Upcoming Trans-Pacific Partnership Looks Like Corporate Takeover

OpEdNews Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Upcoming-Trans-Pacific-Par-by-Dave-Johnson-130516-918.html (Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Associate Member, or higher).

---

May 16, 2013   By Dave Johnson The Trans-Pacific Partnership, an expansion of the 2005 Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement, is being negotiated as we speak. As Yogi Berra said,”It’s deja vu all over again.” Is it another NAFTAesque corporate boondoggle, or will it turn out to be a real windfall for working families as its over 600 corporate promoters suggest? :::::::: You will be hearing a lot about the upcoming Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. TPP’s negotiations are being held in secret with details kept secret even from our Congress. But giant corporations are in the loop. TPP is a “trade” agreement between several Pacific-rim countries that is actually about much more than just trade. It will be sold as a trade agreement (because everyone knows that “trade” is good) but much of it appears to be (from what we know) a corporate end-run around things We the People want to do to reign in the giant corporations — like Wall Street regulation, environmental regulation and corporate taxation. One-Sided Process The TPP process appears to be set up to push corporate interests over other interests. The TPP is being negotiated in secret, so what we know about it comes from leaked documents. Even our Congress is being kept out of the loop. But 600 corporate representatives are in the loop while representatives of groups that protect working people, human, political and civil rights and our environment are largely not in the loop. This one-sided participation unfortunately indicates that the interests of giant corporations are likely to override the interests of working people and those who want to protect non-corporate interests. Otherwise there would be more representation by representatives of organizations representing these concerns, and greater transparency into the process. TPP Is A Very, Very Big Deal The coming TPP is a very, very big deal. If it is agreed to by the Senate and signed by the President it will override American laws in many areas. We won’t be allowed to enforce laws and regulations that impede the “rights” granted to big corporations under this agreement, and it will be very hard to rescind the agreement once signed, no matter how much damage might result. Just look at how NAFTA, China’s entry into the WTO and other agreements are causing huge trade deficits and sending jobs, factories and industries out of the country while dramatically increasing income and wealth inequality. Making the TPP work for We, the People should be up there on our “litmus test” of things we require of our elected officials — right along with pledging no cuts to Social Security and Medicare. TPP Not Just Trade It looks like TPP will go way beyond what most of us would consider to be in a normal “trade” agreement. TPP — negotiated by giant corporate interests — appears set to give giant corporations a veto over a country’s ability to set many laws and regulations that are designed to reign in those corporations. Quelle surprise! Leaked documents appear to show that negotiators are writing provisions that will set rules that are binding on Congress and our state legislatures tell us what laws and regulations our own country can pass or enforce in areas like: intellectual property rights like patents and copyrights, government procurement like Buy American which would be banned, investment and land use, service-sector regulation, food and product safety, corporate competition, labor, even environmental standards. Leaks show that TPP even limits government regulation of financial services! Dean Baker explains that non-trade items like patents in an agreement like TPP can have a huge effect on us by dramatically increasing prices of items like pharmaceuticals, in Political Corruption and the “Free Trade” Racket, Tariffs and quotas might raise the price of various items by 20 or 30 percent. By contrast, patent and copyright protection is likely to raise the price of protected items 2,000 percent or even 20,000 percent above the free market price. Drugs that would sell for a few dollars per prescription in a free market would sell for hundreds or even thousands of dollars when the government gives a drug company a patent monopoly. Again: There are over 600 corporate representatives participating in the TPP process, but few if any representatives of human rights, environmental, civil rights or worker rights organizations. And the resulting agreement will be binding on governments! The corporate powers apparently granted in the TPP can override domestic laws on environmental health and safety, and labor and citizens’ rights. If this agreement becomes law multinationals can claim that those domestic laws and regulations hamper free trade and can sue for millions of dollars in “damages.” Bad History Of Trade Agreements Harming Economy, Democracy Our one-sided, corporate-negotiated trade agreements have dramatically enriched Wall Street and a few CEOs. But the devastation that is apparent in many regions of our country along with the hollowing out of our middle class tells the real story of what these agreements can do to an economy. For example, we all know what has happened since China was allowed to enter the WTO. In the 2000s we lost 50,000+ factories and at least 6 million jobs just to China. Because of the massive cost of building a manufacturing infrastructure it will be very difficult to restore even key industries. But the 1% who pushed this made out extremely well. Even the just-signed Korea Free Trade agreement is already hurting our economy. It has increased the trade deficit, increased imports and decreased exports! A recently-released fact sheet from Public Citizen looks at the damage our economy is already experiencing from the Korea, Panama and Columbia agreements. The section on Korea tells the story: exports to Korea down 10%, trade deficit up 37%: “One year into the Korea FTA, U.S. goods exports to Korea have declined by 10 percent (a $4.2billion decrease) in comparison to the year before FTA implementation. U.S. meat producers lost a combined $206 million in beef, pork and poultry exports in the first year of the Korea FTA relative to the year before FTA implementation, while the U.S. auto and auto parts industries suffered a 16 percent increase in the U.S. auto trade deficit with Korea. Overall, the U.S. trade deficit with Korea has swelled 37 percent under the FTA.” Just one of many examples in the fact sheet: Imports of cars and auto parts from Korea have soared 15 percent (more than $2.5 billion) under the FTA, driving a 16 percent increase in the U.S. trade deficit with Korea in autos and auto parts relative to the year before FTA implementation. Also from the fact sheet — loss of 12,000 jobs: “The combined U.S. trade deficit with Korea, Colombia and Panama under the FTAs has jumped 11percent above pre-FTA levels for the same months as exports to Korea have declined and imports from Korea and Panama have risen substantially. Using the same ratio employed by the Obama administration, this $2.3 billion combined trade deficit expansion implies the net loss of more than 12,000 U.S. jobs in just the first several months of the new FTAs.” And that’s just the recent Korea agreement, and in just a few months since it went into effect. Trade Can Be Good Or Bad, Depending… No question about it, a good trade deal can boost exports, boost the economy, boost employment … And of course this promise is how these trade deals are sold to us. But the bad trade deals we have gotten ourselves into have instead boosted the trade deficit, boosted unemployment, boosted income and wealth inequality, boosted the loss of factories and industries, boosted the hollowing-out of our middle class and boosted the domination of our politics by the large corporate interests. All trade deals have winners and losers. NAFTA and letting China into the WTO were obviously big winners for Wall Street, the 1%ers, and their giant multinational corporations. But these and similar trade deals helped break the back of the unions, the middle class and our economy — especially manufacturing and its supply chains. The result of these changes has been that all of the gains from our economy as productivity increases have increasingly gone to fewer and fewer people who are higher and higher up the food chain. We need an open, democratic process that ensures that We, the People are the winners from our trade deals. Needed Fixes The TPP negotiations should not just be negotiated to serve the interests of giant multinational corporations. The process should be opened up to the public and democracy, so people and groups with a huge stake in the outcome — like labor unions, environmental organizations, human rights groups and consumer organizations — can participate. With only corporate participation, only corporate interests will be served. Funny how that works, isn’t it? The process of democracy should not be subverted by a “fast track” rule that keeps our Congress from fully considering the implications and effects of such an agreement. “Fast track” just extends the lack of citizen involvement in negotiations into a lack of citizen involvement in the finalization! Last June 130 members of the Congress wrote a letter to the US Trade Representative asking for transparency in the TPP negotiations and consultation with members of Congress. In addition,more than 400 organizations have asked Congress to replace the “Fast Track” system that limits Congress’ (democracy’s) ability to get involved in the process, and to call for a new direction for TPP as well as other trade agreements. We also need strong tests and irrevocable language about withdrawing from the agreement if it is harming our economy, environment, smaller businesses, tax base and/or our working people. TPP and all future trade deals must include clear and enforceable rules covering currency manipulation and other ways that countries game the system. Elizabeth Warren Drives It Home Watch Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) asking about trends in trading patterns with Korea since the new “free trade” treaty went into effect, and about how TPP looks like an end run around Wall Street regulation. Get Involved The next round of TPP talks will be held May 15-24 in Lima, Peru. It is time to start making sure that your voice is heard in D.C. Trade deals can lift people on both sides of trade borders. But only if a true open and democratic process is used to reach agreement. Otherwise these agreements will continue to be gamed to enrich the few at the expense of the many. One of the best comprehensive sources of information on TPP is at Public Citizen and their Global Trade Watch. They have a landing page just waiting for you: TPP: Corporate Power Tool of the 1%. Go take a look. The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a TPP page, explaining their concerns about the sections involving Intellectual Property (IP) as well as the general lack of transparency and openness. Public Knowledge has a TPP landing pageo expressing similar concerns. The AFL-CIO has a TPP detail page and offers Trans-Pacific FTA Outline concluding: “Although not all the news coming from APEC was good, it is too early to tell if the TPP will live up to its promise to create great opportunities for America’s working families. Now is the time to speak up. If you have concerns about some of these announcements, too, now is the time to speak up–the TPP is still being negotiated.” —– This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture & also crossposted at the Huffington Post. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary Click to follow me on Twitter. — Click to follow CAF on Twitter. Follow Dave Johnson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dcjohnson Submitters Bio: Dave Johnson is Founder and principal author at Seeing the Forest. Dave is a frequent public speaker and talk-radio guest and a leading participant in the progressive blogging community. He does a regular weekly segment on the popular Fairness Radio radio show. Currently Dave is a Fellow at Campaign for America’s Future, where he writes about issues involving American manufacturing, trade, and industrial policy. Recently Dave helped co-found Carbon Tracing, Inc., the company developing the desktop systems to validate carbon trading in the US. Before starting Seeing the Forest, Dave had over over 20 years of technology industry experience and has previously held senior industry positions including CEO and VP of Sales and Marketing. His earlier career included technical positions, including video game design at Atari and Imagic, and he was a pioneer in design and development of productivity and educational applications of personal computers.

Why the TransPacific Partnership is a Scary Big (Trade) Deal

Published on Thursday, May 9, 2013 by YES! Magazine

A super-sized NAFTA, the TPP gives foreign corporations privileges that can override domestic laws on environmental health and citizens’ rights. Here’s why we shouldn’t let it pass without a fight.

by Kristen Beifus

(Photo courtesy of Think Panama)NHK Broadcasting, Japan’s equivalent of the BBC, contacted me last month, wanting a statement on the American public’s reaction to the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations.

A super-sized NAFTA, the TransPacific Partnership is a free-trade agreement whereby countries give foreign corporations rights and privileges to encourage investment and global business. The TPP was a major issue during Japan’s recent national elections, when thousands took to the streets in protest. It was hard for the Japanese journalist to believe me when I explained that there is little awareness of the TPP here in the United States, because our media has hardly covered the subject.

The corporate powers granted in the TPP can override domestic laws on environmental health and safety, and labor and citizens’ rights. Not only that, but multinationals can claim that those domestic laws hamper free trade and sue member countries for millions of dollars. The TPP is in many ways an attempt to revive the stalled expansion of the World Trade Organization.

At present, the TPP talks include 12 Pacific Rim countries: Canada, the United States, Mexico, Peru, Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and, most recently, Japan. Thailand and the Philippines have expressed interest, and other countries would be allowed to join the TPP at any time.

Although trade deals have potentially huge effects on the economy, environment, and food sovereignty of communities throughout these 12 countries, the TPP negotiations are being held in secret between unelected government officials and representatives from more than 600 of the world’s most powerful corporations. The United States has plenty of interests clamoring for the trade advantages of the TPP, while developing countries like Vietnam see the TPP as an opportunity for economic development.

But the AFL-CIO, one of the few non-corporate and nongovernmental entities that have access to the text of the agreements, does not support the TPP in its current form because of implications for labor and human rights.

The talks are scheduled to finish by October of this year. Meanwhile, negotiators are lobbying Congress to grant “Fast Track” authority for the TPP. That would mean Congress couldn’t revise the agreements and could only vote “yes” or “no” to the United States joining the TPP.

Leaked documents show how extensive the reach of the TPP would be. It is shaping up as a corporate takeover of public policy that would impact safe food, sustainable jobs, clean water and air, access to life-saving medicines, education, even our very democracy. After 20 years under NAFTA we know the likely impacts for people and the environment.

In March, Citizens Trade Campaign organized a letter to Congress signed by 400 U.S. organizations outlining expectations for public involvement and calling for an end to Fast Track. It was signed by, among others, the Sierra Club, Doctors Without Borders, Public Citizen, the National Family Farm Coalition, and state trade justice groups including my organization, the Washington Fair Trade Coalition. Polls show the majority of Americans believe that offshoring jobs and NAFTA-style free trade deals have hurt the U.S. economy, so it’s likely that Americans would be opposed to the TPP too—if they knew more about it.

The next round of TPP talks will be held May 15–24 in Lima, Peru. An International Day of Action Against the TPP is set for May 11, International Fair Trade Day. TPPx-Border, a network of groups in the United States, Canada, and Mexico resisting the TPP, is organizing actions throughout the month of May and beyond, including webinars with Peruvian activists, a TPP action camp, and local community events. VisitTPPxBorder.org to find out how the TPP will impact you—and then take to the streets!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License

Kristen Beifus is the director of the Washington Fair Trade Coalition, consisting of 55 diverse organizations across the state of Washington working for trade policy that benefits people and the planet.

• E-mail
• Print
• Share

U.S. senators want no exemptions for Japan over TPP

By MATTHEW PENNINGTON

POLITICS MAR. 20, 2013 – 06:45AM JST ( 27 )

WASHINGTON —

Japan must open up its auto market and be granted no special exemptions if it is to be admitted into a regional trade pact championed by the Obama administration, U.S. senators said Tuesday.

Lawmakers pressed a top U.S. negotiator on how long-standing trade disagreements with the world’s third largest economy — also a key ally of Washington — would be tackled following Prime Minister Shinzo Abe decision to seek Japan’s entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP.

The pact is widely viewed as part of broader U.S. efforts to intensify its engagement with Asia. With Japan’s entry, the participating nations would account for about 40 percent of global GDP.

But resolving sensitive issues, including Japan’s heavily subsidized agriculture sector, could prove tricky. Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis told the Senate Finance Committee hearing that Japan would have to put “all goods on the table” for negotiation.

The pact is being negotiated by 11 nations: U.S., Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. All would have to sign off on Japan’s entry into the pact that’s intended would reduce duties on a wide range of goods and services and ease regulatory and other non-tariff barriers to trade. The administration hopes to complete talks on the pact by October.

Talking tough, Democrat Sen Debbie Stabenow, co-chair of a Senate caucus on manufacturing, complained Japan exports 120 automobiles to the U.S. for every American vehicle sold to Japan.

She also accused Japan of currency manipulation, saying that an undervalued yen is giving it an unfair advantage.

“It’s impossible for us to get into their markets,” she said, charging that protectionism of Japan’s auto sales dates back 80 years. “As we look at Japan, why in the world would we believe at this point that this would be any different?”

Abe has promised to guard Japan’s national interest, but says it has no choice but to opt for the growth that comes with freer trade or lose out to other countries which are capitalizing on market opening. He took office in December vowing to revive Japan’s long-sluggish economy.

Democrat Sen Max Baucus said Japan’s entry would enhance the “remarkable opportunity” presented by TPP to open up a huge market for U.S. exports, and he noted progress in Japan beginning to accept U.S. beef imports.

But Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch took issue with a statement issued by President Barack Obama after a White House meeting with Abe last month that noted sensitivities for Japan on certain agricultural products and for some manufactured products for the U.S. Japan’s average tariff on imported rice is nearly 800 percent, while rates for butter and sugar are over 300 percent.

“If this statement reflects the standards for Japan in the TPP it threatens to dilute the benefits of entire agreement as other countries seek to carve out as many sensitivities as they can,” he said.

Marantis said the U.S. is currently working with Japan to ensure that should it join TPP it will be capable of meeting its high standards. He said they were making progress, but concerns remain over the auto and insurance sectors, and Japan’s use of non-tariffs measures.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Abe vows to change constitution, reestablish ‘proud Japan’

POLITICS MAR. 18, 2013 – 07:00AM JST ( 48 )

TOKYO —

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe pledged Sunday to push for changes to Japan’s pacifist constitution—a move likely to stir unease in both the countries, which were among victims of Tokyo’s 20th century militarism.

Abe was speaking at the annual convention of his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which adopted a wide-ranging action plan, including efforts to create an “independent constitution” to replace the U.S.-imposed postwar charter which bans the use of force in settling international disputes.

The ban limits the so-called Self-Defense Forces to a strictly defensive role andbars them from taking aggressive action.

The hawkish Abe has said Japan must redefine its rules of engagement to provide an effective deterrent against North Korea and balance China’s growing military might.

Abe said in January he intends to change the constitution, by modifying an article which stipulates that amendments need a two-thirds majority in parliament.

The LDP and its junior coalition partner New Komeito have a more-than two-thirds majority in the lower house, but New Komeito and some LDP factions are cautious about amendments.

The less powerful upper house is controlled by no single party, but the opposition Democratic Party of Japan has the greatest number of seats.

Elections for half the upper house seats must be held around July.

“We will definitely win through the (upper house) election and reestablish a proud Japan,” Abe told the convention.

The party action plan also reaffirmed Japan’s intention to join the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade talks, despite persistent objections from farmers and others.

It said Japan will negotiate “in a manner which will protect national interests including the agriculture and fishery sector.”

“I will definitely protect Japan’s agriculture and food. I want you to trust me,” Abe said.

© 2013 AFP

______________________________

Comment: A proud Japan means powerful with nukes and Nipponism?

48 U.S. lawmakers sound alarm on Japan joining TPP talks

POLITICS MAR. 15, 2013 – 10:10AM JST ( 40 )

WASHINGTON —

Four dozen Democratic lawmakers on Thursday expressed concern about Japan joining free trade talks with the United States and urged President Barack Obama to maintain U.S. tariffs on Japanese autos and trucks if Tokyo does enter the negotiations.

The plea came one day before Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is expected to announce Japan’s interest in joining talks on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a proposed free trade deal between the United States and 10 countries.

That worries Ford Motor Co and other Detroit-based automakers, which fear losing more sales to Japanese imports. A U.S.-led push to finish the TPP pact by the end of this year adds to the carmakers’ anxiety.

“In an industry with razor-thin profit margins, the elimination of the 2.5% car tariff (as well as the 25% truck tariff) would be a major benefit to Japan without any gain for a vital American industry, leading to more Japanese imports, less American production and fewer American jobs,” the lawmakers said in a letter to Obama.

The group included Representative Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee. He is from Michigan and one of the fiercest defenders of the U.S. auto industry in Congress.

His brother, Senator Carl Levin, another Michigan Democrat who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, also signed the letter, along with eight other senators and nearly 40 members of the House.

“What the letter does is sound an alarm about Japan’s participation” in the TPP, Sander Levin said in an interview with Reuters.

He said he was skeptical that negotiations could tear down regulatory and other non-tariff barriers that he said have long kept American autos out of Japan’s market.

Levin, who has a history of voting for most trade agreements, played a major role in persuading the Obama administration to renegotiate auto provisions of a free trade pact with South Korea.

The revised pact, which took force one year ago, allowed the United States to keep its 2.5% tariff on South Korean autos until the fifth year and to keep its 25 percent tariff on South Korean light trucks until the eighth year, when it will begin to be phased out.

But Levin and the other lawmakers argued in their letter that the same approach could not be taken with Japan.

“While some have compared this challenge to the one we faced with Korea, the Japanese auto market is more impenetrable, the history of formidable barriers and imbalanced trade is longer, and the magnitude of the problem is far greater than with Korea,” the group said.

“Despite being the third-largest auto market in the world, Japan ranks last among OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) members in terms of auto market import penetration, at 5.9 percent in 2012,” they said.

The lawmakers blame those low import numbers on a web of barriers, including currency manipulation, discriminatory taxes, onerous and costly certification procedures for foreign cars and unwillingness by Japanese auto dealers to sell foreign cars.

Meanwhile, Japan is concerned about being pressured in the TPP talks to open its long-protected markets for rice and other politically sensitive farm products.

In the aftermath of Abe’s recent visit to Washington, there have been rumors the two sides have already struck a deal that would let the United States keep its auto tariffs in exchange for Japan’s protecting some agricultural products.

Levin said he had not heard anything from the administration to confirm that. “We have no indication from the administration there is any such deal,” Levin said.

(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2013.

Peril in the Pacific: No to the TPP

 

• E-mail
• Print
• Share

resize:+ - reset

Published on Friday, March 8, 2013 by Friends of the Earth

A short film on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement that analyzes what is at stake in the negotiations in general, the implications of the proposed investment chapter and the growing campaign to challenge the TPP.

© 2013 Friends of the Earth

US ‘Stalling’ Could Force Acceptance of Onerous TPP

Carey L. Biron

Inter Press Service/News Report

Published: Wednesday 6 March 2013

The proposal, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), currently comprises 11 countries (a twelfth Japan, is also contemplating joining), but the Obama administration has been clear that if passed, the zone would be open-ended in terms of future expansion.

SHARE

EMAIL

Civil society opposition here has strengthened against a U.S.-proposed free trade zone that would include some dozen countries around the Pacific Rim.

As negotiators head into a 16th round of talks this week in Singapore, around 400 organizations are urging the U.S. Congress to demand greater transparency in the proceedings.

On Monday, the first day of the negotiations, Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF), a humanitarian group, called on President Barack Obama’s administration to “end its stall tactics and revise its proposals for what otherwise promises to be the most harmful trade deal ever for access to medicines in developing countries.”

The Singapore talks will extend through March 13. Critics say civil society and other critical stakeholders have been systematically shut out of the negotiations, supplanted by corporate interests.

The proposal, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), currently comprises 11 countries (a twelfth Japan, is also contemplating joining). But the Obama administration has been clear that if passed, the zone would be open-ended in terms of future expansion.

That broad geographical sweep, together with the simultaneous negotiation of a lengthy but highly secretive list of contentious issues not necessarily related to trade, is leading critics to warn that the scope of any pending agreement could negatively impact on nearly half the globe.

And with the Obama administration now saying it wants to wrap up the negotiations by October, some TPP negotiators are reportedly worried that some of the most controversial issues up for discussion are being pushed to the very end in an attempt to “run out the clock.”

According to a new brief released by MSF, U.S. TPP negotiators are pushing for rules that would “enhance patent and data protections for pharmaceutical companies, dismantle public health safeguards enshrined in international law and obstruct price-lowering generic competition for medicines.”

The result could be restrictions on access to affordable generic medicines for “millions” of people. 

Judit Rius Sanjuan, U.S. manager for MSF’s Access Campaign, says her office heard that the last time the TPP negotiations included substantive talks on access to medicines was a year ago. At that time, nearly all-negotiating partners reportedly rejected a draft chapter on intellectual property rights, which includes the patent provisions.

And while the White House has stated that it would be resubmitting a revised chapter on this issue, Sanjuan says it appears that access to medicines is once again not on the agenda this week in Singapore.

“We are hearing from other negotiating teams that the pressure to finalize this agreement by October is rising, and they fear that if there is not more time for substantive discussion, this chapter could stand,” she told IPS.

“We share the concern that this delay in presenting an alternative text is a U.S. strategy to focus instead on the less controversial chapters and leave behind debate over access to medicines. But doing so would have huge consequences for developing countries.”

In fact, imposing these types of new restrictions would run counter to previous international agreements and national legislation under which Washington has pledged to expand access to generic medicines.

Any restriction in access to such medicines would also affect the United States’ own global health goals. According to Sanjuan, generics make up some 98 percent of the medicines used by PEPFAR, the United States’ flagship anti-HIV/AIDS program and the world’s largest.

Half the world

Global health wouldn’t be the only sector impacted by the TPP’s passage. Also on Monday, coinciding with the first day of negotiations in Singapore, around 400 groups from a broad range of backgrounds sent an open letter to the U.S. Congress opposing the abnormally secretive way in which negotiations for the trade area have been run.

“This agreement will impact on how trade and investment are conducted in the Pacific Rim for decades, yet the ramifications aren’t fully understood even by people who know about the TPP,” Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Washington-based Citizens Trade Campaign, an advocacy group, and an organizer of the letter, told IPS.

“This is an agreement that wouldn’t just affect the economy and sustainability in these 11 countries, but has the potential to impact the economy and environment for literally half the world.”

In lieu of official consultation, the groups are offering recommendations for draft language on issues from environmental standards and human and labor rights to financial regulation and national sovereignty. Yet the central complaint has to do with lack of oversight and transparency.

“We find it troubling that … U.S. negotiators still refuse to inform the American public what they have been proposing,” the letter states. “Shielding not only proposals but agreed-upon texts from public view until after negotiations have concluded and the pact is finalized is not consistent with democratic principles.”

The groups are calling for an opening-up of the talks to both the U.S. Congress and the public at large. They’re also urging lawmakers not to authorize new “fast track” powers that would allow the president to send Congress trade pacts for straight votes without the possibility of amendments.

Free trade advocates tend to suggest that such powers are necessary to get other countries to agree to large-scale trade agreements in the first place, but President Obama had allowed the “fast track” legislation to lapse. On Friday, however, the administration’s new trade policy agenda noted that the president would work with Congress to re-authorize that authority.

The administration has used similar concerns to rationalize the high level of secrecy surrounding the negotiations, saying that greater transparency would upset delicate discussions.

Yet critics point out that draft trade texts at this point in negotiations are often made public, including by the World Trade Organization. Similar precedent exists from the Free Trade Area of the Americas, the trade zone agreed to in 2001 covering 34 countries, including the United States.

“There’s a real reason why the draft has been kept secret from the U.S. public – Americans wouldn’t support a huge amount of the agenda that the [Obama administration] has been pushing,” Citizens Trade’s Stamoulis says.

“If they were to negotiate an agreement that put human rights ahead of corporate profit, creating more just and sustainable social policy, the TPP could be a tool for incredible good. But if you look at who has a seat at the table, with the public shut out and more than 600 corporate lobbyists included, there is nothing to indicate that’s the deal we’re going to get.”

U.S. Arms Fuel Asian Tension

 RICHARD JAVAD HEYDARIAN

Inter Press Service/News Analysis

Published: Monday 11 February 2013

Overall, the U.S. seems to be gradually passing the buck to Asian partners, prodding them to bear a growing share of defense costs vis-à-vis China’s perceived expansionism.

After a year of intense diplomatic standoff and territorial brinkmanship among disputing states in the South and East China Seas, the U.S. military ‘pivot’ to the region appears to be in full swing – a move that could further aggravate an already combustible regional dynamic.

Against the backdrop of Chinese territorial assertiveness, the year started off with the bang of big-ticket U.S. arms sales to treaty allies and strategic partners across the region, including an expanded package of sophisticated military hardware featuring state-of-the-art anti-missile systems and warplanes. On top of this, Washington has also stepped-up its joint military exercises with Asian allies perched on the forefront of ongoing territorial spats.

Building on its earlier promise of greater commitment to the freedom of navigation in the Western Pacific, an artery for global trade and energy transport, Washington aims to improve its allies’ military capabilities in a bid to rein in Beijing’s strong-willed territorial posturing.

Facing a stubborn economic downturn at home, the dramatic boost in U.S. defense sales to the region underlines Washington’s growing emphasis on a primarily military-oriented (as opposed to trade-and-investment-driven) approach to re-asserting its position as an ‘anchor of peace and stability’ in the region.

Among the biggest beneficiaries of growing U.S. military commitment to the region is the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), a massive trade group that includes top Pentagon suppliers such as Lockheed Martin Corp, Boeing Co and Northrop Grumman Corp. It underscores the extent to which the U.S. ‘pivot’ has energized the American industrial-military complex, further dimming the prospects for a peaceful resolution of the ongoing disputes.

 

“(The pivot) will result in growing opportunities for our industry to help equip our friends,” says Fred Downey, vice-president for national security at the AIA. 

Since the formal commencement of the U.S. pivot, after U.S. President Barack Obama’s fateful speech to the Australian Parliament in November 2011, Washington has come under tremendous pressure to reassure troubled allies such as Japan and the Philippines against Beijing’s assertiveness. In response, the U.S. has beefed up its rotational military presence across the Pacific, while expanding joint exercises – focusing on maritime defense – with and military aid to Pacific partners.

To calm China’s fears of a U.S.-led regional containment strategy, Washington has also focused on deepening economic integration within the Pacific Rim, specifically through the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trading agreement, which aims to facilitate the flow of investments and goods among partner-nations. In addition, the U.S. has also – at least in principal – underlined its support for diplomatic resolution of ongoing territorial disputes in the South and East China Seas.

However, the U.S. pronouncements have failed to appease regional partners and deter Chinese assertiveness. Beijing continues to accuse Washington of staging a concerted effort to deny China its (perceived) legitimate interests, while allies have raised doubts as to Washington’s ability – given its dire fiscal woes – to maintain regional ascendancy.

Reflecting on fragile U.S. finances, Ken Lieberthal, director of the Thornton China Center at the Brookings Institute and former president Bill Clinton’s top China adviser, has stated, “The most important single element to our (U.S.) success in Asia will be whether domestically we get our house in order, whether domestically we’re able to adopt and integrate a set of policies that will effectively address our fiscal problems over time.”

Given TPP’s failure to gain traction among major Pacific economies, and in the absence of any substantial American investments and economic aid to strategic partners, Washington seems to have instead opted for a full military pivot. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) inability to forge ahead with an effective diplomatic mechanism to settle the disputes has only encouraged this trend.

Since 2011, the U.S. worldwide military sales have hovered above 60 billion dollars.  In 2011, India alone accounted for a 6.9 billion dollar acquisition deal, underscoring New Delhi’s growing anxieties with China’s massive naval buildup, especially in light of its substantial energy-related investments in South China Sea. Last year, overall sales to Pacific partners topped $13.7 billion dollars.

Building on its earlier arms bonanza, the U.S. defense industry has started off the year with a large package of flashy, cutting-edge arms sales to key partners in Northeast Asia: a 5 billion dollar Lockheed Martin radar-evading F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft deal with Japan, a 1.85 billion dollar Lockheed Martin-led retrofitting of Taiwan’s 145 F-16A/B fighters with advanced radars and electronic warfare suits, and a 1.2 billion dollar Northrop Grumman high-flying RQ-4 “Global Hawk” spy drone deal with South Korea.

Beyond propping up allies’ military capabilities to deal with a wide array of challenges, including China, Washington has also encouraged further self-reliance and inter-operability among regional allies, creating a so-called “inversed wall of China” across the Western Pacific.

As a result, the newly elected Japanese government, under the hawkish Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, has supported Washington’s call for a more assertive Japanese regional role. Mr. Abe has pushed for revitalized defense ties with Asian partners, enhanced inter-operability with major naval powers in the Pacific such as Australia and India, and expanded military aid to countries such as the Philippines. He has also pushed for a so-called Asian “security diamond”, bringing together likeminded Pacific powers concerned with a perceived Chinese “threat”.

With Japan locked in a brewing conflict with China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea, Washington has conducted a series of high-profile joint naval exercises with Tokyo. In November, 47,000 Japanese and American military personnel took part in the biennial Keen Sword exercise off Okinawa islands, which was originally planned to act out the re-capture of disputed islands off the southern coast of Japan. This was followed by a five-day joint air exercise in January, just days after Japanese jets fended off Chinese aircraft surveying the disputed islands.

Overall, the U.S. seems to be gradually passing the buck to Asian partners, prodding them to bear a growing share of defense costs vis-à-vis China’s perceived expansionism. Meanwhile, there is little indication of a renewed push for a diplomatic resolution of the territorial disputes.

ABOUT RICHARD JAVAD HEYDARIAN

Foreign Policy In Focus contributor Richard Javad Heydarian is a foreign affairs analyst based in Manila.

The TPP and the Slow-Motion Corporate Coup

Wallach: ‘In reality, the TPP is about much more than trade.’ (photo: Adbusters)

By Lori Wallach, Yes! Magazine

09 December 12

 

A highly secretive trade agreement aims to penalize countries that protect workers, consumers, and the environment. Luckily, the growing opposition goes beyond the usual trade justice suspects.

hile the election season seized everyone’s attention, government officials and 600 official corporate “advisors” were working behind closed doors to complete the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Negotiations have been cloaked in unprecedented secrecy and its proponents have mislabeled the TPP as a “free trade” agreement. In reality, the TPP is about much more than trade. It threatens a stealthy, slow-motion corporate coup d’etat, formalizing and locking in corporate rule over most aspects of our lives.

Thirteen years ago, at the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Seattle Ministerial, a similar threat in the form of a massive expansion of the powers and scope of the WTO was stopped.

At the Battle in Seattle, the immovable object called grassroots democracy was victorious over the allegedly unstoppable force of corporate-led globalization. The “Doha Round,” which followed two years later and continued the attempt to expand the WTO’s reign, was alsoderailed thanks to tenacious campaigning by organizations and activists worldwide.

Recalling these historic moments, when people power stopped the dangerous expansion of corporate power, is especially sweet today, when we must again act to safeguard these inspiring victories. All of us who will live with the results must become active to stop the TPP, the latest iteration of corporate coup via “trade” agreement.

What Would the TPP Do?

Eleven countries are now involved-Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States-and there is an open invitation for more to join. Think of the TPP as a NAFTA on steroids, which could encompass half of the world.

This is the largest, most potentially damaging agreement since the 1995 establishment of the WTO. And you may never have heard about it before. That’s because the negotiations, which have been underway for three years, are being conducted in extreme secrecy. The public, Congress, and the press are locked out, but the 600 official corporate advisors have access to the negotiating texts.

The TPP is the latest strategy by the same gang who got us into the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and pushed for the expansion of the WTO: American job-offshorers like GE and Caterpillar; banksters like Citi; pharmaceutical price-gouging giants like Pfizer; oil, gas, and mining multinationals like Chevron and Exxon; and agribusiness monopolists like Cargill and Monsanto.

They’ve misbranded the TPP as a model 21st-Century “trade” deal to try to sell it with the usual false promises of it expanding exports. But only two of the TPP’s 29 chapters are about “trade.”

Most of the TPP’s proposed provisions instead comprise a corporate power grab. The TPP would includeextreme protections for foreign investors, which would help corporations offshore American jobs to low-wage countries. These terms would require governments to provide foreign investors a guaranteed “minimum standard of treatment” when they relocate, including special privileges and rights that domestic firms and investors do not enjoy. Foreign firms-or foreign subsidiaries of U.S. firms-could extract unlimited amounts of taxpayer money as compensation when investors claim that U.S. government actions undermine a corporation’s expected future profits. Seriously.

Equal Status for Corporations and Country

The investor rules would elevate individual foreign firms and investors to the same status as the sovereign nations that would be party to the TPP. Corporations and investors would be empowered to privately enforce the agreement by suing a signatory government before the World Bank and other foreign tribunals. In this “investor-state dispute resolution,” three private-sector lawyers, who rotate between suing governments and acting as “judges,” could order governments to pay large amounts of our tax dollars to investors who do not want to follow the same laws as domestic firms.

Under similar, if less grandiose, provisions in NAFTA, investors have been paid hundreds of millions of dollars in cases attacking bans on toxic chemicals, land use rules, and more. Phillip Morris Asia has attacked Australia’s cigarette plain packing law-which requires that health warnings be included in cigarette packaging-before such a tribunal. Australia announced in April that it will not agree to be bound to the investor-state regime in the TPP. Negotiators from the United States have declared that all TPP nations must submit to this regime.

Either by winning an investor-state dispute or by preemptively putting a chill on government actions to address critical public needs, the TPP’s investor rights would impose an outer bound of the possible for communities and countries setting policies related to health, the environment, water, or other natural resources. There is almost no progressive movement or campaign whose goals are not threatened, while vast swaths of public-interest policy achieved through decades of struggle are poised to be undermined as these attacks proliferate.

Progressive Achievements Rolled Back

The TPP would also ban existing and future “Buy Local” and “Buy American” procurement policies. These are rules that direct federal and state governments to reinvest our tax dollars to create American jobs by buying domestically made cars, steel, food, and more, and by giving contracts to local construction firms or call centers firms.

The TPP also would expose to attack green and sweat-free procurement rules that specify that only recycled paper, non-old-growth wood products, renewable-source energy, or products made under fair labor standards can be purchased with government funds. Under these terms, democracies would no longer be able to decide that we want to invest our tax dollars to create jobs at home or to create markets for green energy or morally produced goods. Instead, the TPP would require our governments to send our money offshore and spend it with firms trashing human rights and the environment.

The TPP would limit financial regulation by forbidding bans on risky derivatives and other dangerous financial products, as well as the use of capital controls to counter wild surges of speculative investments in and out of countries, which destabilize the global economy. The massive financial firms that caused the financial crisis could use these terms to roll back the new financial regulations implemented in the U.S. and around the world.

As far as health care goes, the TPP would grant new monopoly privileges to Big Pharma that would jack up medicine prices and cut consumers’ access to life-saving medicines in the developing countries involved in the TPP. There is a proposal to allow pharmaceutical firms to challenge the pricing decisions of cost-saving drug formularies, which are used by developing countries and, increasingly, by the United States, to bargain for better prices with drug firms.

One chapter would even attack Internet freedom by imposing through the backdoor damaging aspects of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which citizen activism derailed in the U.S. Congress.

A Trade Justice Coalition Emerges (Again)

That’s only the tip of the iceberg. But it’s precisely the extreme nature of the TPP corporate wish list that is its greatest vulnerability-and our greatest opportunity. The 1-percenter TPP agenda would harm most of us in the United States and in the other countries involved. It can only survive if left shrouded in darkness. Citizen activists in many of the TPP countries are building an inspiring global movement implementing the “Dracula strategy” to drag the TPP into the sunshine so those who will have to live with its consequences can know what’s coming and take action.

Civil society groups representing millions of members worldwide have joined together in raising the alarm. And, given the stunning audacity of the TPP’s prospective corporate power grab, activism is reaching beyond the environmental, consumer, labor, family farm, and access to medicines groups who have been the mainstay of movements against past “trade” agreement attacks. Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties Union, Avaaz, Consumers International, tobacco controls groups, and many other organizations have become involved.

From the United States to Australia and even to Malaysia (where any public gathering the authorities consider to be a protest is illegal and participants are subject to arrest), protests are growing. Outside each posh resort where TPP negotiators meet behind closed doors, citizens gather to chant“Flush the TPP,”“Release the Text,” and “Peoples’ Needs, Not Corporate Greed!”

At the next round of negotiations, which will be held in early December in Auckland, New Zealand, negotiators hope to finish several chapters of the deal, so they can sign the whole thing in the first quarter of 2013.

Each of us can make a difference. Given the threats that the TPP poses to a stunningly broad range of fundamental rights and public needs, this is a fight-like the Battle in Seattle in 1999-that can unite a powerful coalition of movements. And it is people power that will be victorious against the TPP corporate power grab, if you help spread the word.

 

Take Action: TPP – NAFTA on Steroids, meeting in NYC

 

October 14, 2012 at 18:16:21
By Scott Baker (about the author)     Permalink

Tag(s): International Trade Movements; Tpp Trans-pacific Partnership; Trade; Trans-pacific Partnership, Add Tags

Group(s): Common Ground NYC, Add to My Group(s)

Become a Fan

SAVE AS FAVORITE

VIEW FAVORITES

opednews.com

Trade Justice Coalition by Trade Justice

The Sierra Club, Community Church’s Green Sanctuary Committee, Environmental Working Group and Trade Justice are holding an educational forum on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive new free trade agreement being negotiated behind closed doors by 600 transnational corporations. The Nation calls it “NAFTA on Steroids.” Please RSVP to
http://tradejustice.net/tppforums
as to whether you will attend the panel discussion on:

Friday, October 26th, 6:30 to 9 PM
Gallery of the Community Church, John Haynes Holmes House, 28 East 35th St. 
between Madison and Park Avenues, Manhattan

Speakers:
Moderator, Ken Gale, Producer of WBAI’s environmental program, Eco-logic
Alissa Simmons, National Field Dir., Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
Ilana Solomon, Trade Representative, Sierra Club

Donation: $5-$15 or FREE if you can’t afford to pay
RSVP and get more details & directions at
http://tradejustice.net/tppforums
Learn more about TPP at http://www.citizen.org/tpp

This event will focus on the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s potential impact on fracking, although its total impacts would encompass every aspect of our lives. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to attend in order to discuss the most effective response for you and your organization. Public Citizen calls for a strategy to get out word as fast and widely as possible in order to provoke public outrage leading to effective mobilization and action. It would be a great help if you will distribute this invitation to your lists.

Thanks and look forward to seeing you there!

IF PASSED, THE TPP WOULD:

* Expand NAFTA’s legal right to sue the US or NYS for “takings not taken,” in this case, unfracked gas. (For an example, see Metalclad’s successful case against Mexico at
click here )
” Move good-paying jobs offshore to low-wage nations and lower working conditions and labor rights all over the world.
” Create new tools to attack pro-environment and consumer safety policies
” Deregulate Wall Street banks, hedge funds and insurance companies – even more so than now.
” Displace family farmers, which would concentrate global food supplies and subject consumers (us) to spiking prices
” Extend patent expiration dates, which would block our access to affordable, generic medications
* Gain the legal right to override sovereign US policies at the federal, state, local and court levels; in other words, the US would function as a sovereign state no longer.
…and much more.

UTUBE http://www.democracynow.org/2012/6/14/breaking_08_pledge_leaked_trade_doc

ARTICLE and an amazing PHOTO from The Nation October 2011 articlehttp://www.thenation.com/article/168627/nafta-steroids link to

FLYER to print out and/or email and distribute (see below):

TPP:What You Don’t Know CAN Hurt You!

A Series of Educational Forums on the Trans-Pacific Partnership:

A Secret Plan to Globalize NAFTA

At Risk: Our Jobs, Our Environment, Our Food, and Our Health!

WHAT IS TPP?

Behind closed doors, the US Administration and the governments of 10 other

countries are negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a massive expansion of

NAFTA that would increase the profits of the 1% – at the expense of