Posts
TPP plots to cripple China
7
October, 2015
Five
years in the making and involving 40 percent of world's trade, the
Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has been signed between United States
and 11 other countries, namely, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Peru,
Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam and
Brunei, concerning over 800 million people.
The
deal is a thinly-disguised attempt by the United States to encircle
China and cripple its plan for One Belt, One Road (OBOR) which aims
to integrate Asia by the Asians for the overall growth of the region.
US, who finds it economic, political and military grip on Asia
slipping, have thrown its last dice. Other nations have primarily
agreed to invest in US' crumbling proposition.
Don't
take my word alone for it. No less than President Barack Obama
claimed to Wall Street Journal: "If we don't write the rules,
China will write the rules," Senator Charles E. Schumer has
professed the deal's stated goal is to "lure" other
countries "away from China." A prominent US columnist has
described the deal as a "comprehensive trade pact that could
help cement our dominance over China in Asia."
This
TPP is no ordinary trade agreement.
It's
focus is to dismantle "non-tariff barriers" to business and
kick out any regulatory measure to protect labour, consumers and the
environment. All countries involved will have to submit themselves to
multinational corporations and that's why its largest proponents have
been big Silicon Valley firms, Hollywood studios and the
pharmaceutical industry.
The
deal, under Investor-State-Dispute Settlement (ISDS) process, allows
corporations to seek restitution against states in an international
arbitration court if their profits are hurt. The protection thus
offered, say to a pharmaceutical giant, wouldn't allow any generic,
cheap drugs to be made available to masses. Tens and thousands of
Vietnamese HIV patients, for instance, would be deprived of
live-saving drugs within their means.
Another
provision allows corporations to use the long arm of law to crack
down on any leak through a computer system. It would turn
whistleblowers into an outlaw. For TPP, corporations, and not the
people, are the priority. Sovereignty would pass on from states to
corporations. The TPP has been achieved in secrecy and the world
wouldn't know the details for years.
It's
primarily a deal to isolate China from the rest of Asia. Most Asian
nations have begun to invest in closer ties with the Beijing. China
is the top trading partner of over 120 countries. It's aiming to
internationalize its currency renminbi as an alternative to dollar;
it has invested in multilateral institutions, such as the Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to counter the might of IMF and
World Bank. US, through TPP, seek to scuttle such moves. If TPP
succeeds, then US would look to bring more nations under its umbrella
in the second round in a bid to bring China on its knees.
Under
TPP, American multinationals would look to off-shoring, low-cost
alternatives to China. Southeast Asian nations--Malaysia, Singapore,
Vietnam and Brunei--are strategically key nations. They get
preferential access to US markets and it would hurt China's export
competitiveness. Vietnam, for instance, could redress its spiraling
trade deficit against China. Its textile and garment industry relies
on Chinese material. Nations such as Brunei and Singapore can't wait
for TPP to get operational. They possess enormous capital but their
domestic market is limited. Singapore would be a magnet for
investment as it strictly enforces intellectual property rights and
has favourable tax climate. Its financial, shipbuilding and
petrochemical industries could zoom ahead. Malaysia would benefit
with greater access to new export markets for its natural resources.
The
biggest obstacle to regional trade in Asia is the inadequate network
of infrastructure--and not high tariffs and protectionist policies.
World Economic Forum concluded in 2013 that world GDP could rise by
up to six times by reducing the supply chain barriers instead of
removing all import tariffs. China's stress on infrastructure and its
AIIB initiative is a step in this direction. TPP holds no such
promise.
The
AIIB will become operational in 2016 with $100 billion initial
budget. It's a sign of its merit and lure that despite pressure from
the United States, a host of US' key allies--Australia, France,
Germany, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and the United Kingdom--have
joined Beijing's development bank. The AIIB is intended to push
China's OBOR initiative--an attempt to modernize two ancient trade
routes--the Silk Road Economic Belt lining China with Europe through
Central Asia; and the 21st century Maritime Silk
Road, aligning China with Southeast Asia. If China succeeds it would
become the engine of world's development growth--a prospect which US
abhors.
The
entire premise of US' pivot to Asia is that it alone can bring peace
and stability in the region--a kind of protection racket run by
low-grade thugs, as geopolitical analyst Tony Cartalucci put it.
Ironically, it's only the US which has made Asia unstable with its
multiple wars and disruptions in the region. By not including China
in TPP, a country which is region's largest economy and trading
partner of Asia-Pacific countries, US have shown its hand.
Ashish
Shukla
is an Indian journalist and author who has his new book:"HOW
UNITED STATES SHOT HUAMNITY: Muslims Ruined Europe Next"
released worldwide.
http://www.amazon.com/How-United-States-Shot-Humanity/dp/8193163109/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1443592289&sr=8-1&keywords=ashish+shukla
He
also runs a website: www.newsbred.com which is antidote to boardroom
bulletins that passes off as news by the mass media.
His
pesonal website is: www.ashishshukla.net and he could be contacted
also on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/authorAshishShukla?ref=hl)
Securing “Buy-In” For The TPP: The Deep State Takes Over
By
Chris Trotter
IT
IS NOW CLEAR that Helen Clark’s Trans-Pacific Partnership advocacy
in New York was just the beginning. The opening move in a chess game
that will end with the Labour Party knocking over its King and
returning to the bi-partisan fold on the issue of “Free Trade”
Editorial: Kiwis deserve quick end to TPP secrecy
Powerful
interest groups are already lining up to oppose various provisions in
the Trans-Pacific Partnership - the sweeping trade agreement reached
Monday by the United States, Japan and 10 other Pacific Rim nations -
in hopes they can sway the votes of enough wavering lawmakers to have
the deal rejected by Congress.
Negotiators
announced completion of the the deal Monday morning and Congress
isn't expected to vote on it until the spring, due to the lengthy
congressional review period that is required. Under the fast-track
trade rules enacted earlier this year, the deal will be subject to
an up or down vote in Congress and lawmakers will not be able to
amend or filibuster the pact.
The
lengthy time-frame for considering the trade pact ensures its
opponents will have plenty of time to lobby Congress. Here's a look
at the industries and interest groups that are pushing back against
parts of the agreement:
Automakers
Their
complaint: The deal does not address alleged currency manipulation
by Japan, which the auto industry has long said hurts U.S.
automakers by keeping the price of Japanese cars artificially low. A
Ford spokeswoman said the company's top priority was and is to
include rules prohibiting currency manipulation in trade deals.
Earlier
this year, the company supported a failed amendment sponsored by
Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan) to the
Trade Promotion Authority legislation, which gave the White House
the ability to fast-track trade bills through Congress, that would
have increased enforcement efforts against nations considered to be
currency manipulators.
"To
ensure the future competitiveness of American manufacturing, we
recommend Congress not approve TPP in its current form, and ask the
administration to renegotiate TPP and incorporate strong and
enforceable currency rules," Ford said in a statement.
Brand-name
pharmaceutical companies
Their
complaint: Pharmaceutical companies wanted the deal to include
intellectual property protection for biologic medicines for 12
years, which is the length of time granted under U.S. law, but the
pact only grants protection for up to eight years. PhRMA chief
executive John Castellani said in a statement Monday that he is
"disappointed," but a spokesman for the leading
pharmaceutical trade group said he could not elaborate on what steps
the industry may take, if any, until they review the full text of
the agreement.
Environmental
groups
Their
complaint: The pact includes what's called an investor-state dispute
settlement provision, or ISDS, which is common in trade agreements.
It allows multinational corporations and investors to bring cases
against foreign governments over environmental, public health and
other regulations - if they find that those rules cut into their
profits - before international arbitration panels instead of U.S.
courts.
Critics
of the system say it favors companies because arbitrators are often
corporate lawyers that side with businesses. The Sierra Club said
Monday that TPP would "empower big polluters to challenge
climate and environmental safeguards in private trade courts."
Friends of the Earth expressed a similar sentiment, saying the deal
would "stymie environmental regulation."
The
tobacco industry
Their
complaint: The deal includes changes that would exclude tobacco
companies from accessing the ISDS system, meaning tobacco companies
could have a harder time challenging anti-smoking regulations
abroad. This could be an issue for lawmakers representing states
that produce tobacco, such as North Carolina and Kentucky.
A
spokesman for the cigarette giant Altria said the company is
"opposed to singling out one industry for differential
treatment under the TPP. We think singling out one industry for
differential treatment is bad policy and could become a precedent
for similar actions directed at other industries." He declined
to comment on whether the company will be engaging lawmakers on the
issue.
Labor
unions
Their
complaint: Labor unions have argued that the negotiation process was
not transparent and that TPP would encourage the outsourcing of U.S.
jobs. "Many problematic concessions were made in order to
finalize the deal," AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka said in a
statement Monday. "Rushing through a bad deal will not bring
economic stability to working families, nor will it bring confidence
that our priorities count as much as those of global corporations."
TPP deal: US lawmakers lukewarm
6
October, 2015
The
United States and 11 other Pacific Rim countries have reached a
sweeping deal to set up a free-trade zone for 40 percent of the
world's economy, but the accord faced initial skepticism in the US
Congress.
The
Trans-Pacific Partnership is the most ambitious trade pact in a
generation and could reshape industries and influence the cost of
products from cheese to cancer treatments, presenting key issues also
for drug companies and automakers.
Tired
negotiators worked round the clock over the weekend to settle tough
issues such as monopoly rights for new biotech drugs. A demand by New
Zealand for greater access for its dairy exports was only settled at
5am (local time) on Monday.
Details
of the pact were emerging in statements by officials after days of
marathon talks in Atlanta.
The
12 countries will cut trade barriers and set common standards for a
region stretching from Vietnam to Canada. The agreement could be a
legacy-defining achievement for Democratic President Barack Obama, if
it is ratified by Congress.
Lawmakers
in other TPP countries must also approve the deal, which would reduce
or eliminate tariffs on almost 18,000 categories of goods like
machinery, chemicals and food.
The
Obama administration hopes the pact will help the United States
increase its influence in East Asia to help counter the rise of
China, which is not one of the TPP nations.
Initial
reaction from US lawmakers, including Democrats and Republicans,
ranged from cautious to skeptical.
Vermont
Senator Bernie Sanders, a US Democratic presidential candidate, said
he was disappointed and warned the pact would cost US jobs and hurt
consumers.
"Wall
Street and other big corporations have won again," he said in a
statement. Many Democrats and labor groups fear the TPP will mean
manufacturing job losses and weaker environmental protections.
Senator
Orrin Hatch, a powerful Republican who heads the Senate Finance
Committee, was also wary.
"While
the details are still emerging, unfortunately I am afraid this deal
appears to fall woefully short," said Hatch, who had urged the
Obama administration to hold the line on intellectual property
protections, including for drugs.
US
lawmakers have the power to review the agreement and cast an
up-or-down vote, but not amend it.
A
firm TPP champion, Obama said it will "level the playing field"
for US workers and businesses.
US
trade negotiators will begin briefing Congress about the deal as soon
as Monday afternoon, but deliberations will take months, said US
Trade Representative Michael Froman.
"This
is really a 2016 issue for Congress to consider, not a 2015 issue,"
he told reporters.
Currency
policy
The
agreement will include a parallel forum for finance ministers from
the participating countries to discuss a basic set of principles on
currency policy, ministers say.
That
takes account, in part, of concerns among US manufacturers and
critics who have suggested that Japan has unfairly driven the yen
lower to the benefit of its car exporters and other companies.
Democratic
Representative Debbie Dingell from Michigan, home of the US auto
industry, said currency has been inadequately dealt with. "Nothing
that we have heard indicates negotiators sufficiently addressed these
issues," she said in a statement.
The
trade talks had snared earlier on how long a monopoly period should
be allowed on next-generation biotech drugs, until the United States
and Australia negotiated a compromise.
Negotiating
teams had deadlocked over the minimum period of protection to the
rights for data used to make biologic drugs, made by companies
including Pfizer Inc, Roche Group's Genentech and Japan's Takeda
Pharmaceutical Co.
Negotiators
compromised on minimum terms short of what US negotiators had sought.
Under the deal, countries would give drugmakers at least five years
of exclusive access to the clinical data used to win approval for new
drugs.
An
additional several years of regulatory review would likely mean
pharmaceutical companies would have an effective monopoly for about
eight years before facing lower-cost, generic competition, officials
said.
The
United States, Mexico, Canada and Japan agreed to auto trade rules on
how much of a vehicle must be made within the TPP region to qualify
for duty-free status.
The
North American Free Trade Agreement between Canada, the United States
and Mexico mandates vehicles have local content of 62.5 percent. The
way that rule is implemented means just over half of a vehicle needs
to be made locally. It has been credited with boosting auto-related
investment in Mexico.
The
TPP would give Japan's automakers, led by Toyota Motor Corp, a freer
hand to buy parts from Asia for vehicles sold in the United States,
but it sets long phase-out periods for US tariffs on Japanese cars
and light trucks.
The
deal also provides minimum standards on issues ranging from workers'
rights to environmental protection.
Trade
ministers said the TPP would be open to other countries in the
future, including potentially China.
"There
is a real opportunity for China to be a part of this," Malaysian
Trade Minister Mustapa Mohamed said.
Rarely
has there been such a triumph of image over substance; rarely such an
outpouring of admiration for a deal, whose details yet remain a
secret, as there has been this week in the wake of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership free trade announcement.
"A
gigantic foundation stone for our future prosperity," gushed the
PM as business groups pumped out their press releases with zeal. On
the TV news, the networks ran their panegyrics to the TPP even higher
in the bulletin than the nightly Prince Harry segment.
If
this is such a great deal, why are they hiding it? There is, among
other things, a four-letter answer to this question: ISDS
(Investor-State Dispute Settlement). ISDS is a mechanism for
corporations to sue governments.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.