
Arguments for TPP don’t make sense - walterbell
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/05/30/arguments-for-tpp-don-make-sense/W8WNu5IR9xkhzsqYV0pBWK/story.html
======
themartorana
Not to hijack the better points of the article, because it's a good one, but
this line is telling:

 _" The White House’s efforts to portray the treaty as critical to national
security simply underscores its inability to make a case for the agreement on
the basis of economic benefits."_

If you can't make a cogent argument, just flail your hands about and yell
"National Security!" You wouldn't dare try to impede national security!

Those two words are what remain of Bush's "you're either with us, or against
us" brand of patriotism, but it has a choke hold on the U.S. I cannot
understand why otherwise smart people continue to let "national security"
dissuade all common sense in everything.

Edit: "Investor-State Dispute Settlements" make me want to throw up my hands
and move to Mars. I can't fathom how anyone can accept calling ISDS "national
security" as anything but pure, black-tar hogwash.

~~~
pdkl95
> I cannot understand why otherwise smart people continue to let "national
> security" dissuade all common sense in everything.

As Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something,
when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" It is important to
remember an unfortunately large subset of the people making those arguments -
including far too many people here at HN - are _profiting from the status
quo_.

I am less worried about the people making the stupid "with us or against us"
ultimatum (at least those people are predictable). The problem is the far
larger group that still refuses to believe that surveillance as a business
model even exists, or that the "public-private-partnerships"[1] are anything
other than regulatory capture.

Once you realize who the "nationals" are that need to be secured, the TPP/TTIP
- and all the other efforts to undermine democracy and replace it with
corporate sovereignty - make sense. It is the same thing we saw in Jewel v.
NSA, when the government's legal council gave the Freudian slip of the
century, claiming that it was important to keep the use of section 215
secrete, because of the need to protect "THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THIS
COMPANY"[2].

As for the ISDS, everybody in the negotiation room needs to remember the
advice of Londo and G'kar to their junior assistants as they leave them to
handle important negotiations on their own: "Just don't give away the
homeworld!"[3]

[1] or whatever the latest buzzword-compliant rebranding of fascism is called

[2]
[https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140813/23203228207/unsea...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140813/23203228207/unsealed-
jewel-v-nsa-transcript-doj-has-nothing-contempt-american-citizens.shtml)

[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62EaD85zX7o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62EaD85zX7o)

------
PebblesHD
The secrecy surrounding the negotiations based on the premise that "We'll see
it when it's passed" is absolutely part of the reasons it's been resisted in
the way it has. The portions that have been leaked so far seem to suggest it's
role is little more than expanding US control over media rights and limiting
other countries abilities to produce potentially competing products
(Medicines, media etc) which of course means any country with any form of
sensible population would want nothing to do with it. Sadly the desires of the
population seems to mean little when governments weigh the concerns of big
business but still.

~~~
venomsnake
Global arab spring is at hand. And this is scary ...

------
JabavuAdams
I'm surprised that the article doesn't spend more time pointing out the sheer
arrogance of this, to non-US eyes.

Even the countries who would possibly be signing on to this must be insulted
by it. That's not a good place to start.

Nobody else in the world cares about US interests, except insofar as it
enriches them and/or prevents them from getting beat up and/or cornholed by
friendly, drunk, sometimes generous, often abusive Uncle Sam.

~~~
happyscrappy
When Europe passes TPP it will be the fault of the Americans. Europeans
leaders are not held responsible for anything they do and therefore can easily
do what the US asks with no fear of repercussions. This is self fulfilling
victimology.

~~~
mrweasel
> Europeans leaders are not held responsible for anything they do

And even when someone tries to make someone responsible, they just say: "Well
it's an EU thing. We tried to stop it, but the other countries wanted it". EU
in turn points to the individual countries and say: "It's up to the parliament
in each member country to interpret and implement the rules". It's the perfect
system for not taking responsibility and still have the flexibility to do what
ever you want.

------
aikah
Especially the "China is out to destroy us" argument. It's funny how each time
there is a heated debate in USA, China suddenly looks it is going to invade
USA soon ? Even worse, China might join the TPP in the next future. So enough
of "but but China..." bull.

The TPP is a excellent deal for multinational corporations,no question, they
wrote the deal, whether it's good for your job or your small business here in
USA is a different story. People should be able to see the deal right now,
because it will have a lot of direct consequences on their lives. Or Obama
doesn't trust people's common sense? or he wants that legacy at any cost?

------
fixxer
Chas Freeman's arguments are always such a joy to read. He is like the Freeman
Dyson of politics. I don't always agree with him, but I love the willingness
to take viewpoints that piss off both parties.

------
drawkbox
China is setting up a 'New Silk Road' [1], not the darknet one but resurgence
of their trade dominance of Asia from the past. China is also benefiting their
trade partners in ways that the US doesn't always and we should. The original
silk road was known for bringing riches to all points on the routes.

China also has presence in the South China Sea where 2/3rds of all trade go
through, it is the reason they are adding new islands there as well. CNN
recently had this in the news but it is ultimately protection for the trade
routes through the South China Sea.

They have also been diplomatically setting up station in Yemen [2] and Somalia
[3] along the Suez Canal trade route. So at major points of the water based
trade routes, China is owning them or taking control of them.

China is also building a massive trade route through Pakistan to the Gwadar
and Karachi ports in Iran and Pakistan, very close to Iraq + India and near
Afghanistan[4]. Completely within Pakistan/Iran, it is another route around
the South China sea into/near the Persian Gulf.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 left China with huge advantages in
exports and currency tools due to large currency purchases in other countries,
that are smart for them and bad for the US in terms of running trade in Asia
and currency values. We have slipped a bit, largely this is due to short term
thinking and overt control of trade partners, while China is very long term.
We are giving up alot in the TPP because we never really have, we have to
convince countries to trade with us for our advantages and theirs, over what
China is offering.

Trade agreements aren't always bad. But the problem in the US now, due to the
control of them, they are usually bad for the workers and great for
corporations. The problem with the TPP is that corporate riders have attached
on in ways that are solely focused in greed, over the workers of the US and
protections for US.

You could argue that China lent us the money to get into debt to them to allow
them to do this while we were bogged down with wars, unwinnable wars, with
force in the Middle East around the same areas.

We forgot how to benefit countries and even our own now. We need more Marshall
Plan type liberation through economic advantages for all countries involved
(including us) to be a better option for trading partners. China is winning
the game, that is why this is fast tracked but it is also bad for the US
internally but the other option is losing more trade dominance. Noone wants to
join the mean person's team when there is a more friendly option that is
mutually beneficial, or to pick sides.

The Yale article on the new Chinese Silk Road (One Belt, One Road initiative)
mentions a fundamental problem in our reasoning in this snippet:

 _Will supporting China 's One Belt, One Road, compromise core universal
values and high environmental and labor standards? These are key areas where
the US can show leadership and remain a keystone of the 21st century global
economic architecture. But a keystone must work with other stones rather than
stand alone._

It is a pretty easy sell for the Chinese to these countries like Pakistan,
Iran etc with us right on their doorstep and without a good economic mutually
beneficial plan for the places we 'liberated'. Iraq and Afghanistan should
have been nation building as the main goal, but it appears we created chaos a
decade later. Force doesn't always work but better quality of life always
works, always brings more money. We should leave places in a state like Japan
or South Korea, not how we left Iraq/Afghanistan/etc. Now China is also
getting defense/military power to contain these areas.

This is a massive world change. We can't change it with force this time, China
is everyone's biggest trade partner including ours. It would be better to work
it out with them than exclude them. We have to benefit the US and other
countries with trade, not take everyone down. China is doing the opposite and
the better deal will win.

As a US citizen it is hard to think we benefit others if our trade agreements
harm the lower classes in the US so much, what are we doing elsewhere. We used
to build good trade partners up and they thrive. What happened?

[1] [http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/china%E2%80%99s-new-
silk-...](http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/china%E2%80%99s-new-silk-road-
implications-us)

[2]
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/03/31...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/03/31/what-
yemens-crisis-reveals-about-chinas-growing-global-power/)

[3] [http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/after-23-years-china-to-
reope...](http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/after-23-years-china-to-reopen-
embassy-in-somalia/)

[4] [http://tribune.com.pk/story/896213/pakistan-dismisses-
indias...](http://tribune.com.pk/story/896213/pakistan-dismisses-indias-
concerns-over-china-pakistan-economic-corridor/)

~~~
harshreality
If they'd just drop the horrible intellectual property provisions, which
aren't even relevant to geo-strategic trade, I wouldn't care so much what kind
of geo-strategic trade deal they wanted to negotiate in secret.

~~~
thomnottom
While the IP sections are horrendous, it's dangerous to ignore the problems
inherent with the investor-state dispute section(s). There are already
multiple cases involving corporations suing countries for having laws that
prevent them from making money in their preferred manner. Increasing the scope
or range of those conflicts will strip more nations (including the US) of
self-government.

I don't want to come off as hyperbolic, but these provisions can seriously
undermine any future legislation and nation might want to undertake in order
to protect their resources or population.

~~~
snowwrestler
ISDS complaints can only win if the government is shown to unfairly hobble
foreign investors, for example a regulation that says "companies owned by
Americans can pollute twice as much as companies owned by Malaysians."

That's not the way that U.S. law works; our laws are based on measurable
standards that apply equally to all companies regardless of who owns them.
That's why the U.S. has never lost an ISDS case in the decades they have
already been in force.

------
bcg1
Chas Freeman is 100% spot on in this article and provides a sound rebuttal to
the portions of the TPP that we've been able to see.

The reason that he is able to so effectively dismantle the economic arguments
is because the real intention of the TPP is not for economic benefit of the
United States; it is to set up a supra-national framework for supra-national
corporations to override national sovereignty.

Compared to the money and power at stake, the cost to buy the political
establishment in DC is next to nothing, and so they do it. Ripping the TPP
apart as failed policy is good, and I'm all for that... but the problem can
really only be solved by hacking at the root, which is the fact that our
governments and the rule of law have been hijacked by entities that have no
soul to save and no body to incarcerate.

------
robogimp
TPP is just a funnel for the USA to pour bullshit down the throats of other
nations citizens.

