Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pact

Discussion in 'China' started by sorcerer, Apr 24, 2015.

  1. sorcerer

    sorcerer Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    5,119
    Location:
    India
    Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pact

    Both the US Senate and House of Representatives have begun action on legislation to grant President Obama Trade Promotion Authority, also known as “fast-track” authority, which would enable the US government to finalize the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement with 11 other countries in Asia and the Americas.

    The Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday, in a 20-6 vote, approved the measure and sent it to the Senate floor, where it will likely face stronger opposition in advance of a vote in the coming weeks. Five Democrats and one Republican on the committee voted “no.”

    The Finance Committee vote followed an agreement last week between Republicans and a section of committee Democrats on the terms of the TPA legislation after protracted talks between the committee chairman, Orrin Hatch of Utah, and the ranking Democrat, Ron Wyden of Oregon.

    The House Ways and Means Committee was to begin work on the legislation Thursday, its chairman, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, announced. Ryan participated in the talks with Hatch and Wyden and signed off on the deal.

    The bill would give the president authority to negotiate trade agreements under provisions for fast-track congressional approval–the House and Senate would each have up-or-down votes without amendments or procedural delays–for the next three years.

    As a practical matter, congressional approval of Trade Promotion Authority is both necessary to reach a trade deal and tantamount to approval of it. No country will sign a trade agreement with the United States if Congress can amend it at will or filibuster it. Congress has never rejected such an agreement in a straight up-or-down vote.

    The Trans-Pacific Partnership is an economic and trade component of the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia, which involves the mobilization of US military, political and economic assets against the rising power of China. The 11 other nations now engaged in the TPP talks include Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Chile, Peru, Mexico and Canada.


    If the 12-nation trading area is established, it will be the world’s largest; comprising 40 percent of the world’s economy- a bigger proportion than is covered by the European Union. Other Asian countries are expected to sign on if the TPP materializes. South Korea has indicated interest and the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia are also potential candidates.

    Discussion of TPP in official Washington has proceeded on two separate tracks, one for the corporate elite and its military-intelligence apparatus, and one for those posturing demagogically–and entirely falsely–as defenders of American workers.

    Within decisive circles of the ruling elite, the main discussions have revolved around the strategic value of TPP as a means of putting pressure on China and forestalling its rise to a preeminent economic position in the Asia-Pacific region. The central question is the incorporation of Japan, the world’s third-largest economy, into the future bloc, since without Japan the TPP would be little more than an expanded NAFTA: the US, Canada and Mexico, plus a handful of second-tier Asian economies.

    Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is due in Washington April 28 for talks at the White House. He will also address a joint session of Congress. The Obama-Abe talks are expected to deal with the main roadblocks to completion of the TPP, particularly US-Japanese conflicts over agricultural and automobile trade.

    The Washington Post, in an editorial that left no doubt about the real purpose of the TPP talks, called on the Obama administration to make sure the deal is finalized with Japan and Congress. The newspaper declared that “the TPP is about geopolitics as well as economics.” It added, “The key here is Japan. Aging and economically troubled, the Asian giant is looking to forge a deeper political and security commitment with the United States to offset a rising China.”

    The editorial concluded with this warning: “If the TPP fails, there won’t be much left of the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia.”

    Vice President Joseph Biden made a similar argument April 17, addressing a group of 29 right-wing congressional Democrats, most of whom are expected to back Trade Promotion Authority. “China is a gigantic force sitting on top of all nations smaller, except India, in the region and is able to do what Russia is able to do in Europe with regard to oil,” he said. “They have significant economic power to deny access to their markets or open access to their markets for all of those regional powers.”

    Promotion of the TPP is thus tied to the increasingly frenzied efforts of American imperialism to provoke regional conflicts with China and North Korea, effectively a client state of Beijing: with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyou islets; with the Philippines and Vietnam, among others, in the South China Sea; on the Burmese border with China; and between India and China.

    In the media coverage of TPP, however, such considerations have been overshadowed by the fake-populist posturing of a large section of the congressional Democratic Party, along with Democratic Party-aligned groups, including the AFL-CIO, environmental groups, the Nation magazine and the pseudo-left International Socialist Organization.

    These forces are opposing the trade pact on the basis of anti-Chinese chauvinism and American nationalism, seeking once again to promote the lie that US workers’ jobs and wages can be defended at the expense of the jobs and conditions of workers of other countries. Their attempt to divert working class anger over unemployment and wage cuts along reactionary nationalist channels is linked to the promotion of militarism.

    On April 15, four congressional Democrats addressed a rally of more than 1,000 union officials and their supporters, chaired by United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard, fresh from his betrayal of the strike by oil refinery workers.

    Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts performed her fist-pumping ritual, shouting into the microphone, “No more secret trade deals! Are you ready to fight? No more special deals for multinational corporations! Are you ready to fight?”

    Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who may carry out a token challenge to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, declared that Congress was “totally owned by billionaires and their lobbyists.”

    AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, another veteran of countless betrayals of struggles of the working class, both as president of the nearly defunct United Mineworkers of America and now as head of the labor federation, testified against the trade agreement at a hearing Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee.

    Trumka had previously announced a “massive” six-figure ad campaign to lobby Congress against fast-track authority. “We can’t afford to pass fast-track, which would lead to more lost jobs and lower wages,” he declared.

    “We want Congress to keep its leverage over trade negotiations- not rubber-stamp a deal that delivers profits for global corporations, but not good jobs for working people.”

    This demagogic rhetoric covers up the AFL-CIO’s long record of helping corporate America impose “lost jobs and lower wages” on millions of workers. The unions are not defending the interests of the working class, but rather the profits of less competitive sections of the American capitalist class, particularly in manufacturing, which fear they will lose out to foreign rivals in Japan, Mexico and other countries in the TPP talks.

    As for the opposition by congressional Democrats, it is largely for show, to keep the campaign dollars flowing from the unions. When push comes to shove, a sufficient number of Democratic votes will likely be found in both the Senate and the House to offset any potential Republican defections.

    Obama is playing his part in the charade, highlighting opposition among congressional Democrats while declaring them wrong on the issue. Like Warren and Sanders, Obama claims to be defending the interests of working people. “I would not be doing this trade deal if I did not think it was good for the middle class,” he said in an interview Tuesday with MSNBC.

    He went so far as to claim that his six-year record in office was proof that any trade deal would be good for working people–as though the slashing of wages in the auto industry, the destruction of millions of decent-paying jobs, and an economic “recovery” based on low-wage, part-time labor, enforced by drastic cuts in social benefits, had never happened.

    Both factions in the ruling class “debate,” the advocates of “free trade” and the advocates of protectionism, represent sections of the capitalist class. Both are implacably hostile to the interests of working people.

    ======

    A discussion on the new thing buzzing around TPP.

    Do post articles on TPP so that we have an understanding about it,
     
  2.  
  3. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
  4. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
  5. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Re: TPP - A Discussion | Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pac

    No links in post #1...!
     
  6. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
  7. sorcerer

    sorcerer Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    5,119
    Location:
    India
  8. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Re: TPP - A Discussion | Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pac

    Abe Visit Hails New Phase in US-Japan Relations

    Luis Ramirez
    April 23, 2015 6:35 PM

     
  9. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Re: TPP - A Discussion | Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pac

    TPP another elite club? :)

    Door open for China to join TPP: US officials

    http://m.todayonline.com/business/door-open-china-join-tpp-us-officials

    Don't miss the bus.;)

    ~Tapa talks: Orange is the new black.~
     
  10. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    This was always on the card that US will run out of patience with China.

    It is obviously a part of their geostrategic plans.

    This is the catch all statement - rule-based trading system and fair trade and fair commerce.

    It is a 'come into my parlour said the spider to the fly' type of enticement being bandied for China.

    It is to ensure that China is not a 'currency manipulator' by artificially keeping its currency low in value against the dollar, thereby boosting exports from China to the US.

    As the Economist had written:

    .

    Another 'clever' statement to 'entrap' China and its freewheeling
    There is a whole lot of material in the cyberspace on China's unfair trade practices that has riled the US.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2015
  11. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Re: TPP - A Discussion | Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pac

    It was China who rejected to join TPP before.

    But now looks like China is happy to join TPP.
     
  12. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Re: TPP - A Discussion | Obama, Republicans Push Anti-China Trade Pac

    She will do so at her own peril.

    It will ensure that there is a fair currency value that cannot be manipulated and ensure that there is no unfair trade practices.

    China is averse to both being controlled at the behest of others.
     
  13. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Can demise of TPP be declared for the Obama Adm.?

    Why Democrats are reluctant to support the Trans-Pacific Partnership

    Rep. Sander Levin expressed concern Thursday over secrecy and insufficient worker protections in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal with 11 other Pacific Rim nations.

     
  14. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The Republicans who are calling the shots these days are the most hawkish of the lot and they find the US has to be more aggressive in asserting itself.
     
  15. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,174
    Likes Received:
    422
    No, China was never invited to join TPP. Actually, the whole idea of TPP is keeping China out unless Chinese agrees to the terms which are in favour of USA.

    No, Chinese is doing as much as what American is doing: lip work.
     
  16. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere




    It is important that one must keep abreast with the times and not pass off gut feeling and insecurities as a fact.

    The fact is very clear that China has been invited. That is why their Ministry is studying the pros and cons.

    But for China the problems lies in China being forced to "play by the rules" prevented from "gaming the system."
     
  17. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    InfoWar version of TPP......

     
    Last edited: May 14, 2015
  18. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    To create another trade pact in addition to WTO? Hmmm

    Aquino government won't seek to join, trade chief says
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2015
  19. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Officials Reach Deal On Trans-Pacific Partnership

    Posted: 10/05/2015 08:11 AM EDT | Edited: 10 minutes ago

    By Krista Hughes and Kevin Krolicki

    ATLANTA, Oct 5 (Reuters) - Pacific trade ministers have reached a deal on the most sweeping trade liberalization pact in a generation that will cut trade barriers and set common standards for 12 countries, an official familiar with the talks said on Monday.

    Leaders from a dozen Pacific Rim nations are poised to announce the pact later on Monday. The deal could reshape industries and influence everything from the price of cheese to the cost of cancer treatments.

    The Trans-Pacific Partnership would affect 40 percent of the world economy and would stand as a legacy-defining achievement for U.S. President Barack Obama, if it is ratified by Congress.

    Lawmakers in other TPP countries must also approve the deal.

    The final round of negotiations in Atlanta, which began on Wednesday, had snared on the question of how long a monopoly period should be allowed on next-generation biotech drugs, until the United States and Australia negotiated a compromise.

    The TPP deal has been controversial because of the secret negotiations that have shaped it over the past five years and the perceived threat to an array of interest groups from Mexican auto workers to Canadian dairy farmers.

    Although the complex deal sets tariff reduction schedules on hundreds of imported items from pork and beef in Japan to pickup trucks in the United States, one issue had threatened to derail talks until the end - the length of the monopolies awarded to the developers of new biological drugs.

    Negotiating teams had been deadlocked over the question of 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.

    The United States had sought 12 years of protection to encourage pharmaceutical companies to invest in expensive biological treatments like Genentech's cancer treatment Avastin. Australia, New Zealand and public health groups had sought a period of five years to bring down drug costs and the burden on state-subsidized medical programs.

    Negotiators agreed on a compromise on minimum terms that was short of what U.S. negotiators had sought and that would effectively grant biologic drugs a period of about years free from the threat of competition from generic versions, people involved in the closed-door talks said.

    The Washington, D.C.-based Biotechnology Industry Association said it was "very disappointed" by reports that U.S. negotiators had not been able to convince Australia and other TPP members to adopt the 12-year standard approved by Congress.

    "We will carefully review the entire TPP agreement once the text is released by the ministers," the industry lobby said in a statement.

    FINAL HOURS

    A politically charged set of issues surrounding protections for dairy farmers was also addressed in the final hours of talks, officials said. New Zealand, home to the world's biggest dairy exporter, Fonterra, wanted increased access to U.S., Canadian and Japanese markets.

    Separately, the United States, Mexico, Canada and Japan also agreed rules governing the autotrade that dictate how much of a vehicle must be made within the TPP region in order to qualify for duty-free status.

    The North American Free Trade Agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico mandates that vehicles have a local content of 62.5 percent. The way that rule is implemented means that just over half of a vehicle needs to be manufactured locally. It has been credited with driving a boom in auto-related in 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 sets long phase-out periods for U.S. tariffs on Japanese cars and light trucks.

    The TPP deal being readied for expected announcement on Monday also sets minimum standards on issues ranging from workers' rights to environmental protection. It also sets up dispute settlement guidelines between governments and foreign investors separate from national courts.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tpp-deal-reached_561267dae4b0dd85030c7933




    ~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk
     
  20. Dark Soul

    Dark Soul Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2015
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    86
    USA is trying to bully other developing Countries as well, they are even trying to Stop Rise of Asia. we should support China because she will lead asia for sure in near Future. we can not trust USA. US even tried to Nuke us in 1971. in other hand not even a single bullet fired on I-C Border in last 40 years.
     
  21. Sakal Gharelu Ustad

    Sakal Gharelu Ustad Detests Jholawalas Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,687
    Likes Received:
    6,666
    It's not that quiet on the eastern front: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_La_incident

    "The Cho La incident (1 – 10 October 1967) was a military conflict between India and China in the Himalayan Kingdom of Sikkim, then an Indian protectorate. The Chinese People's Liberation Army infiltrated Sikkim[2] on 1October 1967, but was repulsed by the Indian Army by 10October. During the Cho La and Nathu La incidents Indian losses were 88 killed and 163 wounded, while Chinese casualties were 340 killed and 450 wounded.[citation needed] China had previously won a confrontation in 1962. The end of the battle saw the Chinese Army leave Sikkim after being defeated by Indian troops.[1][3][4]"

    Also not to forget the recent land grabbing attempts by Chinese in Ladakh.
     

Share This Page