Overall, the WTO`s role is to improve the stability and predictability of world trade. As a result, it tends to support free trade, contrary to protectionist policies, and strongly discourages the use of quotas and other import restrictions. At the first U.S. summit in December 1994 in Miami, negotiations on the construction of a U.S. Free Trade Area (FTC) began. These negotiations aimed to remove barriers to trade and investment between the 34 democracies of North and South America. In their statement of principle, the heads of state of the participating countries stated that “free trade and strengthening economic integration are key factors in raising living standards, improving working conditions for people in North and South America and improving environmental protection.”  In the modern world, free trade policy is often implemented by a formal and reciprocal agreement between the nations concerned. However, a free trade policy may simply be the absence of trade restrictions. The argument that a properly established trade agreement can promote democracy seems to be of some use. A trade agreement can promote greater dependence on the rule of law and increased private sector participation in policies; A trade agreement can also promote economic growth, which many see as important if a country is to become more democratic.
There are many more direct instruments for promoting democracy than trade agreements, such as, of course, external assistance to civil society groups committed to democracy, sanctions against countries that manipulate elections and public condemnation of undemocratic acts, and the effects of a trade agreement seem longer than these other instruments. Just a few months after the September 11, 2001, attacks, the government successfully urged U.S. trading partners to agree on launching a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. At their ministerial meeting in Doha in November 2001, members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreed on a negotiating mandate underlining economic development and, in particular, the need to ensure that least developed countries benefit from increased trade. From a foreign policy perspective, the United States believed that broader trade, through the removal of trade barriers and distortions, would promote economic development, which would advance U.S. interests in promoting democracy and freedom. Have U.S. free trade agreements effectively promoted democracy in their trading partners? At present, it is not possible to answer this question by looking at bilateral agreements in the United States, as the sample size is small (the United States has free trade agreements with only 20 countries).
Moreover, most of these agreements are so young that it is premature to draw conclusions about the impact of the agreement on democracy (with the exception of four came into force in 2004 or more recently). In a White House fact sheet, President Bush said, “All over the world, free markets and trade have helped overcome poverty and taught men and women the habits of freedom. That is why I am proposing the creation of a free trade area between the United States and the Middle East within a decade.  In an inaugural address at the University of South Carolina in May 2003, he added, “In an age of global terror and weapons of mass destruction, what is happening in the Middle East is very important to America. The bitterness of this region can bring violence and suffering to our own cities.