China's An Ambitious Negotiation At An Early Stage

By issuing the white paper at such a critical moment in negotiations with the U.S., China has destroyed any chance of free trade with the U.S. or membership in the WTO as far as Congress is concerned. In addition, China deliberately withheld their intentions for a policy shift in Taiwan from a U.S. delegation to China just two weeks ago; the delegation learned of the shift only after they had returned to the U.S. These actions of the Chinese government weren't received well by the U.S. government to say the least. To further add to the tension, China also is trying to play with domestic politics in both countries by releasing their statement a month from the election in Taiwan and in the middle of the presidential primaries in the U.S. They are trying to muscle candidates in both countries to submit to their agenda, a unified China in Taiwan's case, and free trade and WTO membership in the case of the U.S., with the threat of force.

It seems like, most people are either unsure about the TTP or against the trade agreement. Some of the downsides of this agreement are greater import competition for companies in the United States competing against imported goods. Medical drugs will become more expensive due to stricter patents and copyrights on generic-brands. Anti TPP activists have expressed concern over some the countries’(within the agreement) labor laws. For instance, Malaysia was ranked as a tier three human trafficking violator, before the US removed them from this list, outraging human rights

There is no permanent documentation on when their country started blatantly manipulating the U.S. Many economists within America do not see a problem with the trade agreement because China has never required our country to pay back the debt we owe. The economists see this as a positive; they believe China is being helpful to our country when in actuality China just wants to have something to hold against America to manipulate us even further if the need ever arises.

A draft of a top-secret piece of interstate agreement on the Trans- Pacific Partnership leaked online causing a hot status to its discussion. Trans -Pacific Partnership (TPP) - is the largest supra-trade and economic organization, the creation of which is scheduled for completion by the end of 2013. In an agreement on the TPP participating countries, generating more than 40% of global GDP: the U.S., Australia, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Singapore, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei, Chile, Vietnam and Peru. China and Russia are not included to this list.

The big business situation hanging in the loom for Canada is Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Despite recent resolution meetings in Guam, Canada is still reluctant to finalize an agreement. Considering Canada already enjoys the benefits of low tarrifs from the flock of other countries involved with TPP (Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam) the country has shifted focus on other elements of the agreement.

On October 5, 2015, President Barack Obama gave a statement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership in Atlanta, GA. As many people know, the president has been trying to grow the economy and strengthen middle- class America. In his speech he stated, “Trade ministers from the 12 nations that make up the Trans-Pacific Partnership finished negotiations on an agreement that reflects America’s values and gives our workers a fair shot at the success they deserve.” (Obama, 2015) This agreement was put in place to help the middle class get ahead in life as well as help the American farmers, rancher and manufacturers. The TPP was designed to help the middle –class Americans but there are some issues with the TPP that Congress would like to address. An article states that “Congress would need to approve implementing legislation for U.S. commitments under the agreement to enter into force.” (Fergusson, I.F, Cooper,W.H., Jurenas,R., & Williams, B.R. , 2013) . Not everyone in the government agrees with the TPP. President Obama has encouraged everyone to read the TPP for themselves before creating an opinion if they agree with it or not.

TPP advocates’ neglect of losers generated by the TPP cannot be taken as an evidence to prove that the TPP does not have its merit. The TPP does increase the national income in member states and trade induces an economic increase in an unprecedented way. If pulling out the TPP pushed Japan closer to China, the change of trade pattern could

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is something that you may have heard of on the news, but like many, you probably do not know what exactly it is. The Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP as it is commonly referred to in shorthand is a free trade agreement that the United States and 12 countries which includes Australia, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, the United States, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, and New Zealand. Free Trade means that tariffs are virtually dismantled in between countries to supposedly spur the machine of trade and boost everybody’s economy. If you did not know that you are not alone as a Harvard poll that was reported about in a Politico, which is a respected political news source, “…despite the seeming predominance of this issue in the media and in Washington D.C., only 29% of Americans say they have heard or read anything about the TPP, while 70% say they have heard or read nothing at all.” (Palmer, 6) This is disappointing as more people should be more involved with such a monumental agreement that could affect their lives in very big ways. If they were to know about what it will do if we signed onto it, no one would allow it, but coded language and redirects of the subject have led many Americans buying into the supposed good things about the agreement or as the poll suggests never even heard about it. If everyone knew about it and understood what would happen if it was implemented the sane collective of our country would agree that the United States

In contrast, the PRC, operating under a single party does not have the same incentives to bow to popular political pressures. However, it was displayed clearly during the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) and noted by (Curran and Von Acker 2010, 185) that in times of crisis the PRC will tend to “retreat from the privatisation of the economy for a significantly increased state intervention”, including such measures as ordering the mainly state owned banks to cut the size of loans granted to private enterprises (Wang and Iftikhar 2010). This kind of government control can have negative impacts on business but are sometimes considered as an acceptable trade-off, as in the case of the compulsory minimum wages set and tightly controlled in the United states by the federal government and set in the PRC by autonomous provinces and municipalities, which allows for corruption and abuse by domestic and international business. While the Chinese market promises cheap land and labour, it must be understood that recklessly abusing such activities will tarnish that rare commodity that is brand image. For some, such as Hitachi the offer is simply too tempting to refuse and they take advantage of what Barboza (2006) describes as the “cheap land and labour” and the “factory system where young workers essentially march to their jobs every 8 hours, often from company owned dormitories nearby”.

This paper focuses on the key provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. The agreement is an expansion from the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement to now include 12 countries. The U.S. government has specific objectives, 13 in fact, for the agreement. If finalized, the agreement would encompass 40 percent of the world’s economy and produce over $300 billion U.S. dollars a year. Labor, goods, services, textiles, and intellectual property make up some of the key provisions of particular interest to the U.S. The President’s Administration is seeking “Fast Track Approval” to move this agreement unmolested through Congress for ratification. Due to many conflicting and competing outside interests, the negotiation proceedings have been kept secret so as to not complicate an already very complex and multi-faceted situation with cultural and bilingual challenges. Although not specifically stated, this endeavor is the U.S. government’s economical approach to controlling the expanding sphere of influence of China by leveling the playing field with many of China’s trading partners.

China might object to a bilateral agreement encouraging joint ventures because it would place purely domestic Chinese firms at a relative economic disadvantage. However, to persuade China to adopt an agreement, the U.S. could point out that China cannot continue to depend on selling low-value-added goods to Western consumers for economic growth. As PRC officials have stated, China must shift from an export-led to a consumption-based economy by harvesting domestic demand from its growing middle class. Joint ventures would allow China to produce goods domestically for consumption rather than export.

One thing that you may notice about the TPP is that one regional Pacific super power is not a member, China. The TPP will cover approximately 40% of the world economy, and supporters of the agreement will say that these numbers will increase if it is a success. This can be seen as other countries limiting the power of China, and growing together to do so. This is a highly realistic reason for cooperation, and it has some support as China is proposing its own trade agreement in the region. China sees the TPP as something that may infringe on its power in the region, and so it is countering with a trade agreement of its own.

The United States became engaged in the TPP negotiations in September 2008 after President Bush notified Congress that the U.S. would join P-4 talks despite no delegation of congressional trade authority or negotiating objectives. Two months later, Vietnam, Peru, and Australia announced that they would join the P-4 trade bloc. After the inauguration of President Barack Obama in January 2009, the March 2009

The United States is currently negotiating the TPP with 11 other countries including Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

The creating TPP is a noteworthy try that typifies the Obama Administration 's vision for the American economy, the conceivable fate of exchange, and the United States ' focal part in the Asia-Pacific. This understanding will open fundamental new chances to broaden trades that bolster higher-paying occupations here at home. The Asia-Pacific merges a piece of the world 's most dynamic economies, tending to more than forty percent of general exchange. (Marantis, cited in Kerr 2013)