As kids, I imagine most of us played the boardgame Monopoly. My strategy was to get Boardwalk and Park Place -- and a monopoly on the Railroads. And then just sit back and wait for the "Rents and Fees" to roll in.
Imagine now that, as International savvy adults -- we could do that for real -- in Real Life.
Simply trade away so much symbolic natural value, for a steady stream of future paper profits ...
Then we would have known, We've arrived! Made the Big Time. Had become Gameboard King.
I suspect the Negotiators of the top secret Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement -- have such 'Park-Place' moments ...
Environmental TPP Chapter Leaked: Weaker Than Previous Agreements
by Kevin Zeese, PopularResistance.org -- Jan 15, 2014
[...]
Wikileaks describes the leaked environmental chapter as
“The Environment Chapter covers what the Parties propose to be their positions on: environmental issues, including climate change, biodiversity and fishing stocks; and trade and investment in ‘environmental’ goods and services. It also outlines how to resolve environmental disputes arising out of the treaty’s subsequent implementation.”
[...]
As a Joint Analysis of Leaked Environment Chapter Consolidated Text by Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, and NRDC, notes “the leaked text takes a significant step back from the May 2007 agreement.” The Times writes:
“As of now, the draft environmental chapter does not require the nations to follow legally binding environmental provisions or other global environmental treaties. The text notes only, for example, that pollution controls could vary depending on a country’s ‘domestic circumstances and capabilities.”
Thing is, that in the Game of Monopoly -- all involved can walk away still friends -- with no-long term damage done.
In the Game of Global Resource Extraction -- some of the players, well they have their own agendas and rulebooks.
Administration Is Seen as Retreating on Environment in Talks on Pacific Trade
by Coral Davenport, nytimes.com -- Jan 15, 2014
“It rolls back key standards set by Congress to ensure that the environment chapters are legally enforceable, in the same way the commercial parts of free-trade agreements are,” Ms. Solomon said. The Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the World Wildlife Fund have been following the negotiations closely and are expected to release a report on Wednesday criticizing the draft.
[...]
The draft documents are dated Nov. 24 and there has been one meeting since then.
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.
What's that she said -- we can have an "
unusual behind-the-scenes look" into the wheelings and dealing of the TPP --
Well sign me up Sparky!
Let's turn that high-rollers page, shall we ...
First a few definitions that will help decipher that insider look at the Environmental wheelings and dealings. Here are some educated guesses to the commonly used gameboard abbreviations:
Australia, AU
Brunei, BN
Canada, CA
Chile, CL
Japan, JP
Malaysia, MY
Mexico, MX
New Zealand, NZ
Peru, PE
Singapore, SG
Vietnam. VN
United States, US
Multilateral Environmental Agreements, MEA
Dispute Settlement, DS
Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna, CITES
Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, Montreal, 1989. Montreal Protocol
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, MARPOL
Free Trade Agreements, FTA
United States Trade Representative, USTR
----------------- ----------------- -----------------
from wikileaks.org
This document contains TPP Confidential Information
November 24, 2013
TPP ENVIRONMENT WORKING GROUP
Report from the Chairs and Consolidated Text for the Environment Chapter
[...]
SS.4 Multilateral Environmental Agreements [MEA]
• This issue relates to how to address MEAs in this Chapter -- one of the main tensions in this chapter.
• US proposes obligations to adopt, maintain, and implement measures to fulfill specific MEAs (CITES, Montreal Protocol and MARPOL) into the TPP enforceable through the DS chapter if failure to do so would affect trade or investment.
• AU, BN, CA, CL, JP, MX, NZ, PE, SG and VN oppose such incorporation in this way as they do not consider it appropriate to incorporate those obligations that have been negotiated in different circumstances and subjecting them to a dispute settlement mechanism in the TPP.
• VN, CL, MY, MX and PE do not support the reference in the footnote to Montreal Protocol, MARPOL and CITES to future protocols, amendments, annexes and adjustments to which it is a Party.
[...]
SS.15 Trade and Climate Change
• VN, PE and MY do not want a reference to fossil fuel subsidies in the Article.
• US and AU cannot agree to the Article as it is currently drafted.
SS.16 Marine Capture Fisheries
• CL, AU, VN, NZ, BN, PE, JP, SG, MX and CA advocate for the placement of the MARPOL Article in the MEA Article.
• CL, VN and MY do not support inclusion of provisions on subsidies for fishing without flexibility for sufficient transitional period and to small-scale fisheries.
[...]
SS.17 Conservation
• US proposed obligations to adopt, maintain, and implement measures to fulfill CITES obligations into the TPP enforceable through the DS chapter if failure to do so would affect trade or investment.
• AU, BN, CA, CL, JP, MX, MY, NZ, PE, SG and VN are opposed to incorporating CITES into the TPP (same issue as MEAs above).
• US has proposed to obligate all TPP Parties to take measure prohibiting trade in wild flora and fauna taken or traded in contravention of a foreign law. AU, BN, CL, JP, MX, MY, PE, SG and VN cannot agree to the provision as drafted.
[...]
SS.12 Consultations/Dispute Settlement
[...]
• With respect to the arbitral tribunal, this is another main tension in the Chapter. AU, BN, CA, CL, JP, MX, MY, NZ, PE, SG and VN can agree to the process outlined in the consolidated text while the US requires that the obligations in the Environment Chapter be subject to the same arbitral tribunal process as the obligations found elsewhere in the TPP. This includes the resort to the application of trade sanctions in cases where compliance with an arbitral panel ruling is not achieved.
That was the Environmental-Monopoly gameboard
from 2013. Interesting look at the goings-on. Surprising that no one has yet flipped the board over and run home.
Do we have a updated look at what the Environmental "players" have been up to lately? Well with a H/T to the resourceful Mark Lippman, it seems that we do have such an insider's window to this on-going high-stakes game ...
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) -- Negotiations and Issues for Congress
March 20, 2015
Congressional Research Service
Environment [pg 40]
Like the U.S. position on worker rights, environmental provisions in U.S. FTAs have evolved over time. As with worker rights, environmental provisions were originally placed in side-letters in the NAFTA agreement, and “enforce your own laws” provisions were placed in subsequent FTAs with limited dispute settlement based on the Trade Act of 2002. The May 10th Agreement provisions (see above) added an affirmative obligation to adhere to multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and allowed for environmental disputes under the FTAs to access the full dispute settlement provisions of the agreements.
According to USTR, it has pushed for the incorporation of the May 10th Agreement as well as long-standing provisions in the TPP environmental talks. The U.S. position seeks commitments to fully enforce domestic environmental laws and laws to implement MEAs; not to waive or derogate from environmental protections to encourage trade or investment; provisions to combat wildlife trafficking, illegal logging, and fishing subsidies; and consultative mechanisms to assure stakeholder participation to challenge member state’s adherence to the provisions. For these obligations, the United States has sought binding commitments to be enforced with the same dispute mechanism as other provisions of the agreement.[105] Subjecting the provisions of the environmental chapter to binding dispute settlement has proved controversial, reportedly even among countries that have signed U.S. FTAs with -- albeit narrower -- environmental chapters with dispute settlement provisions.[106]
[...]
However, press reports suggest that a subsequent leaked document from February 2014 indicates that the United States has sought to replace language on trade and climate change with text on “transition to a low-emission economy” and has sought less comprehensive language on trade and biodiversity.[109]
“The May 10th Agreement” [pg 29]
On May 10, 2007, a bipartisan group of congressional leaders and the Bush Administration released a statement on agreed principles in four policy areas: worker rights, environment protection, intellectual property rights, and foreign investment. The principles were to be reflected in provisions in four U.S. FTAs -- with Colombia, Panama, Peru, and South Korea. Regarding worker rights, the May 10th Agreement (the Agreement) required the United States and FTA partners to commit to enforcing the five international labor principles enshrined in International Labour Organization’s (ILO’s) 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights At Work and that the commitment be enforceable under the FTA. These rights are the freedom of association, the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all forms of compulsory or forced labor, the effective abolition of child labor, and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
The Agreement also required FTAs to adhere to seven major multilateral environmental agreements: The seven agreements are the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species; the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances; the Convention on Marine Pollution; the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Convention; the Ramsar Convention on the Wetlands; the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling; and the Convention on Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources.
Furthermore, the parties are not to waive or otherwise derogate from their labor or environmental protection laws in a manner that would affect trade or investment with the FTA partner(s). In addition, the labor and environment provisions must be enforceable, if consultation and other avenues fail, through the same dispute settlement procedures that apply to the other provisions in the FTA.
The Agreement also required the FTAs to include provisions related to patents and approval of pharmaceuticals for marketing exclusivity with different requirements for developed and developing countries. Specifically, the Agreement requires provisions dealing with the effective period of data exclusivity -- the restrictions on the use of test data produced for market approval by generic drug producers; patent extensions; linkage of marketing approval of generic drugs to determination of possible patent infringement; and reaffirmation of adherence to Doha Declaration on compulsory licensing of drugs to respond to public health crises.
Regarding foreign investment, the Agreement required each of the FTAs to state that none of its provisions would accord foreign investors greater substantive rights in terms of foreign investment protection than are accorded U.S. investors in the United States.
So there you have it.
Our global Environment has been reduced to so many "controversial tokens" making the circuit on a global-bargaining gameboard.
Meant to tailored and tweaked -- or simply "traded away" -- like so many "Get out of Jail Free" cards, on a lazy Sunday.
Long as it's to the liking of the Lowest International bidders ...
Because without them, we don't really have a Multinational Low-wage Game, now do we.
Wonder what they'll 'trade away' next, by the time all the Pacific-Players are appeased ...?