"Debunking Protectionist Myths: Free Trade, the Developing World, and Prosperity"   Cato Institute Economic Development Bulletin, No.31, Forthcoming ARVIND PANAGARIYA , University of Maryland - Department of Economics, Columbia University Email: panagari@econ.umd.edu More than 170 years ago, Frédéric Bastiat noted in his masterly work Economic Sophisms that the “opposition to free trade rests upon errors, or, if you prefer, upon half-truths.”1 Ever since Adam Smith successfully replaced mercantilist orthodoxy with free trade doctrine in his celebrated book The Wealth of Nations, free trade critics have repeatedly challenged the doctrine, offering half-truths to bolster their case. In each instance, free trade advocates have successfully exposed the falsehood of arguments made by critics. Although free trade has gained increasing acceptance among policymakers over time, challenges to it have remained omnipresent. The latest of these challenges has manifested itself

Globalization has led to weaker national and international regulatory frameworks and to the emergence of new “globalist” institutional and normative frameworks. These are contested and this leads to a conflicting landscape that some call deglobalization or slowbalization (Breault & Rioux, 2019; van Bergeijk, 2019). -  Rioux, Michèle, Christian Deblock, and Guy-Philippe Wells. "CETA, an Innovative Agreement with Many Unsettled Trajectories."  Open Journal of Political Science  10.01 (2019): 50.

Global supply chains (GSCs), which emerged from and thrived with globalization, are associated with technological changes and affected by industrial and trade policies. One lesser-known fact is that the cycle of globalization took place in waves, each has sequentially been followed by a downturn that eventually reshaped the cross-border flow of goods, capital, and people. The so-called second phase of globalization, which was empowered largely by the ICT revolution and politico-economical openness, has evidently faltered and slowed in the post-2008 financial crisis  Recent development of trade tensions, such as the U.S.-China conflict, the Brexit process, Japan-South Korea trade dispute, and other business dynamics towards deglobalization are readily affecting and will continue to affect GSCs. MORE .

The trade war between the US and China and the backlash against globalization has focused attention on the durability of the region’s dominant economic model, built on investment and trade in world markets. Continent-sized nations with vast domestic markets such as China, India and Indonesia are much better positioned to ride out deglobalization compared with smaller, open economies like the Asian tigers of South Korea and Taiwan. -  Vasuki Shastry  Outlook for Asia 2020: The Lessons of 2019 , AsiaSentinel

Potentially dangerous dynamics, like deglobalization, need to be managed, not enthusiastically embraced. A synthesis between the clash-of-systems school and the pragmatists may point toward a new consensus for a 2020s post-Trump foreign policy. - Thomas Wright in the Atlantic