protectionism vs. liberalization?

Seeking the optimal balance between trade protectionism and liberalization is an oft explored topic in implementing foreign economic policy. To determine the right policy, I usually picture renowned policy-makers disregarding the micro- and macroeconomic models that proclaim sense, and turn to the situation with politics in mind.

Time and time again, it has been noted that not everyone reaps the benefits of globalization. Asymmetrical trade in the international system is often considered the culprit.

Familiar cases of such are completely random (well, at least to me). Who knew that countries would fight over dolphin-safe tuna (U.S.-Mexico) or wood (U.S.-Canada)? Everyday products as menial as tuna or wood apparently make large waves in the realm of economic policy-making. Politicians, in particular, need to know that tuna and wood will make people happy.

One Federal Reserve Banker noted a few months ago over a breakfast conference, "please do all you can to resist the urge to protect." The need for multinational companies to keep the machinery of globalization well-oiled with openness to the markets, would apparently spread globalization's benefits, instead of concentrating them. He noted, however, that politicians would most likely say otherwise, because of the concern that would be generated regarding job/profit loss as a result of competition with foreign products.

There is no simple formula to implement across all cases: protectionism and liberalization must vary from case-to-case or more specifically, from country-to-country.