Thinking About What the TPP Threatens
Published in Chunichi Shimbun
(Japan) on 10 November 2013
by Editorial (link to original)
(Japan) on 10 November 2013
by Editorial (link to original)
Translated from
by Stephanie Sanders.
Edited by Gillian Palmer.
“What the secret is, is also a secret.” Citizens’ anxiety is increasing over the state secrets law the Abe administration aims to establish, but the Trans-Pacific Partnership is also thoroughly shrouded in secrecy. This is reportedly because it would affect the settlements of the 12 participating countries if the contents were leaked. It’s an anomaly that enforces confidentiality for another four years.
It would be terrible if the foundations of life — food, agriculture, medical care, insurance, education, employment and even culture — were fundamentally transformed without the people’s knowledge.
If You Won’t Protect It, Then Leave Your Seat
The way Japan’s government has repeated concessions from the point its participation in negotiations was acknowledged is not an exaggerated concern.
Japan is relaxing the safety standard for U.S. beef, which has been banned in Europe. Not only is Japan Post insurance moving into the field of cancer insurance, it is also contracting the sale of cancer insurance by U.S. insurance companies in every post office in Japan. Guessing the intentions of the U.S., Japan is pre-emptively indicating a tax-increase plan for light vehicles. Since it was done in this manner from the beginning, it’s natural for anxieties to increase at the main negotiations.
Already, some are saying that Japan cannot protect all of the five major sectors — rice, wheat, beef and pork, dairy products, sugar, etc. — with maintained tariffs, regarded within the ruling party as “off-limits.” Of course, since officials have obstinately insisted that they will “pursue the national interest which should be protected,” and “if I can’t protect it, I will leave my seat,” it is not likely that they will permit these sectors to become the topic of negotiations after the settlement.
Essentially, the point of national institutions and policies is to protect the lives, health and livelihood of citizens, and to build a safe and secure society. However, the TPP could lead not just to tariff reductions and trade rules, but also to changes in institutions intended to protect livelihood and the shape of the country, so to speak.
A Choice between Life or Corporate Profit
The institutions of each country are obstacles for the U.S., permeated by the market principle and the “power of the one percent,” which aims above all to increase its wealth. Accordingly, U.S. companies and the U.S. government use the cliché “level the playing field.” Under the banner of a “level-playing field,” which certainly sounds like fair reasoning, the U.S. completely breaks or reverses obstructive rules and institutions at its convenience.
“The essence of TPP is market hijacking. With current trends, the traditions and mutually supportive society that Japan has come to hold dear are crumbling. ‘Open Japan’ is becoming ‘Broken Japan,’” says University of Tokyo’s Professor Nobuhiro Suzuki, Agricultural Economics.
Japan’s strict food safety standards are an obstacle to the export expansion of U.S. agricultural products; because school lunch “local production for local consumption” incentives are also a barrier to entry, the U.S. is acting in a “make it change” sort of manner. This is a matter of choosing between citizens’ lives and corporate profit.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says, “We aspire to be the world’s easiest country for businesses to operate in.” He relaxes regulations, favors the taxation system and makes it easy even for foreign businesses to earn to their heart’s content. That coincides closely with America’s aims.
Journalist Mika Tsutsumi, who has written several reports on the U.S. such as “Poverty Superpower America” (published by Iwanami Shoten), has a strong sense of danger about a Japan inclined toward the TPP. Policies that seem to imitate the U.S. are moving ahead, giving top priority to corporate profits. The state secrets law, similar to the Patriot Act established by the U.S. after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, could also be called a gag law.
Speaking of what’s going on in the U.S., everything from prisons and municipalities to legislatures are purchased by businesses. Sizeable multinational companies unify with government through extravagant contributions and lobbying and remove obstacles with pro-business legal reforms. It is a society that will neglect even the sovereignty of citizens before corporate logic.
“It can no longer bind companies against their will. Although it’s impossible since there is no mandatory labeling of genetically modified food in the U.S., Japan needs to leave the decision up to national sovereignty, so that citizens are able to choose unmodified foods,” appeals Tsutsumi.
Prime Minister Abe is expressing his views of trade liberalization negotiations concerning the TPP at the same time as negotiations for major security and defense framework. It has implications about uniting with the U.S. and Australia and keeping China in check.
However, supposing that the TPP produces partners and outsiders, is it not the same as the block economy that led to World War II? It could revert back to before the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade system.
The Happiness of the People is the National Interest
When protecting the national interest, I want the happiness of the people to be the first thing considered. More so than consideration for the U.S., which is capable of transforming people’s lives in a major way. One can’t help but feel the discrepancy between the prime minister’s thinking and the wishes held by many people.
It would be terrible if the foundations of life — food, agriculture, medical care, insurance, education, employment and even culture — were fundamentally transformed without the people’s knowledge.
If You Won’t Protect It, Then Leave Your Seat
The way Japan’s government has repeated concessions from the point its participation in negotiations was acknowledged is not an exaggerated concern.
Japan is relaxing the safety standard for U.S. beef, which has been banned in Europe. Not only is Japan Post insurance moving into the field of cancer insurance, it is also contracting the sale of cancer insurance by U.S. insurance companies in every post office in Japan. Guessing the intentions of the U.S., Japan is pre-emptively indicating a tax-increase plan for light vehicles. Since it was done in this manner from the beginning, it’s natural for anxieties to increase at the main negotiations.
Already, some are saying that Japan cannot protect all of the five major sectors — rice, wheat, beef and pork, dairy products, sugar, etc. — with maintained tariffs, regarded within the ruling party as “off-limits.” Of course, since officials have obstinately insisted that they will “pursue the national interest which should be protected,” and “if I can’t protect it, I will leave my seat,” it is not likely that they will permit these sectors to become the topic of negotiations after the settlement.
Essentially, the point of national institutions and policies is to protect the lives, health and livelihood of citizens, and to build a safe and secure society. However, the TPP could lead not just to tariff reductions and trade rules, but also to changes in institutions intended to protect livelihood and the shape of the country, so to speak.
A Choice between Life or Corporate Profit
The institutions of each country are obstacles for the U.S., permeated by the market principle and the “power of the one percent,” which aims above all to increase its wealth. Accordingly, U.S. companies and the U.S. government use the cliché “level the playing field.” Under the banner of a “level-playing field,” which certainly sounds like fair reasoning, the U.S. completely breaks or reverses obstructive rules and institutions at its convenience.
“The essence of TPP is market hijacking. With current trends, the traditions and mutually supportive society that Japan has come to hold dear are crumbling. ‘Open Japan’ is becoming ‘Broken Japan,’” says University of Tokyo’s Professor Nobuhiro Suzuki, Agricultural Economics.
Japan’s strict food safety standards are an obstacle to the export expansion of U.S. agricultural products; because school lunch “local production for local consumption” incentives are also a barrier to entry, the U.S. is acting in a “make it change” sort of manner. This is a matter of choosing between citizens’ lives and corporate profit.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says, “We aspire to be the world’s easiest country for businesses to operate in.” He relaxes regulations, favors the taxation system and makes it easy even for foreign businesses to earn to their heart’s content. That coincides closely with America’s aims.
Journalist Mika Tsutsumi, who has written several reports on the U.S. such as “Poverty Superpower America” (published by Iwanami Shoten), has a strong sense of danger about a Japan inclined toward the TPP. Policies that seem to imitate the U.S. are moving ahead, giving top priority to corporate profits. The state secrets law, similar to the Patriot Act established by the U.S. after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, could also be called a gag law.
Speaking of what’s going on in the U.S., everything from prisons and municipalities to legislatures are purchased by businesses. Sizeable multinational companies unify with government through extravagant contributions and lobbying and remove obstacles with pro-business legal reforms. It is a society that will neglect even the sovereignty of citizens before corporate logic.
“It can no longer bind companies against their will. Although it’s impossible since there is no mandatory labeling of genetically modified food in the U.S., Japan needs to leave the decision up to national sovereignty, so that citizens are able to choose unmodified foods,” appeals Tsutsumi.
Prime Minister Abe is expressing his views of trade liberalization negotiations concerning the TPP at the same time as negotiations for major security and defense framework. It has implications about uniting with the U.S. and Australia and keeping China in check.
However, supposing that the TPP produces partners and outsiders, is it not the same as the block economy that led to World War II? It could revert back to before the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade system.
The Happiness of the People is the National Interest
When protecting the national interest, I want the happiness of the people to be the first thing considered. More so than consideration for the U.S., which is capable of transforming people’s lives in a major way. One can’t help but feel the discrepancy between the prime minister’s thinking and the wishes held by many people.