3 ms·

How so? He's pushing pretty hard for it. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/us/path-to-pacific-trade-deal-may-open-in-senate-after-all.html http://www.nytimes.c

How so? He's pushing pretty hard for it. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/us/path-to-pacific-trade-deal-may-open-in-senate-after-all.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/us/path-to-pacific-trade-d...

themeek 11y ago
The decision to pivot to Asia started during the Bush years and through its inception had the backing of a wide number of individuals including Secretary Clinton. The actual discussions being had involve 11 other nations and hundreds of international corporations. The now "Rebalance" to Asia is an Obama term and the TPP negotiating position of the United States is informed by its national security interests to contain China - but it can hardly be called "President Obama's Deal".
cbsmith 11y ago
The origins of the treaty trace back to 2002, and the US formally joined negotiations in January 2008. Later that year, Susan C. Schwab (an appointee under then President GWB) announced to the world that the US was entering in to negotiations to join it. It is entirely possible the treaty won't be ratified until the next President is in office (or never). There are 12 countries that are actively involved in the negotiations, of which four signed on to the original TPSEP in 2005, and 8 were formally involved in negotiations before Obama ever entered the White House. What we know of the negotiations show that the US is looking for terms very different from the other nations, which at least creates a realistic possibility that much of what is in the treaty agreement is not what the US, let alone President Obama, would want. In the end, the negotiations are driven by apolitical business interests (which you can take as a positive or negative, I think a reasonable case can be made that it is neither). No question he's been involved in negotiations, promoting it and in favour of it. His administration has obviously played a significant role in negotiations. But this thing is way, way bigger than any President. The forces driving the negotiation cross at least a dozen nations and both the Republican & Democratic parties in the US. Suggesting it is Obama's deal is to completely misrepresent the scope and nature of the deal, the process by which it is structured, and creates a mythos of it being a part of a domestic partisan political agenda.

themeek 11y ago

The decision to pivot to Asia started during the Bush years and through its inception had the backing of a wide number of individuals including Secretary Clinton. The actual discussions being had involve 11 other nations and hundreds of international corporations. The now "Rebalance" to Asia is an Obama term and the TPP negotiating position of the United States is informed by its national security interests to contain China - but it can hardly be called "President Obama's Deal".

cbsmith 11y ago

The origins of the treaty trace back to 2002, and the US formally joined negotiations in January 2008. Later that year, Susan C. Schwab (an appointee under then President GWB) announced to the world that the US was entering in to negotiations to join it. It is entirely possible the treaty won't be ratified until the next President is in office (or never). There are 12 countries that are actively involved in the negotiations, of which four signed on to the original TPSEP in 2005, and 8 were formally involved in negotiations before Obama ever entered the White House. What we know of the negotiations show that the US is looking for terms very different from the other nations, which at least creates a realistic possibility that much of what is in the treaty agreement is not what the US, let alone President Obama, would want. In the end, the negotiations are driven by apolitical business interests (which you can take as a positive or negative, I think a reasonable case can be made that it is neither). No question he's been involved in negotiations, promoting it and in favour of it. His administration has obviously played a significant role in negotiations. But this thing is way, way bigger than any President. The forces driving the negotiation cross at least a dozen nations and both the Republican & Democratic parties in the US. Suggesting it is Obama's deal is to completely misrepresent the scope and nature of the deal, the process by which it is structured, and creates a mythos of it being a part of a domestic partisan political agenda.