Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free trade is usually done on a tit-for-tat basis. I think the GP is saying they should allow protectionist policies without "tatting".
This is effectively how the US built up the industries of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. The reason these countries were allowed to do it where others are not was because the US wanted strategically placed powerful allies in the region. There probably wouldn't be a Japanese electronics/car industry, for instance, if the Soviets hadn't spooked the the US in the 40s.
Japan's industrial base was built before the 40s, with an extensive domestic supply of machine tools and industrial equipment, rail infrastructure, and finished manufactured goods. Or else who do you think was building the planes, ships, and submarines that the allies were fighting on the Pacific front? Their industries were temporarily damaged by the war but it's no surprise that they'd be back to building cars within a couple decades.
They, rather than the US, were the ones who built up much of the initial industrial base of Taiwan and Korea, as part of their own colonization efforts. Not out of so much benevolence, of course.