General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT: Administration Is Seen as Retreating on Environment in Talks on Pacific Trade
The Obama administration is retreating from previous demands of strong international environmental protections in order to reach agreement on a sweeping Pacific trade deal that is a pillar of President Obamas strategic shift to Asia, according to documents obtained by WikiLeaks, environmentalists and people close to the contentious trade talks. ... Environmentalists said that the draft appears to signal that the United States will retreat on a variety of environmental protections including legally binding pollution control requirements and logging regulations and a ban on harvesting sharks fins to advance a trade deal that is a top priority for Mr. Obama.
The documents consist of the environmental chapter as well as a Report from the Chairs, which offers an unusual behind-the-scenes look into the divisive trade negotiations, until now shrouded in secrecy. The report indicates that the United States has been pushing for tough environmental provisions, particularly legally binding language that would provide for sanctions against participating countries for environmental violations. The United States is also insisting that the nations follow existing global environmental treaties.
But many of those proposals are opposed by most or all of the other Pacific Rim nations working on the deal, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Peru. Developing Asian countries, in particular, have long resisted outside efforts to enforce strong environmental controls, arguing that they could hurt their growing economies.
The report appears to indicate that the United States is losing many of those fights, and bluntly notes the rifts: While the chair sought to accommodate all the concerns and red lines that were identified by parties regarding the issues in the text, many of the red lines for some parties were in direct opposition to the red lines expressed by other parties.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/politics/administration-is-seen-as-retreating-on-environment-in-talks-on-pacific-trade.html
This is bad news. If there are not strong, enforceable provisions on the environment, labor rights and currency manipulation, among others, this is a bad deal.
I'm glad that the leak "indicates that the United States has been pushing for tough environmental provisions, particularly legally binding language that would provide for sanctions against participating countries for environmental violations." However, if the other countries oppose this the agreement should die. Perhaps the publicity that this release causes will shame some of the governments' lack of support for strong environmental protections.
Response to pampango (Original post)
woo me with science This message was self-deleted by its author.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It is a vicious assault on our nation by corporatists, with the goal of substituting corporate rule for our representative system.
cali
(114,904 posts)look, there never were going to be strong protections in this for anyone but the corporations.
Response to pampango (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cali
(114,904 posts)look, I'm so angry at the President over this I could spit, and that's not all he's done that I find profoundly wrong, but your post is objectionable.
why are you focusing on his race? what the fuck does that have to do with anything re the TPP? And no, he's not a clone of Reagan who was a social conservative.
And why are you claiming he was unqualified? He wasn't.