This chapter argues that, albeit with variations, each of the three countries – that is, the US, Mexico and Canada – that belong to the USMCA can point to some concrete positive economic and welfare developments that have been realised because of NAFTA. The relative success of NAFTA / the USMCA has largely happened because of the belief that the three contracting parties have in the institution created to enhance the implementation of obligations under the agreement. Indeed, in 1994, NAFTA placed emphasis on the creation of ‘effective procedures for the implementation and application’ of member states’ obligations. In contrast to dispute settlement under the AfCFTA, ASEAN and MERCOSUR, a premium was placed on an effective dispute settlement mechanism. This explains why the USMCA’s chapter 10 is viewed as the ‘crown jewel’ of the RTA. The same can be said of Chapter 14 on ISDS which even has authority to review decisions by, for instance, a state court in the US. Further, we have also argued that free trade agreements between a hegemon and countries at a lower level of economic and political development may likely lead to the loss of ability by the party at the lower stages of development to adopt trade measures for the protection of its own industries.