Trans-Pacific Partnership: Corporate Power-Tool Of The 1%

[논둑길맨발로]

April 03, 2013

Trans-Pacific Partnership: Corporate Power-Tool Of The 1%

Neoliberal Overload

by NILE BOWIE

One of the least discussed and least reported issues is the Obama administration’s effort to bring the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to the forefront, an oppressive plurilateral US-led free trade agreement currently being negotiated with several Pacific Rim countries. Six hundred US corporate advisors have negotiated and had input into the TPP, and the proposed draft text has not been made available to the public, the press or policymakers. The level of secrecy surrounding the agreements is unparalleled – paramilitary teams scatter outside the premise of each round of discussions while helicopters loom overhead – media outlets impose a near-total blackout of reportage on the subject and US Senator Ron Wyden, the Chair of the Congressional Committee with jurisdiction over TPP, was denied access to the negotiation texts. “The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations — like Halliburton, Chevron, PhaRMA, Comcast and the Motion Picture Association of America — are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement,” said Wyden, in a floor statement to Congress.

In addition to the United States, the countries participating in the negotiations include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. Japan has expressed its desire to become a negotiating partner, but not yet joined negotiation, partly due to public pressure to steer-clear. The TPP would impose punishing regulations that give multinational corporations unprecedented rights to demand taxpayer compensation for policies they think will undermine their expected future profits straight from the treasuries of participating nations – it would push the agenda of Big PhaRMA in the developing world to impose longer monopoly controls on drugs, drastically limiting access to affordable generic medications that people depend on. The TPP would undermine food safety by limiting labeling and forcing countries like the United States to import food that fails to meet its national safety standards, in addition to banning Buy America or Buy Local preferences.

According to leaked draft texts, the TPP would also impose investor protections that incentivize offshoring jobs through special benefits for companies – the TPP stifles innovation by requiring internet service providers to police user-activity and treat small-scale individual downloads as large-scale for-profit violators. Most predictably, it would rollback regulation of finance capital predators on Wall Street by prohibiting bans on risky financial services and preventing signatory nations from exercising the ability to independently pursue monetary policy and issue capital controls – signatories must permit the free flow of derivatives, currency speculation and other manipulative financial instruments. The US-led partnership – which seeks to impose ‘Shock and Awe’ Globalization – aims to abolish the accountability of multinational corporations to the governments of countries with which they trade by making signatory governments accountable to corporations for costs imposed by national laws and regulations, including health, safety and environmental regulations.

The proposed legislation on Intellectual Property will have enormous ramifications for TPP signatories, including Internet termination for households, businesses, and organizations as an accepted penalty for copyright infringement. Signatory nations would essentially submit themselves to oppressive IP restrictions designed by Hollywood’s copyright cartels, severely limiting their ability to digitally exchange information on sites like YouTube, where streaming videos are considered copyrightable. “Broader copyright and intellectual property rights demands by the US would lock up the Internet, stifle research and increase education costs, by extending existing generous copyright from 70 years to 120 years, and even making it a criminal offense to temporarily store files on a computer without authorization. The US, as a net exporter of digital information, would be the only party to benefit from this,” said Patricia Ranald, convener of the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network.

In the private investor-state that the TPP is attempting to establish, foreign corporations can sue national governments, submitting signatory countries to the jurisdiction of investor arbitral tribunals, staffed by private sector attorneys. International tribunals could have authority to order governments to pay unlimited cash compensation out of national treasuries to foreign corporations and investors if new or existing government policy hinders investors’ expected future profits. The domestic taxpayer in each signatory country must shoulder any compensation paid to private investors and foreign corporations, in addition to large hourly fees for tribunals and legal costs. A good example of how this agreement neuters national sovereignty comes from Malaysia, which was able to recover from the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis more quickly than its neighbors by introducing a series of capital control measures on the Malaysian ringgit to prevent external speculation – the TPP’s proposed measures would restrict signatory nations from exercising capital controls to prevent and mitigate financial crises and promote financial stability.

The TPP regime ensures that foreign investors and multinational corporations retain full rights to undermine the sovereignty of participatory nations by skirting domestic regulations and limiting the abilities of national governments to issue independent economic policy. There has never been such a sweeping corporate assault on sovereignty, and that includes US sovereignty. Leaked TPP documents detail how the Obama administration intends to surrender US sovereignty to international tribunals that operate under World Bank and UN rules to settle disputes arising under the TPP, specifically designed to leave Congress out in the cold while creating a judicial authority higher than the US Supreme Court. In theory, the TPP would give international judicial entities the authority to override US laws, allowing foreign companies doing business in the United States the privilege of operating in a legal environment that would give them significant economic advantages over American companies that remain tied to US laws, placing domestic companies who do not move offshore at a competitive disadvantage.

Facing the emergence of strong developing economies like the BRICS group and other nations that seek greater access to industrial growth and development, the Obama administration realizes that it must offer Pacific nations – who would otherwise have greater incentives in deepening economic ties with China – an attractive stake in the US economy. As the Pentagon repositions its military muscle to the Asia-Pacific region, the TPP is clearly the economic arm of the ‘Asia Pivot’ policy, roping strategic economies into a legally binding corporate-governance regime, lured in by the promise of unfettered access to US markets. The Obama administration is essentially prostituting the American consumer to foreign corporations to usher in a deal that would impose one-size-fits all international rules that even limit the US government’s right to regulate foreign investment and the appropriation of natural resources, solidifying a long-discussed model of finance capital-backed global governance.

Of the 26 chapters of the proposed TPP draft text, it is reported that only two chapters cover trade issues, related to slashing tariffs and lifting quotas. The TPP would obligate the federal government to force US states to conform state laws to over a thousand pages of detailed stipulations and constraints unrelated to trade – from land use to intellectual property rights – authorizing the federal authorities to use all possible means to coax states to comply with TPP rules, even by imposing sanctions if they fail to do so. According to leaked documents, US standards for property rights protection would be swept away in favor of international property rights standards, as interpreted by TPP’s unelected international tribunals, giving investors principal control over public land and resources “that are not for the exclusive or predominant use and benefit of the government.”

Due to the unconstitutional nature of the TPP, members of Congress would likely object to many of its stipulations – naturally, the Obama administration is employing its executive muscle to restrict congressional authority by operating under “fast-track authority,” a trade provision that requires Congress to review an FTA under limited debate in an accelerated time frame subject to a yes-or-no vote so as to assure foreign partners that the FTA, once signed, will not be changed during the legislative process. No formal steps have been taken to consult Congress as the agreement continues to be negotiated, and Obama looks set to subtly ram the treaty into law. Such is the toxic nature of US policies that seek to bring in disaster-capitalism on a global scale, while keeping those whose lives will be most affected by deal completely in the dark. The message behind this unfettered corporate smash and grab is simple – bend over!

Recent statistics claim that the combined economic output of Brazil, China and India will surpass that of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States by 2020. More than 80% of the world’s middle class will live in the South by 2030, and what a different world that would be. The United States is economically ailing, and the TPP – Wall Street’s wet dream and Washington’s answer to its own dwindling economic performance – is designed to allow US big business a greater stake in the emerging Pacific region by imposing an exploitative economic model on signatory nations that exempt multinationals and private investors from any form of public accountability. The TPP’s origins go back to the second Bush administration, and it still remains in the negotiating phases under Obama’s second administration. The overwhelming lack of transparency surrounding the talks lends credence to what is known already – that the contents of this trade agreement serve the interests of those on the top of the economic food chain while the rest of us stagnate on the menu.

Nile Bowie is an independent political analyst and photographer based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He can be reached at nilebowie@gmail.com

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/03/trans-pacific-partnership-corporate-power-tool-of-the-1/

14 March 2013 Last updated at 23:13 GMT

TPP: What is it and why does it matter?

US President Barack Obama has been pushing for a deal to be reached on the TPP

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Who benefits from Trans-Pacific Partnership? Watch
• Will Japan join Trans-Pacific Partnership? Watch
• Obama outlines Pacific trade plan

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is one of the most ambitious free trade agreements ever attempted.

Its supporters have billed it as a pathway to unlock future growth of the countries involved in the pact.

The critics have been equally vociferous, not least because of the secrecy surrounding the negotiations of the agreement.

But despite the criticism, the countries involved have been pushing for a deal to be reached soon and they are confident that even more economies will want to join the pact in the coming years.

So what exactly is the TPP?

It is a proposed free trade deal currently being negotiated between 11 countries.

These are Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, United States, Singapore and Vietnam.

The pact is aimed at deepening economic ties between these nations.

It is expected to substantially reduce tariffs, and even eliminate them in some cases, between member countries and help open up trade in goods and services.

It is also expected to boost investment flows between the countries and further boost their economic growth.

The member countries are also looking to foster a closer relationship on economic policies and regulatory issues.

What is the foundation of the TPP?

The 11 nations involved are looking to build up on a trade agreement that was originally signed between Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore.

That agreement was called the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership, or the P4, and came into effect in 2006.

It resulted in most tariffs on goods traded between these countries being removed immediately, with an agreement to gradually phase out remaining tariffs.

They also agreed to open government procurement contracts to businesses operating in any of the four countries.

The members of the P4 also said they will co-operate on issues such as customs procedures, labour practices, intellectual property and competition policies.

TPP: Nations currently negotiating

• Australia
• Brunei Darussalam
• Canada
• Chile
• Malaysia
• Mexico
• New Zealand
• Peru
• United States of America
• Singapore
• Vietnam

Why does TPP matter?

Well, it's all about numbers.

The 11 countries that are currently part of the negotiations are all members of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec).

They have a combined population of more than 650 million people. A free trade agreement could turn this into a potential single market for many businesses.

The average per capita income in the participating countries was $31,491 in 2011 and their combined gross domestic product (GDP) stood at more than $20 trillion.

One cannot ignore the fact that the initiative is being led by the US, the world's biggest economy and biggest trading nation, and one that sees Asia-Pacific as key to its future growth.

Some analysts have even suggested that the US may be trying to use the TPP as a means to undermine China's growing economic might in the region.

Many believe that other members of the Apec bloc may also join the agreement in the coming years, making it an even more important pact.

In all, 21 Apec countries account for about 44% of global trade. They also make up some 40% of the world's population.

What is the status of the negotiations?

There are various dates during which talks were held at different levels.

However, it is safe to say that real negotiations of an expended treaty started only in 2010.

Since then, delegates and trade representatives have met for 16 rounds of discussion, focusing on a range of issues.

According to the US Trade Representative's (USTR) office, at the latest round of discussions held in Singapore this month, delegates "succeeded in finding solutions" to many issues in areas such as customs, telecommunications and regulatory coherence.

However, the USTR said that there are still challenging issues that need to be agreed on, including those related to intellectual property, competition and environment.

But there has been an increased push, not least from the US President Barack Obama, to finalise the pact soon.

The next round of TPP negotiations will be held in Lima, Peru, from 15 till 24 May.

There have been protests in Japan over the impact of TPP on its agriculture sector

Is there any criticism of the deal?

Yes, there is and it is on various fronts.

Like many other free trade agreements, there are fears over the impact TPP may have on certain products and services in member countries.

Some campaign groups have raised concerns about the impact such a wide-ranging agreement may have on intellectual property laws and patent enforcement.

The fear the deal may extend the scope of patents in sectors such a medicine and prevent the distribution of generic drugs.

Meanwhile Japan, which has expressed an interest to join the negotiations, has raised concerns about the agreement impacting its agriculture sector.

But the biggest criticism has been of what the campaigners allege to be secretive negotiations.

They say that the delegates have not been forthcoming about details of the issues that they have been discussing, and what the scope of agreement in those areas is likely to be, and how it will impact trade.

Last year, a group of lawyers even sent a letter to Ron Kirk, the US Trade Representative, to express what they called "profound concern and disappointment at the lack of public participation, transparency and open government processes in the negotiation of the intellectual property chapter of the TPP".

However, some analysts say the reason why the negotiations have not been made public is because there is no formal agreement on them as yet.

They also point out that free trade agreements generally attract a lot of criticism from campaign groups, and that in this case the delegates may be wanting to keep the discussions under wraps to avoid any pressure from such groups.

More on This Story

Related Stories

• Who benefits from Trans-Pacific Partnership? Watch
  13 MARCH 2013, BUSINESS
• Will Japan join Trans-Pacific Partnership? Watch
  13 MARCH 2013, BUSINESS
• Obama outlines Pacific trade plan
  13 NOVEMBER 2011, ASIA

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21782080

$render("page-see-also","ID"); $render("page-newstracker","ID");

$render("page-related-items","ID");