On the other hand, negotiators are pressured to come to some agreement, and a "compromise" halfway between the global consensus and one lone holdout isn't a tru

On the other hand, negotiators are pressured to come to some agreement, and a "compromise" halfway between the global consensus and one lone holdout isn't a true compromise -- it's extortion by a global power. If the secrecy of the documents is supposed to protect that kind of extortion by major powers -- for instance, on the part of US negotiators insisting that the rest of the world honor US IP standards -- then they should be publicly named and shamed, not hidden by "the process", under the guise that their all-or-nothing extortion is a reasonable practice. I think it's very likely that the secrecy is meant to hide bad actions on the part of some negotiators representing powerful interests, and not for the true benefit of the constituents the negotiators are (theoretically) representing. I think the entirety of the fast tracking process in the US (and other nations), the secrecy around the negotiations, etc is at the behest of and for the benefit of major powers extorting other people, and shouldn't be respected, at all. Do you have some reasons to suppose that it's otherwise, given the nature of the drafts we've seen and leaked comments from negotiators suggesting that the US negotiating team is attempting to extort the world in to accepting the (rather ridiculous) US IP position?