Err...partly. It's better known as the 'death of distance'. You'd be naive to suggest it reduces protectionist barriers, because it's a load of *******s. I prefer to think of it as greater reliance on other factors and the downing of the nation state, as we saw during the global financial crisis, because money's moved all around the world so quickly, nothing is certain. It's all one big bubble and loads of numbers.
China and the USA are pretty much at war over trade issues. The USA accuses China of being protectionist by buying loads of US dollars to keep the real value of the Renminbi low. On the other hand, China accuses the United States of keeping their currency low by using quantitative easing measures.
The USA recently whacked a 30% tariff on Chinese imported solar panels because they said production was subsidised by the Chinese government. Furthermore, the USA uses very strong protectionist barriers to protect their steel industry.
Away from the big two, and Japan uses technicalities to stop excessive imports, with strong testing to meet their health and safety standards. Basically, if they don't want something, they'll find something they don't like about it, which doesn't meet their specs, or they'll hit the product until it breaks, another way of protecting their firms.
Furthermore, there are heavy bans on African imported manufactured goods right across the developed world, most notably in America and the EU. The recent Doha round of the WTO failed to achieve a solution to allow African countries to trade more freely - this is desperately contributing to their poverty issues and it has been noted that a 1% increase in trade will life more Africans - mainly in sub-saharan Africa we're talking about here- out of poverty than a 5 fold increase in international aid.
Here's a nice article about the US-Chinese trade war.
http://www.selfdirectedinvestor.com/article/201010/chinese-official-accuses-u-s-of-currency-manipulation-chineseofficial.htm/So as you can see, it would be wrong to suggest there would be more free trade as a result of globalisation. I prefer to see it as a 'shift', with the emergence of more markets, therefore factors of production, opportunities etc to create wealth. But states still very much do protect their industries. In fact, GB gave Vauxhall a massive subsidy to keep production here in the UK last year in Luton and Ellesmere Port, Cheshire.
There will always be protectionism, and as we enter more economic uncertainty, it will only increase. There is certainly more reliance, but it I wouldn't class it as free trade, trade certainly, but it is not entirely, in fact, I'd argue, hardly, 'free trade'.
Sorry about the rant. Hope this has helped anyone looking at free trade/protectionism/globalisation.