ship and guaranteed the sailors' wages so that they would not be distracted by privateering. However, the ship's itinerary and manifest indicate that Raleigh's top priority was harvesting sassafras far south of Croatoan Island. By the time Mace approached Hatteras, bad weather prevented them from lingering in the area. In 1603, Raleigh was implicated in the Main Plot and arrested for treason against King James, effectively ending his Virginia charter.(pp 147-148)

Following the establishment of the Jamestown settlement in 1607, John Smith was captured by the Powhatan and met with both their leader Wahunsenacawh (often referred to as "Chief Powhatan") and his brother Opchanacanough. They described to him a place called "Ocanahonan", where men wore European-style clothing; and "Anone", which featured walled houses. Later, after Smith returned to the colony, he made arrangements with Wowinchopunk, the king of the Paspahegh, to investigate "Panawicke", another place reportedly inhabited by men in European dress. The colony produced a crude map of the region with labels for these villages. The map also featured a place called "Pakrakanick" with a note indicating, "Here remayneth 4 men clothed that came from Roonocok to Ocanahawan."(pp 128-133)

Based on this intelligence, as well as Smith's earlier report, the Council drafted orders for the Jamestown colony to relocate. These orders recommended "Ohonahorn" (or "Oconahoen"), near the mouth of the Chowan River, as a new base. Among the purported advantages of this location were proximity to "Riche Copper mines of Ritanoc" and "Peccarecamicke", where four of Raleigh's colonists were supposed to be held by a chieftain named "Gepanocon". These orders, along with the new acting governor, Thomas Gates, were delayed due to the shipwreck of the Sea Venture at Bermuda. Gates arrived at Jamestown in May 1610, several months into the Starving Time. The crisis may have deterred the colonists from attempting the proposed relocation. An expedition was sent to the Chowan River, but there is no record of its findings.(pp 120-122)

William Strachey arrived in Jamestown, along with Gates and Machumps, in May 1610. By 1612, he had returned to England, where he wrote The Historie of Travaile into Virginia Britannia, an overview of the Virginia territory.(pp 120-122) He described "Peccarecamek", "Ochanahoen", "Anoeg", and "Ritanoe" in a manner consistent with Smith's map and the Virginia Council's orders to Gates. However, Strachey introduced additional details about "the slaughter at Roanoak".

The Historie of Travaile never directly identifies the tribe that supposedly hosted the Roanoke colonists. However, Strachey did describe an attack against the Chesepians, in which Wahunsenacawh's priests warned him that a nation would arise in Chesapeake Bay to threaten his dominion. It has been inferred that the colonists had relocated to Chesapeake, and both groups were massacred in the same attack.(pp 367-368)

Strachey believed that the Powhatan religion was inherently Satanic, and that the priests might literally be in communion with Satan. He advocated for England to facilitate the Powhatans' conversion to Christianity. To that end, he recommended a plan in which King James would show mercy to the Powhatan people for the massacre of the Roanoke colonists, but demand revenge upon the priests. However, the London Company did not publish The Historie of Travaile, which fell into obscurity until 1849. There is no indication that any actions were taken against Wahunsenacawh or his priests in retaliation for the alleged massacre.

After the Powhatan attacked Jamestown in 1622, there was a dramatic shift in English commentary on Native Americans, as writers increasingly questioned their humanity. The London Company sponsored propaganda arguing that the massacre had justified genocidal retaliation, in order to assure potential backers that their investment in the colony would be safe.(pp 453-454)

In this context, Samuel Purchas wrote Virginia's Verger in 1625, asserting England's right to possess and exploit its North American claim. He argued that the natives, as a race, had forfeited their right to the land through bloodshed, citing the 1586 ambush of Grenville's garrison, an alleged attack on White's colonists, and the 1622 Jamestown massacre. Purchas offered no evidence for his claim about the 1587 colony except to state, "Powhatan confessed to Cap. Smith, that hee had beene at their slaughter, and had divers utensills of theirs to shew."(pp 228-229)

It is possible Smith related the story of Wahunsenacawh's confession to Purchas, as they are known to have spoken together. Smith's own writings, however, never mention the confession, leaving Purchas' claim to stand alone in what historian Helen Rountree dismisses as "an anti-Indian polemic". Even if taken at face value, the alleged confession is not persuasive, as Wahunsenacawh might have invented the story in an attempt to intimidate Smith. The European artifacts allegedly offered as "proof" of a raid on the Roanoke colonists could just as easily have been obtained from other sources, such as Ajacán.

Sea traffic through Roanoke Island fell into decline in the 17th century, owing to the dangerous waters of the Outer Banks. In 1672, the inlet between Hatorask and Croatoan Islands closed, and the resulting landmass became known as Hatteras Island.

During John Lawson's 1701-1709 exploration of northern Carolina, he visited Hatteras Island and encountered the Hatteras people. Although there is evidence of European activity in the Outer Banks throughout the 17th century, Lawson was the first historian to investigate the region since White left in 1590.(pp 181-182) Lawson was impressed with the influence of English culture on the Hatteras. They reported that several of their ancestors had been white, and some of them had gray eyes, supporting this claim. Lawson theorized that members of the 1587 colony had assimilated into this community after they lost hope of regaining contact with England. While visiting Roanoke Island itself, Lawson reported finding the remains of a fort, as well as English coins, firearms, and a powder horn.

Research into the disappearance of the 1587 colonists largely ended with Lawson's 1701 investigation. Renewed interest in the Lost Colony during the 19th century eventually led to a wide range of scholarly analyses.

The ruins that Lawson encountered in 1701 eventually became a tourist attraction. U.S. President James Monroe visited the site on April 7, 1819. During the 1860s, visitors described the deteriorated "fort" as little more than an earthwork in the shape of a small bastion, and reported holes dug nearby in search of valuable relics. Production of the 1921 silent film The Lost Colony and road development further damaged the site. In the 1930s, J. C. Harrington advocated for the restoration and preservation of the earthwork.(pp 135-141) The National Park Service began administration of the area in 1941, designating it Fort Raleigh National Historic Site. In 1950, the earthwork was reconstructed in an effort to restore its original size and shape.

After Hurricane Emily uncovered a number of Native American artifacts along Cape Creek in Buxton, North Carolina, anthropologist David Sutton Phelps Jr. organized an excavation in 1995. Phelps and his team discovered a ring in 1998, which initially appeared to be a gold signet ring bearing the heraldry of a Kendall family in the 16th century.(pp 184-189) The find was celebrated as a landmark discovery, but Phelps never published a paper on his findings, and neglected to have the ring properly tested. X-ray analysis in 2017 proved the ring was brass, not gold, and experts could not confirm the alleged connection to Kendall heraldry. The low value and relative anonymity of the ring make it more difficult to conclusively associate with any particular person from the Roanoke voyages, which in turn increases the likelihood that it could have been brought to the New World at a later time.(pp 199-205)

A significant challenge for archaeologists seeking information about the 1587 colonists is that many common artifacts could plausibly originate from the 1585 colony, or from Native Americans who traded with other European settlements in the same era. Andrew Lawler suggests that an example of a conclusive find would be female remains (since the 1585 colony was exclusively male) buried according to Christian tradition (supine, in an east-west orientation) which can be dated to before 1650 (by which point Europeans would have spread throughout the region). However, few human remains of any kind have been discovered at sites related to the Lost Colony.

One possible explanation for the extreme deficiency in archaeological evidence is shoreline erosion. The northern shore of Roanoke Island, where the Lane and White colonies were located, lost 928 feet (283 m) between 1851 and 1970. Extrapolating from this trend back to the 1580s, it is likely that portions of the settlements are now underwater, along with any artifacts or signs of life.

In November 2011, researchers at the First Colony Foundation noticed two corrective patches on White's 1585 map La Virginea Pars. At their request, the British Museum examined the original map with a light table. One of the patches, at the confluence of the Roanoke and Chowan rivers, was found to cover a symbol representing a fort.(pp 163-170)

As the symbol is not to scale, it covers an area on the map representing thousands of acres in Bertie County, North Carolina. However, the location is presumed to be in or near the 16th-century Weapemeoc village of Mettaquem. In 2012, when a team prepared to excavate where the symbol indicated, archaeologist Nicholas Luccketti suggested they name the location "Site X", as in " X marks the spot."(pp 176-177)

In an October 2017 statement, the First Colony Foundation reported finding fragments of Tudor pottery and weapons at Site X, and concluded that these indicate a small group of colonists residing peacefully in the area. The challenge for this research is to convincingly rule out the possibility that such finds were brought to the area by the 1585 Lane colony, or the trading post established by Nathaniel Batts in the 1650s.(pp 174-182) In 2019, the Foundation announced plans to expand the research into land that has been donated to North Carolina as Salmon Creek State Natural Area.

In 1998, a team led by climatologist David W. Stahle (of the University of Arkansas) and archaeologist Dennis B. Blanton (of the College of William and Mary) concluded that an extreme drought occurred in Tidewater between 1587 and 1589. Their study measured growth rings from a network of bald cypress trees, producing data ranging from 1185 to 1984. Specifically, 1587 was measured as the worst growing season in the entire 800-year period. The findings were considered consistent with the concerns the Croatan expressed about their food supply.

Since 2005, computer scientist Roberta Estes has founded several organisations for DNA analysis and genealogical research. Her interest in the disappearance of the 1587 colony motivated various projects to establish a genetic link between the colonists and potential Native American descendants. Examining autosomal DNA for this purpose is unreliable, as so little of the colonists' genetic material would remain after five or six generations. However, testing of Y chromosomes and mitochondrial DNA is more reliable over large spans of time. The main challenge of this work is to obtain a genetic point of comparison, either from the remains of a Lost Colonist or one of their descendants. While it is conceivable to sequence DNA from 430-year-old bones, there are as yet no bones from the Lost Colony to work with. As of 2019, the project has yet to identify any living descendants either.(pp 311-314)

Hypotheses about the colony's disappearance

Without evidence of the Lost Colony's relocation or destruction, speculation about their fate has endured since the 1590s. The matter has developed a reputation among academics for attracting obsession and sensationalism with little scholastic benefit.(pp 8, 263, 270-71, 321-24)

David Beers Quinn concluded that the 1587 colonists sought to relocate to their original destination - Chesapeake Bay - using the pinnace and other small boats to transport themselves and their belongings. A small group would have been stationed at Croatoan, to await White's return and direct him to the transplanted colony. Following White's failure to locate any of the colonists, the main body of the colonists would have quickly assimilated with the Chesepians, while the lookouts on Croatoan would have blended into the Croatan tribe.[citation needed ]

Quinn suggested that Samuel Mace's 1602 voyage might have ventured into Chesapeake Bay and kidnapped Powhatans to bring back to England. From there, these abductees would be able to communicate with Thomas Harriot, and might reveal that Europeans were living in the region. Quinn evidently believed circumstances such as these were necessary to explain optimism about the colonists' survival after 1603.[citation needed ]

Most historians today believe this to be the most likely scenario for the surviving colonists' fate. However, this leaves open the question of which tribe, or tribes, the colonists assimilated into. It is widely accepted that the Croatan were ancestors of the 18th century Hatteras, although evidence of this is circumstantial. The present-day Roanoke-Hatteras tribe identifies as descendants of both the Croatan and the Lost Colonists by way of the Hatteras.(pp 339-344)

Some 17th century maps use the word "Croatoan" to describe locations on the mainland, across Pamlico Sound from Roanoke and Hatteras. By 1700, these areas were associated with the Machapunga. Oral traditions and legends about the migration of the Croatan through the mainland are prevalent in eastern North Carolina. For example, the "Legend of the Coharie" in Sampson County was transcribed by Edward M. Bullard in 1950.(pp 102-110)

More famously, in the 1880s, state legislator Hamilton McMillan proposed that the Native American community in Robeson County (then considered free people of color) retained surnames and linguistic characteristics from the 1587 colonists. His efforts convinced the North Carolina legislature to confer tribal recognition to the community in 1885, with the new designation of "Croatan". The tribe petitioned to be renamed in 1911, eventually settling on the name Lumbee in 1956.(pp 301-307)

Other tribes purportedly linked to the Roanoke colonists include the Catawba and the Coree. S.A'C. Ashe was convinced that the colonists had relocated westward to the banks of the Chowan River in Bertie County, and Conway Whittle Sams claimed that after being attacked by Wanchese and Wahunsenacawh, they scattered to multiple locations: The Chowan River, and south to the Pamlico and Neuse Rivers.

Reports of encounters with pale-skinned, blond-haired people among various Native American tribes occur as early as 1607. Although this is frequently attributed to assimilated Lost Colonists, it may be more easily explained by dramatically higher rates of albinism in Native Americans than in people of European descent. Dawson (2020) proposed that the colonists merged with the Croatoan people; he claims, "They were never lost. It was made up. The mystery is over." However, this conclusion has been called into question. Dr. Alain Outlaw, an archaeologist and faculty member at Christopher Newport University, called Dawson's conclusion as "storytelling, not evidence-based information," while archaeologist Nick Luccketti wrote "I have not seen any evidence at Croatoan of artifacts that indicate that Englishmen were living there." In addition, the actual text of Dawson's 2020 book The Lost Colony and Hatteras Island admitted that there was no "smoking gun" of evidence that the colonists had assimilated with the tribe. The book was also not subject to peer review, leaving the question open in spite of the sensationalist headlines that accompanied its publication.

The pinnace would not have been large enough to carry all of the colonists. Additionally, the provisions needed for a transatlantic voyage would further restrict the number of passengers. The colonists may have possessed the resources to construct another seaworthy vessel, using local lumber and spare parts from the pinnace. Considering the ships were built by survivors of the 1609 Sea Venture shipwreck, it is at least possible that the Lost Colonists could produce a second ship that, with the pinnace, could transport most of their party. Even in these ideal conditions, however, at least some colonists would remain in Virginia, leaving open the question of what became of them.

Anthropologist Lee Miller proposed that Sir Francis Walsingham, Simon Fernandes, Edward Strafford, and others participated in a conspiracy to maroon the 1587 colonists at Roanoke. The purpose of this plot, she argued, was to undermine Walter Raleigh, whose activities supposedly interfered with Walsingham's covert machinations to make England a Protestant world power, at the expense of Spain and other Catholic nations. This conspiracy would have impeded Raleigh and White from dispatching a relief mission until Walsingham's death in 1590.(pp 168-204) Miller also suggested that the colonists may have been separatists, seeking refuge in America from religious persecution in England. Raleigh expressed sympathy for the separatists, while Walsingham considered them a threat to be eliminated.(pp 43-50, 316)

According to Miller, the colonists split up, with a small group relocating to Croatoan while the main body sought shelter with the Chowanoke. The colonists, however, would have quickly spread European diseases among their hosts, decimating the Chowanoke and thereby destabilising the balance of power in the region. From there Miller reasoned that the Chowanoke were attacked, with the survivors taken captive, by the "Mandoag", a powerful nation to the west that the Jamestown colonists only knew from the vague accounts of their neighbors.(pp 227-237) She concluded that the "Mandoag" were the Eno, who traded the captured surviving Lost Colonists as slaves, dispersing them throughout the region.(pp 255-260)

Local legends in Dare County refer to an abandoned settlement called "Beechland", located within what is now the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge. The area has had reports of small coffins, some with Christian markings, encouraging speculation of a link to the Lost Colony.(pp 127-128) Based on these legends, engineer Phillip McMullan and amateur archaeologist Fred Willard concluded that Walter Raleigh dispatched the 1587 colonists to harvest sassafras along the Alligator River. All records suggesting the colony's intended destination was Chesapeake Bay, and that England had lost contact with the colony, were supposedly falsified to conceal the operation from Spanish operatives and other potential competitors.

According to McMullan, Raleigh quietly re-established contact with the colony by 1597, and his sassafras expeditions were simply picking up the colonists' harvests. In this view, the colony was not truly abandoned until the secret of the colony's location died with Raleigh in 1618. After that point, McMullan argued, the colonists would have begun to assimilate with the Croatan at Beechland.

This hypothesis largely depends upon oral traditions and unsubstantiated reports about Beechland, as well as a 1651 map that depicts a sassafras tree near the Alligator River. A significant problem with the hypothesis is that Raleigh supposedly planned a sassafras farm in 1587, to capitalize on a dramatic increase in crop prices, so that he could quickly compensate for the great expense of the failed 1585 colony. The proposed financial motivation overlooks the fact that Richard Grenville's privateering recovered the cost of the 1585 expedition. Additionally, sassafras prices did not skyrocket in value until the late 1590s, well after the establishment of the 1587 colony.

P. Green, while collecting material for a 1937 stage play, noticed that Spanish records from the period contained abundant references to Raleigh and his settlements. Spanish forces knew of English plans to establish a new Virginia base in 1587, and were searching for it before White's colonists had even arrived. The Spanish Empire had included most of North America in their Florida claim, and did not recognize England's right to colonize Roanoke or Chesapeake Bay. Given the Spanish sack of Fort Caroline in 1565, the colonists likely recognized the threat they represented. However, the Spanish were still searching for the colony in Chesapeake Bay as late as 1600, suggesting that they also were unaware of its fate.

In 2006, writer Scott Dawson proposed that a Southern live oak tree on Hatteras Island, which bears the faint inscription "CORA" in its bark, might be connected to the Lost Colony. The CORA tree had already been the subject of local legends, most notably a story about a witch named "Cora" that was popularized in a 1989 book by C.H. Whedbee. Nevertheless, Dawson argued that the inscription might represent another message from the colonists, similar to the "CROATOAN" inscription at Roanoke. If so, "CORA" might indicate that the colonists left Croatoan Island to settle with the Coree (also known as the Coranine) on the mainland, near Lake Mattamuskeet.

From 1937-1941, a series of inscribed stones were discovered that were claimed to have been written by Eleanor Dare, mother of Virginia Dare. They told of the travelings of the colonists and their ultimate deaths. Most historians today believe that they are a fraud because investigations linked all but one to stonecutter Bill Eberhardt. The first one is sometimes regarded as different from the rest, based on a linguistic and chemical analysis, and as possibly genuine.

Raleigh was publicly criticized for his apparent indifference to the fate of the 1587 colony, most notably by Sir Francis Bacon. "It is the sinfullest thing in the world," Bacon wrote in 1597, "to forsake or destitute a plantation once in forwardness; for besides the dishonour, it is the guiltiness of blood of many commiserable persons." The 1605 comedy Eastward Hoe features characters bound for Virginia, who are assured that the lost colonists have by that time intermarried with Native Americans to give rise to "a whole country of English".

United States historians largely overlooked or minimized the importance of the Roanoke settlements until 1834, when George Bancroft lionized the 1587 colonists in A History of the United States.(pp 127-128) Bancroft emphasized the nobility of Walter Raleigh, the treachery of Simon Fernandes, the threat of the Secotan, the courage of the colonists, and the uncanny tragedy of their loss.(pp 128-129) (pp 117-123) He was the first since John White to write about Virginia Dare, calling attention to her status as the first English child born on what would become US soil, and the pioneering spirit exhibited by her name. The account captivated the American public. As Andrew Lawler puts it, "The country was hungry for an origin story more enchanting than the spoiled fops of Jamestown or the straitlaced Puritans of Plymouth... Roanoke, with its knights and villains and its brave but outnumbered few facing an alien culture, provided all the elements for a national myth."

The first known use of the phrase "The Lost Colony" to describe the 1587 Roanoke settlement was by Eliza Lanesford Cushing in an 1837 historical romance, Virginia Dare; or, the Lost Colony. Cushing also appears to be the first to cast White's granddaughter being reared by Native Americans, following the massacre of the other colonists, and to focus on her adventures as a beautiful young woman. In 1840, Cornelia Tuthill published a similar story, introducing the conceit of Virginia wearing the skin of a white doe. An 1861 Raleigh Register serial by Mary Mason employs the premise of Virginia being magically transformed into a white doe. The same concept was used more famously in The White Doe, a 1901 poem by Sallie Southall Cotten.(pp 283-284)

The popularity of the Lost Colony and Virginia Dare in the 19th and early 20th centuries coincided with American controversies about rising numbers of Catholic and non-British immigrants, as well as the treatment of African Americans and Native Americans. Both the colony and the adult Virginia character were embraced as symbols of white nationalism. Even when Virginia Dare was invoked in the name of women's suffrage in the 1920s, it was to persuade North Carolina legislators that granting white women the vote would assure white supremacy. By the 1930s this racist connotation apparently subsided, although the VDARE organisation, founded in 1999, has been denounced for promoting white supremacists.(pp 290-291)

Celebrations of the Lost Colony, on Virginia Dare's birthday, have been organized on Roanoke Island since the 1880s. To expand the tourist attraction, Paul Green's play The Lost Colony opened in 1937, and remains in production today. President Franklin D. Roosevelt attended the play on August 18, 1937 - Virginia Dare's 350th birthday.(pp 141, 347)

Bereft of its full context, the colonists' sparse message of "CROATOAN" has taken on a paranormal quality in Harlan Ellison's 1975 short story and Stephen King's 1999 television miniseries Storm of the Century, as well as being a human-like villain (portrayed by William Shatner) in the 5th series of Stephen King's Haven, which is based on the Stephen King's novel The Colorado Kid. Croatoan, coincidentally, was the murderer of the Colorado kid in Haven and Croatoan also appears in the 2005 television series Supernatural. The 1994 graphic novel Batman-Spawn: War Devil states that "Croatoan" was the name of a powerful demon who, in the 20th century, attempts to sacrifice the entirety of Gotham City to Satan.

In the 1999 comic fiction book 100 Bullets, an organisation of powerful European families known as The Trust massacred the Roanoke Colony as a warning to the kings of Europe, as they wished to claim the riches of the New World for themselves. The word "Croatoa" is used to "reactivate" agents of The Minutemen, an organisation which polices The Trust, who have been placed in hiding with their memories of The Minutemen suppressed.

In the 2015 novel The Last American Vampire, the colonists are the victims of a vampire named "Crowley"; the inscription "CRO" was thus an incomplete attempt to implicate him.

The 2011 American Horror Story episode " Birth" relates a fictional legend in which the Lost Colonists mysteriously died, and their ghosts haunted the local Native Americans until a tribal elder banished them with the word "Croatoan". This premise is expanded upon in the sixth season of the series, American Horror Story: Roanoke, which presents a series of fictional television programs documenting encounters with the ghost colonists. The leader of the undead colonists, " The Butcher", is depicted as John White's wife Thomasin, although there is no historical evidence that she was one of the colonists.

1. Quinn, David B. (1985). Set Fair for Roanoke: Voyages and Colonies, 1584-1606. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-0-8078-4123-5.

2. Kupperman, Karen Ordahl (2007). Roanoke: The Abandoned Colony (2nd ed.). Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-5263-0.

3. ^ Horn, James (2010). A Kingdom Strange: The Brief and Tragic History of the Lost Colony of Roanoke. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-00485-0.

4. ^ Quinn, David Beers, ed. (1955). The Roanoke Voyages, 1584-1590: Documents to illustrate the English Voyages to North America under the Patent granted to Walter Raleigh in 1584. Farnham: Ashgate (published 2010). ISBN 978-1-4094-1709-5.

5. ^ Morison, Samuel Eliot (1971). The European Discovery of America. Vol. 1: The Northern Voyages, A.D. 500-1600. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-501377-8.

6. ^ Milton, Giles (2001). Big Chief Elizabeth: The Adventures and Fate of the First English Colonists in America. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 978-0-312-42018-5.

7. ^ Donegan, Kathleen (2013). "What Happened in Roanoke: Ralph Lane's Narrative Incursion". Early American Literature. University of North Carolina Press. 48 (2): 285-314. doi:10.1353/eal.2013.0032. JSTOR 24476352. S2CID 162342657.

8. ^ Oberg, Michael Leroy (2008). The Head in Edward Nugent's Hand: Roanoke's Forgotten Indians. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. ISBN 978-0-8122-4031-3.

9. ^ Grizzard, Frank E.; Smith, D. Boyd (2007). Jamestown Colony: A Political, Social, and Cultural History. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-85109-637-4.

10. ^ Powell, William S. (April 1957). "Roanoke Colonists and Explorers: An Attempt at Identification". The North Carolina Historical Review. North Carolina Office of Archives and History. 34 (2): 202-226. JSTOR 23516851.

11. ^ Van Zandt, Cynthia J. (2008). Brothers Among Nations: The Pursuit of Intercultural Alliances in Early America, 1580-1660. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199720552.

12. ^ Cain, Tom (Autumn 2001). "John Donne and the Ideology of Colonization". English Literary Renaissance. The University of Chicago Press. 31 (3): 440-476. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6757.2001.tb01196.x. JSTOR 43447628. PMID 18942234. S2CID 40733610.

13. ^ Kupperman, Karen Ordahl (June 1977). "English Perceptions of Treachery, 1583-1640: The Case of the American 'Savages'". The Historical Journal. Cambridge University Press. 20 (2): 263-287. doi:10.1017/S0018246X00011079. JSTOR 2638533.

14. ^ Rountree, Helen C. (1990). Pocahontas's People: The Powhatan Indians of Virginia Through Four Centuries. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 0-8061-2280-3.

15. ^ Parramore, Thomas C. (January 2001). "The "Lost Colony" Found: A Documentary Perspective". The North Carolina Historical Review. North Carolina Office of Archives and History. 78 (1): 67-83. JSTOR 23522231.

16. ^ Dolan, Robert; Bosserman, Kenton (September 1972). "Shoreline Erosion and the Lost Colony". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 62 (3): 424-426. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1972.tb00875.x. JSTOR 562295.

17. ^ "Museum number 1906,0509.1.3 - Transmitted light image of the northern patch in "La Virginea Pars"". British Museum.

18. ^ Dunbar, Gary S. (Autumn 1960). "The Hatteras Indians of North Carolina". Ethnohistory. Duke University Press. 7 (4): 410-418. doi:10.2307/480877. JSTOR 480877.

19. ^ McMillan, Hamilton (1888). Sir Walter Raleigh's Lost Colony. Wilson, North Carolina: Advance Presses. An historical sketch of the attempts of Sir Walter Raleigh to establish a colony in Virginia, with the traditions of an Indian tribe in North Carolina. Indicating the fate of the colony of Englishmen left on Roanoke Island in 1587.

20. ^ Hampton, Jeff (August 17, 2020). ""The mystery is over": Researchers say they know what happened to 'Lost Colony'". The Virginian-Pilot.

21. ^ Ericson, John. "Mystery of the Lost Colony Solved? Not So Fast!". St. Luke's Historic Church & Museum.

22. ^ la Vere, David (July 2009). "The 1937 Chowan River "dare stone": A re-evaluation". North Carolina Historical Review. Raleigh, North Carolina: North Carolina Office of Archives and History. 86 (3): 251-281. JSTOR 23523860.

23. ^ Grant, Stacey (September 21, 2016). "9 Times pop culture delved into Roanoke before American Horror Story". MTV.com.

24. ^ Manning, Matthew K. (2010). "1990s". In Dolan, Hannah (ed.). DC Comics Year By Year A Visual Chronicle. London: Dorling Kindersley. p. 267. ISBN 978-0-7566-6742-9. Fans were also treated to a companion special entitled Batman-Spawn...by writers Doug Moench, Chuck Dixon, and Alan Grant, and artist Klaus Janson.

25. ^ Strause, Jackie (November 16, 2016). "'American Horror Story': 'Roanoke' Finale Delivers Another Twist, Connects 'AHS' Seasons". The Hollywood Reporter.

26. ^ Strause, Jackie (November 10, 2016). "'American Horror Story: Roanoke': Everything to Know After Episode 9". The Hollywood Reporter.

27. ^ Gallagher, Caitlin (October 5, 2016). ""Which 'AHS: Roanoke' characters are real? The "Based on a true story" claim isn't false"". Bustle.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The establishment of the Roanoke Colony ( ROH-ə-nohk ) was an attempt by Sir Walter Raleigh to found the first permanent English settlement in North America. The English, led by Sir Humphrey Gilbert, had claimed St. John's, Newfoundland, in 1583 as the first English territory in North America at the royal prerogative of Queen Elizabeth I.

# data[].attributes.body
War that pitted Native Americans against English settlers and their Indian allies. Paved the way for additional English settlements.

# data[].attributes.body
The first popular uprising in the American colonies. It was long viewed as an early revolt against English tyranny.

# data[].attributes.body
Part of the Seven Years' War in Europe. Britain and France fought for control of the Ohio Valley and Canada. The colonies fought under British commanders. Britain eventually won, and gained control of all of the remaining French possessions in Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Table of Contents

1. Why Did the French and Indian War Start?

2. British Victory in Canada

3. The Treaty of Paris Ends the War

4. Impact of the Seven Years' War on the American Revolution

Also known as the Seven Years' War, the French and Indian war marked another chapter in the long imperial struggle between Britain and France. When France's expansion into the Ohio River valley brought repeated conflict with the claims of the British colonies, a series of battles led to the official British declaration of war in 1756. Boosted by the financing of future Prime Minister William Pitt, the British turned the tide with victories at Louisbourg, Fort Frontenac and the French-Canadian stronghold of Quebec. At the 1763 peace conference, the British received the territories of Canada from France and Florida from Spain, opening the Mississippi Valley to westward expansion.

Why Did the French and Indian War Start?

The Seven Years' War (called the French and Indian War in the colonies) lasted from 1756 to 1763, forming a chapter in the imperial struggle between Britain and France called the Second Hundred Years' War.

In the early 1750s, France's expansion into the Ohio River valley repeatedly brought it into conflict with the claims of the British colonies, especially Virginia. In 1754, the French built Fort Duquesne where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers joined to form the Ohio River (in today's Pittsburgh), making it a strategically important stronghold that the British repeatedly attacked.

During 1754 and 1755, the French won a string of victories, defeating in quick succession the young George Washington, Gen. Edward Braddock and Braddock's successor, Governor William Shirley of Massachusetts.

In 1755, Governor Shirley, fearing that the French settlers in Nova Scotia (Acadia) would side with France in any military confrontation, expelled hundreds of them to other British colonies; many of the exiles suffered cruelly. Throughout this period, the British military effort was hampered by lack of interest at home, rivalries among the American colonies and France's greater success in winning the support of the Indians.

In 1756 the British formally declared war (marking the official beginning of the Seven Years' War), but their new commander in America, Lord Loudoun, faced the same problems as his predecessors and met with little success against the French and their Indian allies.

The tide turned in 1757 because William Pitt, the new British leader, saw the colonial conflicts as the key to building a vast British empire. Borrowing heavily to finance the war, he paid Prussia to fight in Europe and reimbursed the colonies for raising troops in North America.

British Victory in Canada

In July 1758, the British won their first great victory at Louisbourg, near the mouth of the St. Lawrence River. A month later, they took Fort Frontenac at the western end of the river.

In November 1758, General John Forbes captured Fort Duquesne for the British after the French destroyed and abandoned it, and Fort Pitt-named after William Pitt-was built on the site, giving the British a key stronghold.

The British then closed in on Quebec, where Gen. James Wolfe won a spectacular victory in the Battle of Quebec on the Plains of Abraham in September of 1759 (though both he and the French commander, the Marquis de Montcalm, were fatally wounded).

With the fall of Montreal in September 1760, the French lost their last foothold in Canada. Soon, Spain joined France against England, and for the rest of the war Britain concentrated on seizing French and Spanish territories in other parts of the world.

The Treaty of Paris Ends the War

The French and Indian War ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris in February 1763. The British received Canada from France and Florida from Spain, but permitted France to keep its West Indian sugar islands and gave Louisiana to Spain. The arrangement strengthened the American colonies significantly by removing their European rivals to the north and south and opening the Mississippi Valley to westward expansion.

Impact of the Seven Years' War on the American Revolution

The British crown borrowed heavily from British and Dutch bankers to bankroll the war, doubling British national debt. King George II argued that since the French and Indian War benefited the colonists by securing their borders, they should contribute to paying down the war debt.

To defend his newly won territory from future attacks, King George II also decided to install permanent British army units in the Americas, which required additional sources of revenue.

In 1765, parliament passed the Stamp Act to help pay down the war debt and finance the British army's presence in the Americas. It was the first internal tax directly levied on American colonists by parliament and was met with strong resistance.

It was followed by the unpopular Townshend Acts and Tea Act, which further incensed colonists who believed there should be no taxation without representation. Britain's increasingly militaristic response to colonial unrest would ultimately lead to the American Revolution.

Fifteen years after the Treaty of Paris, French bitterness over the loss of most of their colonial empire contributed to their intervention on the side of the colonists in the Revolutionary War.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The French and Indian War, or Seven Years War, a conflict primarily fought between Britain and France over territory in the Americas, ended with a British victory.

# data[].attributes.body
A group of colonists disguised as Mohawk Indians board three British tea ships and dump 342 chests of tea into the harbor in protest of the British Parliament's Tea Act of 1773

# data[].attributes.body
A Philadelphia meeting that brought together representatives from each of the colonies, except Georgia, to discuss their response to the British "Intolerable Acts."

# data[].attributes.body
A resolution created by the Continental Congress, which broke all ties between colonists and the British, creating the idea in America that the colonies were now "states"

# data[].attributes.body
An uprising of rural, indebted farmers in western Massachusetts, against Boston creditors. It began in 1786 and lasted half a year, threatening the economic interests of the business elite and contributing to the demise of the Articles of Confederation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An illustration of Shays’s troops repulsed from the armory in Springfield in early 1787

# data[].attributes.body
A Philadelphia meeting that brought together representatives form each of the colonies, except Georgia, to discuss the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation

# data[].attributes.body
Printed in newspapers, this was largely a warning against political parties and permanent foreign alliances.

# data[].attributes.body
A land deal between the United States and France, in which the U.S. acquired approximately 827,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River for $15 million dollars

# data[].attributes.body
A war between the U.S. and Great Britain caused by American outrage over the impressment of American sailors by the British, the British seizure of American ships, and British aid to the Indians attacking the Americans on the western frontier.

# data[].attributes.body
General Robert Ross, a British force occupied Washington, D.C. and set fire to many public buildings following the American defeat at the Battle of Bladensburg

# data[].attributes.body
Americans moving away from self-sufficient agriculture to production of goods for sale

# data[].attributes.body
Congress admitted Maine as a free state in 1820 so that Missouri would become a slave state and prohibited slavery in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase territory north of 36 30, the southern boundary of Missouri

# data[].attributes.body
Women of all ages and even some men went to discuss the rights and conditions of women. There, they wrote the Declaration of Sentiments, which among other things, tried to get women the right to vote.

# data[].attributes.body
Sparked by a dispute over the annexation of Texas by the United States and a long-standing dispute over the southern border.

# data[].attributes.body
Since slaves are property of their masters, a slave is not automatically granted his freedom when his master moves him to a free state or territory

# data[].attributes.body
Issued by Lincoln to free all of the slaves in the Confederate states. The slaves in border states loyal to the Union, however, remained enslaved, it only applied to Confederate states in rebellion.

# data[].attributes.body
Where the surrender of the Confederate Army under Robert E. Lee To Ulysses S. Grant took place on April 9, 1865

# data[].attributes.body
John Wilkes Booth shot this leader in the head at Ford Theater, just days after the Civil War ended

# data[].attributes.body
Period after the Civil War during which Northern political leaders created plans for the governance of the South and a procedure for former Southern states to rejoin the Union

# data[].attributes.body
A labor protest rally in Chicago turned into a riot after someone threw a bomb at police. At least eight people died as a result of the violence that day. Despite a lack of evidence against them, eight radical labor activists were convicted in connection with the bombing

# data[].attributes.body
A violent strike in Pittsburgh over a decision to cut wages by nearly 20%. This strike ended with the destruction of the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel workers, one of the largest unions at the time

# data[].attributes.body
A nonviolent strike that brought down the railway system in most of the West over wages. President Cleveland shut it down because it was interfering with mail delivery

# data[].attributes.body
U.S. Supreme Court decision supporting the legality of Jim Crow laws that permitted or required separate but equal facilities for blacks and whites

# data[].attributes.body
A novel by Upton Sinclair that revealed gruesome details about the meat packing industry in Chicago

# data[].attributes.body
A U.S. battleship exploded and sank in Havana Harbor; 260 Americans died. Although it was later concluded that it was an internal explosion caused by a fire in the coal bunker, the sinking provided an excuse for those eager for war with Spain.

# data[].attributes.body
War over the European control of Cuba, American won and gained: Guam, Puerto Rico, Philippines, and an alliance with Cuba

# data[].attributes.body
An uprising in China directed against foreign influence. It was suppressed by an international force of some eighteen thousand soldiers, including Americans. It paved the way for the revolution of 1911, which led to the establishment of the Republic of China in 1912.

# data[].attributes.body
The first, modern global war, started by the shooting of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The war is remembered for its violence and destruction, costing over 20 million lives and billions of dollars.

# data[].attributes.body
A British passenger ship that was sunk by a German U-Boat during WWI. 128 Americans died. The sinking greatly turned American opinion against the Germans, helping the move towards entering the war.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the most significant decades in US History because of the great changes that came about in American society, including the rise of consumerism, technology, and social and creative expression.

# data[].attributes.body
The economic crisis and period of low business activity in the U.S. and other countries, roughly beginning with the stock-market crash in 1929 and approximately ending with the start of the next war.

# data[].attributes.body
President FDR's precursor of the modern welfare state. His programs were meant to combat economic depression and it enacted a number of social insurance measures and used government spending to stimulate the economy.

# data[].attributes.body
The second, modern global war, starting less than 2 decades after the last. A significant portion of the world was involved, divided into Axis and Allied powers.

# data[].attributes.body
a 14-year-old African American, was brutally murdered in 1955 in Mississippi for allegedly whistling at a white woman, an event that played a significant role in the civil rights movement in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
a series of nonviolent protests initiated by African American college students in 1960 at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina, challenging racial segregation and inspiring similar actions across the Southern United States during the civil rights movement.

# data[].attributes.body
over 200,000 participants, including Martin Luther King Jr., gathered at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., advocating for equal rights and economic opportunities for African Americans.

# data[].attributes.body
assassinated on November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, when he was shot and killed while riding in a motorcade, sparking a wave of investigations and conspiracy theories.

# data[].attributes.body
assassinated on April 4, 1968, in Memphis, Tennessee, when he was fatally shot on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel, an event that had a profound impact on the civil rights movement in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
enacted to address housing discrimination by prohibiting the refusal to sell or rent a dwelling to any person based on race, color, religion, or national origin, aiming to ensure equal housing opportunities for all.

# data[].attributes.body
marked the end of direct American involvement in the Vietnam War, following the signing of the Paris Peace Accords. South Vietnam would later lose the war and Vietnam is communist to the day.

# data[].attributes.body
involving the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office complex, leading to revelations of widespread abuses of power and subsequent resignation of President Richard Nixon in 1974.

# data[].attributes.body
a political scandal in the 1980s involving the covert sale of weapons to Iran by the U.S. government to fund Nicaraguan Contra rebels, leading to Congressional investigations and convictions.

# data[].attributes.body
a trade agreement signed in 1994 between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, aiming to eliminate barriers to trade and investment and promote economic cooperation in North America.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NAFTA GDP - 2012 : IMF - World Economic Outlook Databases (Oct 2013)

The North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA NAF-tə; Spanish: Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte, TLCAN; French: Accord de libre-échange nord-américain, ALÉNA) was an agreement signed by Canada, Mexico, and the United States that created a trilateral trade bloc in North America. The agreement came into force on January 1, 1994, and superseded the 1988 Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Canada. The NAFTA trade bloc formed one of the largest trade blocs in the world by gross domestic product.

The impetus for a North American free trade zone began with U.S. president Ronald Reagan, who made the idea part of his 1980 presidential campaign. After the signing of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement in 1988, the administrations of U.S. president George H. W. Bush, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney agreed to negotiate what became NAFTA. Each submitted the agreement for ratification in their respective capitals in December 1992, but NAFTA faced significant opposition in both the United States and Canada. All three countries ratified NAFTA in 1993 after the addition of two side agreements, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC).

Passage of NAFTA resulted in the elimination or reduction of barriers to trade and investment between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The effects of the agreement regarding issues such as employment, the environment, and economic growth have been the subject of political disputes. Most economic analyses indicated that NAFTA was beneficial to the North American economies and the average citizen, but harmed a small minority of workers in industries exposed to trade competition. Economists held that withdrawing from NAFTA or renegotiating NAFTA in a way that reestablished trade barriers would have adversely affected the U.S. economy and cost jobs. However, Mexico would have been much more severely affected by job loss and reduction of economic growth in both the short term and long term.

After U.S. President Donald Trump took office in January 2017, he sought to replace NAFTA with a new agreement, beginning negotiations with Canada and Mexico. In September 2018, the United States, Mexico, and Canada reached an agreement to replace NAFTA with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), and all three countries had ratified it by March 2020. NAFTA remained in force until USMCA was implemented. In April 2020, Canada and Mexico notified the U.S. that they were ready to implement the agreement. The USMCA took effect on July 1, 2020, replacing NAFTA. The new law involved only small changes.

Negotiation, signing, ratification, and revision (1988-94)

Negotiation

The impetus for a North American free trade zone began with U.S. president Ronald Reagan, who made the idea part of his campaign when he announced his candidacy for the presidency in November 1979. Canada and the United States signed the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in 1988, and shortly afterward Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari decided to approach U.S. president George H. W. Bush to propose a similar agreement in an effort to bring in foreign investment following the Latin American debt crisis. As the two leaders began negotiating, the Canadian government under Prime Minister Brian Mulroney feared that the advantages Canada had gained through the Canada-US FTA would be undermined by a US-Mexican bilateral agreement, and asked to become a party to the US-Mexican talks.

Back row, left to right: Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, at the initialing of the draft North American Free Trade Agreement in October 1992. In front are Mexican Secretary of Commerce and Industrial Development Jaime Serra Puche, United States Trade Representative Carla Hills, and Canadian Minister of International Trade Michael Wilson.

Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990, the leaders of the three nations signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992. The signed agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

Ratification

The earlier Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement had been controversial and divisive in Canada, and featured as an issue in the 1988 Canadian election. In that election, more Canadians voted for anti-free trade parties (the Liberals and the New Democrats), but the split of the votes between the two parties meant that the pro-free trade Progressive Conservatives (PCs) came out of the election with the most seats and so took power. Mulroney and the PCs had a parliamentary majority and easily passed the 1987 Canada-US FTA and NAFTA bills. However, Mulroney was replaced as Conservative leader and prime minister by Kim Campbell. Campbell led the PC party into the 1993 election where they were decimated by the Liberal Party under Jean Chrétien, who campaigned on a promise to renegotiate or abrogate NAFTA. Chrétien subsequently negotiated two supplemental agreements with Bush, who had subverted the LAC advisory process and worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing of the implementation law to incoming president Bill Clinton.

United States

Before sending it to the United States Senate, Clinton added two side agreements, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), to protect workers and the environment, and to also allay the concerns of many House members. The U.S. required its partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own. After much consideration and emotional discussion, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234-200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Republican Representative David Dreier of California, a strong proponent of NAFTA since the Reagan administration, played a leading role in mobilizing support for the agreement among Republicans in Congress and across the country.

Chicago Congressman Luis Gutiérrez in particular was a vocal opponent of NAFTA, ultimately voting against the measure because of what he considered its failure to sufficiently provide for displaced worker retraining, protections against American job loss, and protections of collective bargaining rights for Mexican workers. He criticized the role of Rahm Emanuel in particular for the deficiencies.

The U.S. required its partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own.

Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994. At the signing ceremony, Clinton recognized four individuals for their efforts in accomplishing the historic trade deal: Vice President Al Gore, Chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers Laura Tyson, Director of the National Economic Council Robert Rubin, and Republican Congressman David Dreier. Clinton also stated that "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement." NAFTA replaced the previous Canada-US FTA.

Provisions

The goal of NAFTA was to eliminate barriers to trade and investment between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The implementation of NAFTA on January 1, 1994, brought the immediate elimination of tariffs on more than one-half of Mexico's exports to the U.S. and more than one-third of U.S. exports to Mexico. Within 10 years of the implementation of the agreement, all U.S.-Mexico tariffs were to be eliminated except for some U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico, to be phased out within 15 years. Most U.S.-Canada trade was already duty-free. NAFTA also sought to eliminate non- tariff trade barriers and to protect the intellectual property rights on traded products.

NAFTA is, in part, implemented by Technical Working Groups composed of government officials from each of the three partner nations.

Intellectual property

The North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act made some changes to the copyright law of the United States, foreshadowing the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 by restoring copyright (within the NAFTA nations) on certain motion pictures which had entered the public domain.

Environment

The Clinton administration negotiated a side agreement on the environment with Canada and Mexico, the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), which led to the creation of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) in 1994. To alleviate concerns that NAFTA, the first regional trade agreement between a developing country and two developed countries, would have negative environmental impacts, the commission was mandated to conduct ongoing environmental assessment, It created one of the first ex post frameworks for environmental assessment of trade liberalization, designed to produce a body of evidence with respect to the initial hypotheses about NAFTA and the environment, such as the concern that NAFTA would create a " race to the bottom" in environmental regulation among the three countries, or that NAFTA would pressure governments to increase their environmental protections. The CEC has held four symposia to evaluate the environmental impacts of NAFTA and commissioned 47 papers on the subject from leading independent experts.

Proponents of NAFTA in the United States emphasized that the pact was a free-trade, not an economic-community, agreement. The freedom of movement it establishes for goods, services and capital did not extend to labor. In proposing what no other comparable agreement had attempted-to open industrialized countries to "a major Third World country"-NAFTA eschewed the creation of common social and employment policies. The regulation of the labor market and or the workplace remained the exclusive preserve of the national governments.

A "side agreement" on enforcement of existing domestic labor law, concluded in August 1993, the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation (NAALC), was highly circumscribed. Focused on health and safety standards and on child labor law, it excluded issues of collective bargaining, and its "so-called [enforcement] teeth" were accessible only at the end of "a long and tortuous" disputes process". Commitments to enforce existing labor law also raised issues of democratic practice. The Canadian anti-NAFTA coalition, Pro-Canada Network, suggested that guarantees of minimum standards would be "meaningless" without "broad democratic reforms in the [Mexican] courts, the unions, and the government". Later assessment, however, did suggest that NAALC's principles and complaint mechanisms did "create new space for advocates to build coalitions and take concrete action to articulate challenges to the status quo and advance workers' interests".

Agriculture

From the earliest negotiation, agriculture was a controversial topic within NAFTA, as it has been with almost all free trade agreements signed within the WTO framework. Agriculture was the only section that was not negotiated trilaterally; instead, three separate agreements were signed between each pair of parties. The Canada-U.S. agreement contained significant restrictions and tariff quotas on agricultural products (mainly sugar, dairy, and poultry products), whereas the Mexico-U.S. pact allowed for a wider liberalization within a framework of phase-out periods (it was the first North-South FTA on agriculture to be signed).

Transportation infrastructure

NAFTA established the CANAMEX Corridor for road transport between Canada and Mexico, also proposed for use by rail, pipeline, and fiber optic telecommunications infrastructure. This became a High Priority Corridor under the U.S. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.

Chapter 11 - investor-state dispute settlement procedures

Another contentious issue was the investor-state dispute settlement obligations contained in Chapter 11 of NAFTA. Chapter 11 allowed corporations or individuals to sue Mexico, Canada or the United States for compensation when actions taken by those governments (or by those for whom they are responsible at international law, such as provincial, state, or municipal governments) violated international law.

This chapter has been criticized by groups in the United States, Mexico, and Canada for a variety of reasons, including not taking into account important social and environmental considerations. In Canada, several groups, including the Council of Canadians, challenged the constitutionality of Chapter 11. They lost at the trial level and the subsequent appeal.

Methanex Corporation, a Canadian corporation, filed a US$970 million suit against the United States. Methanex claimed that a California ban on methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), a substance that had found its way into many wells in the state, was hurtful to the corporation's sales of methanol. The claim was rejected, and the company was ordered to pay US$3 million to the U.S. government in costs, based on the following reasoning: "But as a matter of general international law, a non-discriminatory regulation for a public purpose, which is enacted in accordance with due process and, which affects, inter alios, a foreign investor or investment is not deemed expropriatory and compensable unless specific commitments had been given by the regulating government to the then putative foreign investor contemplating investment that the government would refrain from such regulation."

In another case, Metalclad, an American corporation, was awarded US$15.6 million from Mexico after a Mexican municipality refused a construction permit for the hazardous waste landfill it intended to construct in Guadalcázar, San Luis Potosí. The construction had already been approved by the federal government with various environmental requirements imposed (see paragraph 48 of the tribunal decision). The NAFTA panel found that the municipality did not have the authority to ban construction on the basis of its environmental concerns.

In Eli Lilly and Company v. Government of Canada the plaintiff presented a US$500 million claim for the way Canada requires usefulness in its drug patent legislation. Apotex sued the U.S. for US$520 million because of opportunity it says it lost in an FDA generic drug decision.

Lone Pine Resources Inc. v. Government of Canada filed a US$250 million claim against Canada, accusing it of "arbitrary, capricious and illegal" behaviour, because Quebec intends to prevent fracking exploration under the St. Lawrence Seaway.

Lone Pine Resources is incorporated in Delaware but headquartered in Calgary, and had an initial public offering on the NYSE May 25, 2011, of 15 million shares each for $13, which raised US$195 million.

A treaty with China would extend similar rights to Chinese investors, including SOEs.

Chapter 19 - countervailing duty

NAFTA's Chapter 19 was a trade dispute mechanism which subjects antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) determinations to binational panel review instead of, or in addition to, conventional judicial review. For example, in the United States, review of agency decisions imposing antidumping and countervailing duties are normally heard before the U.S. Court of International Trade, an Article III court. NAFTA parties, however, had the option of appealing the decisions to binational panels composed of five citizens from the two relevant NAFTA countries. The panelists were generally lawyers experienced in international trade law. Since NAFTA did not include substantive provisions concerning AD/CVD, the panel was charged with determining whether final agency determinations involving AD/CVD conformed with the country's domestic law. Chapter 19 was an anomaly in international dispute settlement since it did not apply international law, but required a panel composed of individuals from many countries to re-examine the application of one country's domestic law.

A Chapter 19 panel was expected to examine whether the agency's determination was supported by "substantial evidence". This standard assumed significant deference to the domestic agency. Some of the most controversial trade disputes in recent years, such as the U.S.-Canada softwood lumber dispute, have been litigated before Chapter 19 panels.

Decisions by Chapter 19 panels could be challenged before a NAFTA extraordinary challenge committee. However, an extraordinary challenge committee did not function as an ordinary appeal. Under NAFTA, it only vacated or remanded a decision if the decision involveed a significant and material error that threatens the integrity of the NAFTA dispute settlement system. Since January 2006, no NAFTA party had successfully challenged a Chapter 19 panel's decision before an extraordinary challenge committee.

Adjudication

The roster of NAFTA adjudicators included many retired judges, such as Alice Desjardins, John Maxwell Evans, Constance Hunt, John Richard, Arlin Adams, Susan Getzendanner, George C. Pratt, Charles B. Renfrew and Sandra Day O'Connor.

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it.

Historical context

Obama, Peña Nieto and Harper at the IX North American Leaders' Summit (informally known as the Three Amigos Summit) in Toluca

In 2008, Canadian exports to the United States and Mexico were at $381.3 billion, with imports at $245.1 billion. According to a 2004 article by University of Toronto economist Daniel Trefler, NAFTA produced a significant net benefit to Canada in 2003, with long-term productivity increasing by up to 15 percent in industries that experienced the deepest tariff cuts. While the contraction of low-productivity plants reduced employment (up to 12 percent of existing positions), these job losses lasted less than a decade; overall, unemployment in Canada has fallen since the passage of the act. Commenting on this trade-off, Trefler said that the critical question in trade policy is to understand "how freer trade can be implemented in an industrialized economy in a way that recognizes both the long-run gains and the short-term adjustment costs borne by workers and others".

According to a 2012 study, with reduced NAFTA trade tariffs, trade with the United States and Mexico only increased by a modest 11% in Canada compared to an increase of 41% for the U.S. and 118% for Mexico. Moreover, the U.S. and Mexico benefited more from the tariff reductions component, with welfare increases of 0.08% and 1.31%, respectively, with Canada experiencing a decrease of 0.06%.

Current issues

According to a 2017 report by the New York City based public policy think tank report, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), bilateral trade in agricultural products tripled in size from 1994 to 2017 and is considered to be one of the largest economic effects of NAFTA on U.S.-Canada trade with Canada becoming the U.S. agricultural sectors' leading importer. Canadian fears of losing manufacturing jobs to the United States did not materialize with manufacturing employment holding "steady". However, with Canada's labour productivity levels at 72% of U.S. levels, the hopes of closing the "productivity gap" between the two countries were also not realized.

According to a 2018 report by Gordon Laxter published by the Council of Canadians, NAFTA's Article 605, energy proportionality rule ensures that Americans had "virtually unlimited first access to most of Canada's oil and natural gas" and Canada could not reduce oil, natural gas and electricity exports (74% its oil and 52% its natural gas) to the U.S., even if Canada was experiencing shortages. These provisions that seemed logical when NAFTA was signed in 1993 are no longer appropriate. The Council of Canadians promoted environmental protection and was against NAFTA's role in encouraging development of the tar sands and fracking.

US President Donald Trump, angered by Canada's dairy tax of "almost 300%", threatened to leave Canada out of the NAFTA. Since 1972, Canada has been operating on a " supply management" system, which the United States is attempting to pressure it out of, specifically focusing on the dairy industry. However, this has not yet taken place, as Quebec, which holds approximately half the country's dairy farms, still supports supply management.

Former President Enrique Peña Nieto with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada and then-President Barack Obama of the United States at the 2016 North American Leaders' Summit

Maquiladoras (Mexican assembly plants that take in imported components and produce goods for export) became the landmark of trade in Mexico. They moved to Mexico from the United States, hence the debate over the loss of American jobs. Income in the maquiladora sector had increased 15.5% since the implementation of NAFTA in 1994. Other sectors also benefited from the free trade agreement, and the share of exports to the U.S. from non-border states increased in the last five years while the share of exports from border states decreased. This allowed for rapid growth in non-border metropolitan areas such as Toluca, León, and Puebla, which were all larger in population than Tijuana, Ciudad Juárez, and Reynosa.

One of the most affected agricultural sectors was the meat industry. Mexico went from a small player in the pre-1994 U.S. export market to the second largest importer of U.S. agricultural products in 2004, and NAFTA may have been a major catalyst for this change. Free trade removed the hurdles that impeded business between the two countries, so Mexico provided a growing market for meat for the U.S., and increased sales and profits for the U.S. meat industry. A coinciding noticeable increase in the Mexican per capita GDP greatly changed meat consumption patterns as per capita meat consumption grew.

One of concerns raised by the implementation of NAFTA in Mexico was wealth inequality. National Bureau of Economic Research found that NAFTA increased the wage gap between the lowest and highest earners, directly affecting wealth inequality. According to Global Trade Watch, under NAFTA Mexico observed a decline in real average annual wages, with this decline mainly affecting those who earned the least - the real average wage of minimum wage workers decreased by 14 percent. GTW concluded that "inflation-adjusted wages for virtually every category of Mexican worker decreased over NAFTA's first six years, even as hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs were being shifted from the United States to Mexico". Similar effects were found in a study published in the International Journal of Economic Sciences, which found that NAFTA had a direct impact on wage inequality in Mexico; from 1994 onwards, the wage gap between the poorest and the richest workers noticeably increased.

Production of corn in Mexico increased since NAFTA. However, internal demand for corn had increased beyond Mexico's supply to the point where imports became necessary, far beyond the quotas Mexico originally negotiated. Zahniser & Coyle pointed out that corn prices in Mexico, adjusted for international prices, have drastically decreased, but through a program of subsidies expanded by former president Vicente Fox, production remained stable since 2000. Reducing agricultural subsidies, especially corn subsidies, was suggested as a way to reduce harm to Mexican farmers.

A 2001 Journal of Economic Perspectives review of the existing literature found that NAFTA was a net benefit to Mexico. By 2003, 80% of the commerce in Mexico was executed only with the U.S. The commercial sales surplus, combined with the deficit with the rest of the world, created a dependency in Mexico's exports. These effects were evident in the 2001 recession, which resulted in either a low rate or a negative rate in Mexico's exports.

A 2015 study found that Mexico's welfare increased by 1.31% as a result of the NAFTA tariff reductions and that Mexico's intra-bloc trade increased by 118%. Inequality and poverty fell in the most globalization-affected regions of Mexico. 2013 and 2015 studies showed that Mexican small farmers benefited more from NAFTA than large-scale farmers.

NAFTA had also been credited with the rise of the Mexican middle class. A Tufts University study found that NAFTA lowered the average cost of basic necessities in Mexico by up to 50%. This price reduction increased cash-on-hand for many Mexican families, allowing Mexico to graduate more engineers than Germany each year.

United States

Economists generally agreed that the United States economy benefited overall from NAFTA as it increased trade. In a 2012 survey of the Initiative on Global Markets' Economic Experts Panel, 95% of the participants said that, on average, U.S. citizens benefited from NAFTA while none said that NAFTA hurt US citizens, on average. A 2001 Journal of Economic Perspectives review found that NAFTA was a net benefit to the United States. A 2015 study found that US welfare increased by 0.08% as a result of NAFTA tariff reductions, and that US intra-bloc trade increased by 41%.

A 2014 study on the effects of NAFTA on US trade jobs and investment found that between 1993 and 2013, the US trade deficit with Mexico and Canada increased from $17.0 to $177.2 billion, displacing 851,700 US jobs.

University of California, San Diego economics professor Gordon Hanson said that NAFTA helped the US compete against China and therefore saved US jobs. While some jobs were lost to Mexico as a result of NAFTA, considerably more would have been lost to China if not for NAFTA.

Trade balances

The US had a trade surplus with NAFTA countries of $28.3 billion for services in 2009 and a trade deficit of $94.6 billion (36.4% annual increase) for goods in 2010. This trade deficit accounted for 26.8% of all US goods trade deficit. A 2018 study of global trade published by the Center for International Relations identified irregularities in the patterns of trade of NAFTA ecosystem using network theory analytical techniques. The study showed that the US trade balance was influenced by tax avoidance opportunities provided in Ireland.

A study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, found NAFTA increased US agricultural exports to Mexico and Canada, even though most of the increase occurred a decade after its ratification. The study focused on the effects that gradual "phase-in" periods in regional trade agreements, including NAFTA, have on trade flows. Most of the increases in members' agricultural trade, which was only recently brought under the purview of the World Trade Organization, was due to very high trade barriers before NAFTA or other regional trade agreements.

Investment

The U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in NAFTA countries (stock) was $327.5 billion in 2009 (latest data available), up 8.8% from 2008. The US direct investment in NAFTA countries was in non-bank holding companies and the manufacturing, finance/ insurance, and mining sectors. The foreign direct investment of Canada and Mexico in the United States (stock) was $237.2 billion in 2009 (the latest data available), up 16.5% from 2008.

Economy and jobs

In their May 24, 2017 report, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) wrote that the economic impacts of NAFTA on the U.S. economy were modest. In a 2015 report, the Congressional Research Service summarized multiple studies as follows: "In reality, NAFTA did not cause the huge job losses feared by the critics or the large economic gains predicted by supporters. The net overall effect of NAFTA on the U.S. economy appears to have been relatively modest, primarily because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of U.S. GDP. However, there were worker and firm adjustment costs as the three countries adjusted to more open trade and investment among their economies."

According to University of California, Berkeley professor of economics Brad DeLong, NAFTA had an insignificant impact on US manufacturing. The adverse impact on manufacturing was exaggerated in US political discourse according to DeLong and Harvard economist Dani Rodrik.

According to a 2013 article by Jeff Faux published by the Economic Policy Institute, California, Texas, Michigan and other states with high concentrations of manufacturing jobs were most affected by job loss due to NAFTA. According to a 2011 article by EPI economist Robert Scott, about 682,900 U.S. jobs were "lost or displaced" as a result of the trade agreement. More recent studies agreed with reports by the Congressional Research Service that NAFTA only had a modest impact on manufacturing employment and automation explained 87% of the losses in manufacturing jobs.

Environment

According to a study in the Journal of International Economics, NAFTA reduced pollution emitted by the US manufacturing sector: "On average, nearly two-thirds of the reductions in coarse particulate matter (PM ₁₀₎ and sulfur dioxide (SO ₂₎ emissions from the U.S. manufacturing sector between 1994 and 1998 can be attributed to trade liberalization following NAFTA."

According to the Sierra Club, NAFTA contributed to large-scale, export-oriented farming, which led to the increased use of fossil fuels, pesticides and GMO. NAFTA also contributed to environmentally destructive mining practices in Mexico. It prevented Canada from effectively regulating its tar sands industry, and created new legal avenues for transnational corporations to fight environmental legislation. In some cases, environmental policy was neglected in the wake of trade liberalization; in other cases, NAFTA's measures for investment protection, such as Chapter 11, and measures against non-tariff trade barriers threatened to discourage more vigorous environmental policy. The most serious overall increases in pollution due to NAFTA were found in the base metals sector, the Mexican petroleum sector, and the transportation equipment sector in the United States and Mexico, but not in Canada.

Mobility of persons

According to the Department of Homeland Security Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, during fiscal year 2006 (October 2005 - September 2006), 73,880 foreign professionals (64,633 Canadians and 9,247 Mexicans) were admitted into the United States for temporary employment under NAFTA (i.e., in the TN status). Additionally, 17,321 of their family members (13,136 Canadians, 2,904 Mexicans, as well as a number of third-country nationals married to Canadians and Mexicans) entered the U.S. in the treaty national's dependent (TD) status. Because DHS counts the number of the new I-94 arrival records filled at the border, and the TN-1 admission is valid for three years, the number of non-immigrants in TN status present in the U.S. at the end of the fiscal year is approximately equal to the number of admissions during the year. (A discrepancy may be caused by some TN entrants leaving the country or changing status before their three-year admission period has expired, while other immigrants admitted earlier may change their status to TN or TD, or extend TN status granted earlier).

According to the International Organization for Migration, deaths of migrants have been on the rise worldwide with 5,604 deaths in 2016. An increased number of undocumented farmworkers in California may be due to the initial passing of NAFTA.

Canadian authorities estimated that on December 1, 2006, 24,830 U.S. citizens and 15,219 Mexican citizens were in Canada as "foreign workers". These numbers include both entrants under NAFTA and those who entered under other provisions of Canadian immigration law. New entries of foreign workers in 2006 totalled 16,841 U.S. citizens and 13,933 Mexicans.

Disputes and controversies

In the second 1992 presidential debate, Ross Perot argued:

We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. It's pretty simple: If you're paying $12, $13, $14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory south of the border, pay a dollar an hour for labor, ... have no health care-that's the most expensive single element in making a car-have no environmental controls, no pollution controls and no retirement, and you don't care about anything but making money, there will be a giant sucking sound going south. ... when [Mexico's] jobs come up from a dollar an hour to six dollars an hour, and ours go down to six dollars an hour, and then it's leveled again. But in the meantime, you've wrecked the country with these kinds of deals.

Perot ultimately lost the election, and the winner, Bill Clinton, supported NAFTA, which went into effect on January 1, 1994.

Legal disputes

In 1996, the gasoline additive MMT was brought to Canada by Ethyl Corporation, an American company when the Canadian federal government banned imports of the additive. The American company brought a claim under NAFTA Chapter 11 seeking US$201 million, from the Canadian federal government as well as the Canadian provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). They argued that the additive had not been conclusively linked to any health dangers, and that the prohibition was damaging to their company. Following a finding that the ban was a violation of the AIT, the Canadian federal government repealed the ban and settled with the American company for US$13 million. Studies by Health and Welfare Canada (now Health Canada) on the health effects of MMT in fuel found no significant health effects associated with exposure to these exhaust emissions. Other Canadian researchers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency disagreed citing studies that suggested possible nerve damage.

The United States and Canada argued for years over the United States' 27% duty on Canadian softwood lumber imports. Canada filed many motions to have the duty eliminated and the collected duties returned to Canada. After the United States lost an appeal before a NAFTA panel, spokesperson for U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman responded by saying: "we are, of course, disappointed with the [NAFTA panel's] decision, but it will have no impact on the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders." On July 21, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade found that imposition of the duties was contrary to U.S. law.

Change in income trust taxation not expropriation

On October 30, 2007, American citizens Marvin and Elaine Gottlieb filed a Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim to Arbitration under NAFTA, claiming thousands of U.S. investors lost a total of $5 billion in the fall-out from the Conservative Government's decision the previous year to change the tax rate on income trusts in the energy sector. On April 29, 2009, a determination was made that this change in tax law was not expropriation.

Impact on Mexican farmers

Several studies rejected NAFTA responsibility for depressing the incomes of poor corn farmers. The trend existed more than a decade before NAFTA existed. Also, maize production increased after 1994, and there wasn't a measurable impact on the price of Mexican corn because of subsidized corn from the United States. The studies agreed that the abolition of U.S. agricultural subsidies would benefit Mexican farmers.

Zapatista Uprising in Chiapas, Mexico

Preparations for NAFTA included cancellation of Article 27 of Mexico's constitution, the cornerstone of Emiliano Zapata's revolution in 1910-1919. Under the historic Article 27, indigenous communal landholdings were protected from sale or privatization. However, this barrier to investment was incompatible with NAFTA. Indigenous farmers feared the loss of their remaining land and cheap imports (substitutes) from the US. The Zapatistas labelled NAFTA a "death sentence" to indigenous communities all over Mexico and later declared war on the Mexican state on January 1, 1994, the day NAFTA came into force.

In a interview in September 2015, 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump called NAFTA "the single worst trade deal ever approved in [the United States]", and said that if elected, he would "either renegotiate it, or we will break it". Juan Pablo Castañón, president of the trade group Consejo Coordinador Empresarial, expressed concern about renegotiation and the willingness to focus on the car industry. A range of trade experts said that pulling out of NAFTA would have a range of unintended consequences for the United States, including reduced access to its biggest export markets, a reduction in economic growth, and higher prices for gasoline, cars, fruits, and vegetables. Members of the private initiative in Mexico noted that to eliminate NAFTA, many laws must be adapted by the U.S. Congress. The move would also eventually result in legal complaints by the World Trade Organization. The Washington Post noted that a Congressional Research Service review of academic literature concluded that the "net overall effect of NAFTA on the U.S. economy appears to have been relatively modest, primarily because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of U.S. GDP".

Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders, opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, called it "a continuation of other disastrous trade agreements, like NAFTA, CAFTA, and permanent normal trade relations with China". He believes that free trade agreements have caused a loss of American jobs and depressed American wages. Sanders said that America needs to rebuild its manufacturing base using American factories for well-paying jobs for American labor rather than outsourcing to China and elsewhere.

Policy of the Trump administration

Renegotiation

Chrystia Freeland, Luis Videgaray Caso and Rex Tillerson in Mexico City in 2018

Shortly after his election, U.S. President Donald Trump said he would begin renegotiating the terms of NAFTA, to resolve trade issues he had campaigned on. The leaders of Canada and Mexico had indicated their willingness to work with the Trump administration. Although vague on the exact terms he sought in a renegotiated NAFTA, Trump threatened to withdraw from it if negotiations failed.

In July 2017, the Trump administration provided a detailed list of changes that it would like to see to NAFTA. The top priority was a reduction in the United States' trade deficit. The administration also called for the elimination of provisions that allowed Canada and Mexico to appeal duties imposed by the United States and limited the ability of the United States to impose import restrictions on Canada and Mexico.

Being "consistent with the president's stance on liking trade barriers, liking protectionism", Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics suggested that the proposed changes would make NAFTA "in many respects less of a free-trade agreement." Additional concerns expressed by the US Trade Representative over subsidized state-owned enterprises and currency manipulation were not thought to apply to Canada and Mexico, but were intended rather to send a message to countries beyond North America.

John Murphy, vice-president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce declared that a number of the proposals tabled by the United States had "little or no support" from the U.S. business and agriculture community." Pat Roberts, the senior U.S. senator from Kansas, said it was not clear "who they're intended to benefit", and called for push back against the anti-NAFTA moves as the "issues affect real jobs, real lives and real people". Kansas is a major agricultural exporter, and farm groups warned that just threatening to leave NAFTA might cause buyers to minimize uncertainty by seeking out non-US sources.

From June to late August 2018, Canada was sidelined as the United States and Mexico held bilateral talks. On 27 August 2018 Mexico and the United States announced they had reached a bilateral understanding on a revamped NAFTA trade deal that included provisions that would boost automobile production in the U.S., a 10-year data protection period against generic drug production on an expanded list of products that benefits pharmaceutical companies, particularly US makers producers of high-cost biologic drugs, a sunset clause-a 16-year expiration date with regular 6-year reviews to possibly renew the agreement for additional 16-year terms, and an increased threshold in which Mexico raised the de minimis value to $100 from $50 regarding online duty- and tax-free purchases. According to an August 30 article in The Economist, Mexico agreed to increase the rules of origin threshold which would mean that 75% as opposed to the previous 62.5% of a vehicle's components must be made in North America to avoid tariffs. Since car makers currently import less expensive components from Asia, under the revised agreement, consumers would pay more for vehicles. As well, approximately 40 to 45 per cent of vehicle components must be made by workers earning a minimum of US$16 per hour, in contrast to the current US$2.30 an hour that a worker earns on average in a Mexican car manufacturing plant. The Economist described this as placing "Mexican carmaking into a straitjacket".

Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland announced that they were willing to join the agreement if it was in Canada's interests. Freeland returned from her European diplomatic tour early, cancelling a planned visit to Ukraine, to participate in NAFTA negotiations in Washington, D.C. in late August. According to an August 31 Canadian Press published in the Ottawa Citizen, key issues under debate included supply management, Chapter 19, pharmaceuticals, cultural exemption, the sunset clause, and thresholds.

Although President Donald Trump warned Canada on September 1 that he would exclude them from a new trade agreement unless Canada submitted to his demands, it is not clear that the Trump administration had the authority to do so without the approval of Congress.

On September 30, 2018, the day of the deadline for the Canada-U.S. negotiations, a preliminary deal between the two countries was reached, thus preserving the trilateral pact when the Trump administration submits the agreement before Congress. The new name for the agreement was the " United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement" (USMCA) and came into effect on July 1, 2020.

Impact of withdrawing from NAFTA

Following Donald Trump's election to the presidency, a range of trade experts said that pulling out of NAFTA as Trump proposed would have a range of unintended consequences for the U.S., including reduced access to the U.S.'s biggest export markets, a reduction in economic growth, and increased prices for gasoline, cars, fruits, and vegetables. The worst affected sectors would be textiles, agriculture and automobiles.

According to Tufts University political scientist Daniel W. Drezner, the Trump administration's desire to return relations with Mexico to the pre-NAFTA era are misguided. Drezner argued that NAFTA made it easier for Mexico to transform to a real democracy and become a country that views itself as North American. If Trump acts on many of the threats that he has made against Mexico, it is not inconceivable that Mexicans would turn to left-wing populist strongmen, as several South American countries have. At the very least, US-Mexico relations would worsen, with adverse implications for cooperation on border security, counterterrorism, drug-war operations, deportations and managing Central American migration.

According to Harvard economist Marc Melitz, "recent research estimates that the repeal of NAFTA would not increase car production in the United States". Melitz noted that this would cost manufacturing jobs.

Trans-Pacific Partnership

If the original Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) had come into effect, existing agreements such as NAFTA would be reduced to those provisions that do not conflict with the TPP, or that require greater trade liberalization than the TPP. However, only Canada and Mexico would have the prospect of becoming members of the TPP after U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement in January 2017. In May 2017, the 11 remaining members of the TPP, including Canada and Mexico, agreed to proceed with a revised version of the trade deal without U.S. participation.

American public opinion on NAFTA

The American public was largely divided on its view of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), with a wide partisan gap in beliefs. In a February 2018 Gallup Poll, 48% of Americans said NAFTA was good for the U.S., while 46% said it was bad.

According to a journal from the Law and Business Review of the Americas (LBRA), U.S. public opinion of NAFTA centers around three issues: NAFTA's impact on the creation or destruction of American jobs, NAFTA's impact on the environment, and NAFTA's impact on immigrants entering the U.S.

After President Trump's election in 2016, support for NAFTA became very polarized between Republicans and Democrats. Donald Trump expressed negative views of NAFTA, calling it "the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country". Republican support for NAFTA decreased from 43% support in 2008 to 34% in 2017. Meanwhile, Democratic support for NAFTA increased from 41% support in 2008 to 71% in 2017.

The political gap was especially large in concern to views on free trade with Mexico. As opposed to a favorable view of free trade with Canada, whom 79% of American described as a fair trade partner, only 47% of Americans believed Mexico practices fair trade. The gap widened between Democrats and Republicans: 60% of Democrats believed Mexico is practicing fair trade, while only 28% of Republicans did. This was the highest level from Democrats and the lowest level from Republicans ever recorded by the Chicago Council Survey. Republicans had more negative views of Canada as a fair trade partner than Democrats as well.

NAFTA had strong support from young Americans. In a February 2017 Gallup poll, 73% of Americans aged 18-29 said NAFTA was good for the U.S, showing higher support than any other U.S. age group. It also had slightly stronger support from unemployed Americans than from employed Americans.

References

1. ^ "NAFTA's Economic Impact". Council on Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on July 21, 2017.

2. ^ Hiltzik, Michael (January 30, 2017). "NAFTA doesn't count for much economically, but it's still a huge political football. Here's why". Los Angeles Times. ISSN 0458-3035. Archived from the original on August 29, 2017.

3. Eric Martin, Trump Killing Nafta Could Mean Big Unintended Consequences for the U.S., Bloomberg Business (October 1, 2015).

4. ^ "Nafta withdrawal would hit US GDP without helping trade deficit - report". Financial Times. Archived from the original on December 10, 2022.

5. Eugene Beaulieu and Dylan Klemen. "You Say USMCA or T-MEC and I Say CUSMA: The New NAFTA-Let's Call the Whole Thing On." ^ The School of Public Policy Publications (2020) online.

6. ^ Preliminary Report of the Labor Advisory Committee for Trade Negotiations and Trade Policy on the North American Free Trade Agreement, dated Sept. 16, 1992 (Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 1992), i, 1.

7. For an overview of the process, see ^ Noam Chomsky, "'Mandate for Change', or Business as Usual", Z Magazine 6, no. 2 (February 1993), 41.

8. ^ Luis Gutierrez on Why Rahm Emanuel Should Not Be Mayor, Chicago Magazine, Carol Felsenthal, January 11, 2011. Retrieved July 2, 2022.

9. [9311150020_1_anti-nafta-forces-nafta-debate-undecided-house-members Gutierrez Resists Party Pressure, Vows He'll Vote Against Nafta], ^ Chicago Tribune, November 13, 1993. Retrieved July 1, 2022.

10. ^ Learning From The Experience Of NAFTA Labor And Environmental Governance, Forbes Magazine, Mark Aspinwall, August 10, 2017. Retrieved July 1, 2022.

11. ^ Gantz, DA (1999). "Dispute Settlement Under the NAFTA and the WTO:Choice of Forum Opportunities and Risks for the NAFTA Parties". American University International Law Review. 14 (4): 1025-106.

12. ^ Carpentier, Chantal Line (December 1, 2006). "IngentaConnect NAFTA Commission for Environmental Cooperation: ongoing assessment". Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 24 (4): 259-272. doi:10.3152/147154606781765048.

13. ^ Schliefer, Jonathan (December 1992). "What price economic growth?". The Atlantic Monthly: 114.

14. ^ Witt, Matt (April 1990). "Don't trade on me: Mexican, U.S. and Canadian workers confront free trade". Dollars and Sense.

15. ^ Compa, Lance (2001). "NAFTA's Labour Side Agr s Labour Side Agreement and International Labour Agreement and International Labour Solidarity" (PDF). core.ac.uk/. Cornell University ILR School.

16. ^ "'North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)', Public Citizen". Citizen.org. January 1, 1994.

17. ^ Red Mexicana de Accion Frente al Libre Comercio. "NAFTA and the Mexican Environment". Archived from the original on December 16, 2000.

18. ^ Trefler, Daniel (September 2004). "The Long and Short of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement" (PDF). American Economic Review. 94 (4): 870-895. doi:10.1257/0002828042002633.

19. ^ Bernstein, William J. (May 16, 2009). A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World. Grove Press.

20. ^ Romalis, John (July 12, 2007). "NAFTA's and CUSFTA's Impact on International Trade" (PDF). Review of Economics and Statistics. 89 (3): 416-35. doi:10.1162/rest.89.3.416. ISSN 0034-6535. S2CID 57562094.

21. ^ Caliendo, Lorenzo; Parro, Fernando (January 1, 2015). "Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects of NAFTA". The Review of Economic Studies. 82 (1): 1-44. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.189.1365. doi:10.1093/restud/rdu035. ISSN 0034-6527. S2CID 20591348.

22. McBride, James; Sergie, Mohammed Aly (2017) [February 14, 2014]. "NAFTA's Economic Impact". Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) think tank. Archived from the original on May 16, 2017.

23. Laxer, Gordon. "Escaping Mandatory Oil Exports: Why Canada needs to dump NAFTA's energy proportionality rule" (PDF). p. 28.

24. ^ Hufbauer, GC; Schott, JJ (2005). "NAFTA Revisited". Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

25. ^ Greening the Americas, Carolyn L. Deere (editor). MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

26. ^ "NAFTA's Legacy for Mexico: Economic Displacement, Lower Wages for Most, Increased Migration". citizen.org. September 1, 2019.

27. ^ Martha Rodriguez-Villalobos; Antonio Julián-Arias; Alejandro Cruz-Montaño (2019). "Effect of NAFTA on Mexico's Wage Inequality". International Journal of Economic Sciences. 8 (1): 131-149. doi:10.52950/ES.2019.8.1.009.

28. Steven S. Zahniser & William T. Coyle, ^ U.S.-Mexico Corn Trade During the NAFTA Era: New Twists to an Old Story Archived 2021-02-14 at the Wayback Machine, Outlook Report No. FDS04D01 (Economic Research Service/USDA, May 2004), 22 pp.

29. ^ Ruiz Nápoles, Pablo. "El TLCAN y el balance comercial en México". Economía Informa. UNAM. 2003

30. ^ H, Hanson, Gordon (March 9, 2007). "Globalization, Labor Income, and Poverty in Mexico". University of Chicago Press: 417-456.

31. ^ Prina, Silvia (August 2013). "Who Benefited More from the North American Free Trade Agreement: Small or Large Farmers? Evidence from Mexico". Review of Development Economics. 17 (3): 594-608. doi:10.1111/rode.12053. S2CID 154627747.

32. ^ Prina, Silvia (January 2015). "Effects of Border Price Changes on Agricultural Wages and Employment in Mexico". Journal of International Development. 27 (1): 112-132. doi:10.1002/jid.2814.

33. ^ "Economic Report of the exportations in the manufacturer industry" Consejo Nacional de Industria Maquiladora Manufacturera A.C. 2016

34. ^ Scott, Robert E. (July 21, 2014). "The effects of NAFTA on US trade, jobs, and investment, 1993â€"2013". Review of Keynesian Economics. 2 (4): 429-441. doi:10.4337/roke.2014.04.02 - via ideas.repec.org.

35. ^ "Free Trade Agreement Helped U.S. Farmers". Archived 2009-01-29 at the Wayback Machine Newswise. Retrieved on June 12, 2008.

36. ^ "U.S. Economy Lost Nearly 700,000 Jobs Because Of NAFTA, EPI Says". The Huffington Post. July 12, 2011.

37. ^ Long, Heather (February 16, 2017). "U.S. auto workers hate NAFTA ... but love robots". CNNMoney. Archived from the original on February 14, 2021. The problem, they argue, is that machines took over. One study by Ball State University says 87% of American manufacturing jobs have been lost to robots. Only 13% have disappeared because of trade ... But workers in Michigan think the experts have it wrong.

38. ^ Cherniwchan, Jevan (2017). "Trade Liberalization and the Environment: Evidence from NAFTA and U.S. Manufacturing". Journal of International Economics. 105: 130-49. doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2017.01.005.

39. ^ Fiess, Norbert; Daniel Lederman (November 24, 2004). "Mexican Corn: The Effects of NAFTA" (PDF). Trade Note. The World Bank Group. 18. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 16, 2007.

40. ^ Subcomandante Marcos, Ziga Voa! 10 Years of the Zapatista Uprising. AK Press 2004

41. Alexander Panetta (November 1, 2017). "U.S. pro-NAFTA campaign ramps up to defend deal: Concerns in Congress heighten over 'potential catastrophe' from withdrawal". Vancouver Sun. Canadian Press.

42. ^ Laura Stone; Robert Fife (October 13, 2017). "Canada, Mexico vow to remain at NAFTA negotiating table". The Globe and Mail. p. A1.

43. ^ Gollom, Mark (August 30, 2018). "Canada had little choice but to play it cool in NAFTA talks, trade experts say". CBC News. Charm offensive hadn't worked with U.S., so there was not much Trudeau could have done to save NAFTA, say some

44. ^ Ukrainian Independent Information Agency, Canada's Foreign Minister postpones visit to Ukraine over urgent talks in U.S., 29 August 2018

Further reading

Altieri, Morena. "New historical chapter for North American trade United States, México, Canada Agreement-USMCA." Sociology and Social Work Review 5.2 (2021): 29-39. online Archived June 7, 2022, at the Wayback Machine

Beaulieu, Eugene, and Dylan Klemen. "You Say USMCA or T-MEC and I Say CUSMA: The New NAFTA-Let's Call the Whole Thing On." The School of Public Policy Publications (2020) on Trump's changes online.

Boskin, Michael J. ed. NAFTA at 20 : the North American Free Trade Agreement's achievements and challenges (Hoover, 2014) online

Burfisher, Mary E., Sherman Robinson, and Karen Thierfelder. "The impact of NAFTA on the United States." Journal of economic perspectives 15.1 (2001): 125-144. online

Cameron, Maxwell A. , Brian W. Tomlin (2002) The making of NAFTA: how the deal was done. Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-8781-1.

Chambers, Edward J. and Peter H. Smith (2002) NAFTA in the new millennium. University of California, San Diego. Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies ISBN 0-88864-386-1

Csehi, Robert, and Eugenia C. Heldt. "Populism as a 'corrective' to trade agreements? 'America First' and the readjustment of NAFTA." International Politics (2021): 1-17. on Trump's impact online

Deblock, Christian. "Canada and International Regulatory Cooperation: A Comparison of USMCA, CETA and CPTPP." in NAFTA 2.0 (Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2022) pp. 181-197.

Fairbrother, Malcolm (2014). "Economists, Capitalists, and the Making of Globalization: North American Free Trade in Comparative-Historical Perspective". American Journal of Sociology. 119 (5): 1324-1379.

Folsom, Ralph H. NAFTA and free trade in the Americas in a nutshell (2012) online

Francis, John, and Yuqing Zheng. "Trade liberalization, unemployment and adjustment: evidence from NAFTA using state level data." Applied Economics 43.13 (2011): 1657-1671.

Frittelli, John. North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation: The Future of Commercial Trucking Across the Mexican Border (Congressional Research Service, 2010) online

Fukao, Kyoji, Toshihiro Okubo, and Robert M. Stern. "An econometric analysis of trade diversion under NAFTA." North American Journal of Economics and Finance 14.1 (2003): 3-24. online

Gladstone, Fiona, et al. "NAFTA and environment after 25 years: A retrospective analysis of the US-Mexico border." Environmental Science & Policy 119 (2021): 18-33. online

Hernández Pérez, Juan Luis. "Mexican agriculture from NAFTA to USMCA: Theoretical considerations, general balance, and development perspectives." El trimestre económico 88.352 (2021): 1121-1152. online

Holian, David B., Timothy B. Krebs, and Michael H. Walsh. "Constituency opinion, Ross Perot, and roll-call behavior in the US House: The case of the NAFTA." Legislative Studies Quarterly (1997): 369-392.

Hufbauer. Gary Clyde, and Jeffrey J. Schott (2005) NAFTA Revisited: Achievements and Challenges Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics ISBN 0-88132-334-9 online

Kennedy, Kevin, ed. The first decade of NAFTA: the future of free trade in North America (BRILL, 2021).

Meylor, Dan, and Kishore G. Kulkarni. "NAFTA in Mexico: What Worked? And What Did Not?." SAMVAD 23 (2022): 1-7. online

Rosenberg, Jerry M. ed. Encyclopedia of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the New American Community, and Latin-American Trade (1995)

Simons, Herbert W. "Judging a policy proposal by the company it keeps: The Gore‐Perot NAFTA debate." Quarterly Journal of Speech 82.3 (1996): 274-287.

Skonieczny, Amy. "Constructing NAFTA: Myth, representation, and the discursive construction of US foreign policy." International Studies Quarterly 45.3 (2001): 433-454 online

Thorbecke, Willem, and Christian Eigen-Zucchi. "Did NAFTA cause a 'giant sucking sound'?." Journal of Labor Research 23.4 (2002): 647-658 online .

Van Haren, Ian, and Claudia Masferrer. "Mexican migration to Canada: Temporary worker programs, visa imposition, and NAFTA shape flows." (2022). online

Villareal, M., and Ian F. Fergusson. (2017) "The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)." (CRS Report R42965). Washington: Congressional Research Service online free; a U.S. government document

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North American Free Trade Agreement - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA NAF-tə ; Spanish: Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte, TLCAN; French: Accord de libre-échange nord-américain, ALÉNA) was an agreement signed by Canada, Mexico, and the United States that created a trilateral trade bloc in North America.

# data[].attributes.body
centered on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice related to his extramarital affair

# data[].attributes.body
The 2000 U.S. presidential election, marked by a controversial recount in Florida, legal battles culminating in the Supreme Court's decision to stop the recount, and Bush's ultimate victory despite losing the popular vote.

# data[].attributes.body
a global military and political campaign initiated by the United States in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, aimed at combating terrorism and its sponsors around the world.

# data[].attributes.body
a U.S. law passed in response to the 9/11 attacks, granting expanded surveillance and law enforcement powers to the government in the name of national security and counterterrorism efforts.