Anti-TPP Movement in Japan

[TaiShang]

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics

Sachie Mizohata and the Association of University Faculties

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement is a proposed trade pact that Japan is currently negotiating with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam (as of September 2013). The TPP aims to increase the liberalization of economies in the Pacific region through abolition of tariffs on trade as well as reregulation.1 In 2008, the United States joined the talks “and has espoused a hard core complete free trade policy,” which has vastly expanded the scope of the negotiations.2 With both the US and Japan as participants, the pact would cover nearly 40% of the world’s economy.3 Japan officially joined one of final rounds of the negotiations in July 2013 in Malaysia, as the participating countries intend to finalize the TPP negotiations (at least partially) by the end of 2013.4

The TPP agreement affects not only trade issues, but also nontrade matters that immensely impact lives of citizens in all participating countries.5 The areas at stake include, for example:

• domestic court decisions and international legal standards (e.g., overriding domestic laws on both trade and nontrade matters, foreign investors’ right to sue governments in international tribunals that would overrule the national sovereignty)
• environmental regulations (e.g., nuclear energy, pollution, sustainability)
• financial deregulation (e.g., more power and privileges to the bankers and financiers)
• food safety (e.g., lowering food self-sufficiency, prohibition of mandatory labeling of genetically modified products, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease)
• Government procurement (e.g., no more buy locally produced/grown)
• Internet freedom (e.g., monitoring and policing user activity)
• labor (e.g., welfare regulation, workplace safety, relocating domestic jobs abroad)
• patent protection, copyrights (e.g., decrease access to affordable medicine)
• public access to essential services may be restricted due to investment rules (e.g., water, electricity, and gas)

Although the TPP negotiations have been held in the name of the people, the draft texts have been shrouded in secrecy not only from the public, but also members of the Diet, and civil society, thereby precluding public scrutiny and public input. Reportedly, the countries have signed up not to reveal the contents of the agreement for four years after the signing of the agreement. 6 All public information comes from leaked texts. Bizarrely, the TPP makes a special exception to “a group of some 600 trade ‘advisers,’ dominated by representatives of big businesses.”7

The TPP is a Trojan horse, branded as a “free trade” agreement, but having nothing to do with fair and equitable treatment. In reality, it is precisely “a wish list of the 1% ―a worldwide corporate power.”8 “Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas.”9 “The other chapters enshrine new rights and privileges for major corporations while weakening the power of nation states to oppose them.”10 As the Japanese people have increasingly become concerned about its potential implications on their lives, some groups have voiced their objections to the TPP.

One such group is the Association of University Faculties (AUF), a Board which Seeks Japan’s Immediate Withdrawal from the TPP negotiations. On April 10, 2013, some AUF members held a press conference, announcing that they had established the association and submitted a letter with an 839 signature petition to Prime Minister Abe to withdraw from the TPP negotiations.11 Since then, they have publicly warned against entering the negotiations, calculating estimated losses (see their website) due to the TPP and holding workshops and press conferences. On September 14, the AUF plans to hold a symposium with the members of Japan Medical Association, Network of Lawyers who oppose the TPP, Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives (or JA-Zenchu), Federation of Housewives, and other civic groups to explore how to stop the TPP.

Looking back at the history of TPP, Yonekura Hiromasa, chairman of Keidanren (the Japan Business Federation) said in October 26, 2010: “Japan will be left out as an orphan in the world” if we do not join the negotiations.12 Note that “Yonekura is also chairman of Sumitomo Chemical, which in 2010 signed a tie-up agreement with American agrichemical giant Monsanto.”13 Besides this orphan language, pro-TPP adherents used the kaikoku (opening the country) campaign, widely publicized by the mass media. The then Prime Minister, Kan Naoto called the TPP “the third opening of the country.”14

The kaikoku rhetoric evokes the history of the US-Japan relationship and coercive unequal treaties.15 “The first opening” was at the arrival of the Black Ships of Commodore Matthew Perry in 1853, subsequently signing the US-Japan Treaty of Amity and Commerce with no tariff autonomy to the Japanese side. “The second opening” refers to the US military occupation and its continuation to date. After defeat in the Pacific War in 1945, Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration, unconditional surrender, and occupation by the US military, subsequently signing the Security Treaty along with the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951.16

Obviously, both orphan and kaikoku languages are empty rhetoric. Japan is no longer isolated under the sakoku foreign relations policy. Rather, the country has been a World Trade Organization member since its creation of 1995.17 In addition, “actual trade barriers between these countries are already very low.”18 Thus, the removal of tariffs (e.g., 2 to 3% in the United States) will have little effect on exports.19

On November 11, 2011, Kan’s successor, Noda Yoshihiko of the Democratic Party announced Japan’s interest in joining the TPP negotiations.map.

Second, Japan’s nationalized health-care system is at stake. The annual US-Japan Business Council (USJBC) held in Tokyo on November 8-9, 2012, issued a public announcement: “USJBC companies can connect with Japanese industry and government to help shape transparent trade rules, standards and regulations in this dynamic region – particularly if Japan decides to pursue membership in TPP.”31 The USJBC’s chairman was Charles Lake II. Note that he is chairman of the American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus (Aflac) Japan, whose company revenues were $16.6 billion in 2008, about 70% of them from Japan.32 If the government embraces lucrative privatization accepting the ISD system, it would be detrimental to Japan’s long cherished national health-care system.

In conclusion, we have reviewed this extraordinary agreement, which would ruinously reverse and rewrite the history of humanity with its repeated struggles for democracy, freedoms, human rights, and welfare. As noted, “the secrecy of the Trans-Pacific Partnership process represents a huge assault on the principles and practice of democratic governance.”33 In translating the AUF’s “youbousho” as “petition,” I thought of another word: list of grievances. One such formal set of letters was “Cahiers de Doléances” written in 1789, the year the French Revolution started. Similarly, I thought of letters written by our ancestors on the eve of peasant uprisings in feudal Japan. The AUF petition evokes such indignation of citizens as it brings the TPP under public scrutiny.

Recommended Citation: Sachie Mizohata, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics: An introduction and a petition," The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 36, No. 3

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics: An introduction and a petition ＴＰＰ批判　序論と要望書 :: JapanFocus

 

[qwerrty]

• domestic court decisions and international legal standards (e.g., overriding domestic laws on both trade and nontrade matters, foreign investors’ right to sue governments in international tribunals that would overrule the national sovereignty)
• environmental regulations (e.g., nuclear energy, pollution, sustainability)
• financial deregulation (e.g., more power and privileges to the bankers and financiers)
• food safety (e.g., lowering food self-sufficiency, prohibition of mandatory labeling of genetically modified products, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease)
• Government procurement (e.g., no more buy locally produced/grown)
• Internet freedom (e.g., monitoring and policing user activity)
• labor (e.g., welfare regulation, workplace safety, relocating domestic jobs abroad)
• patent protection, copyrights (e.g., decrease access to affordable medicine)
• public access to essential services may be restricted due to investment rules (e.g., water, electricity, and gas)

omg. all these points has american written all over. only an idiot would sign up for this sh1t. no wonder it's going nowhere after many years of preaching

 

[qwerrty]

Meanwhile our Viet friends are singing loudly for TPP.

hope they like american supa-mutant crops, pigs, cows, monkeys...

 

[NiceGuy]

Meanwhile our Viet friends are singing loudly for TPP.

TPP is good for VN coz we can sell more farm produces, seafood while it will kill SK-JP's ones.

 

[TaiShang]

TPP is good for VN coz we can sell more farm produces, seafood while it will kill SK-JP's ones.

You are thinking in a very simplistic way. I do not think you can compete the heavily-subsidized and mechanized US farming industry. They beat many countries on their home turf after signing similar agreements. So, you can forget about US market for good. Who else will you sell fish and farm products? Japan and SK won't buy from you (that's the whole reason why TPP is stagnated now) at the cost of their own farmers otherwise they will be punished heavily in the next elections.

 

[C130]

omg. all these points has american written all over. only an idiot would sign up for this sh1t. no wonder it's going nowhere after many years of preaching

does it

 

[Galad]

TPP is good for VN coz we can sell more farm produces, seafood while it will kill SK-JP's ones.

Actually TPP and its EU brother is only good for USA.Better read the little information is known for it before posting.Nothing good coming from such one sided agreements.There is a reason why TTP talks are being held in secret.

 

[NiceGuy]

You are thinking in a very simplistic way. I do not think you can compete the heavily-subsidized and mechanized US farming industry. They beat many countries on their home turf after signing similar agreements. So, you can forget about US market for good. Who else will you sell fish and farm products? Japan and SK won't buy from you (that's the whole reason why TPP is stagnated now) at the cost of their own farmers otherwise they will be punished heavily in the next elections.

As Karl Max said:"economic deal always go together wt politics deal". We r beating US fish products in USA now, and if TPP is unfair to us, we simply quit the game.

Unlike SK-JP who can not go against US, when we quit TPP, it means we will join wt Russia to make more troubles to USA like selling lethal weapons to the US enemies ,train their soldiers to fight against US troops etc.. and US is smart enough for not turning VN into its enemy again

So, VN-US will make a win-win TPP deal, both will win, China will lose, thats the best way to go

 

[kawaraj]

Actually TPP and its EU brother is only good for USA.Better read the little information is known for it before posting.Nothing good coming from such one sided agreements.There is a reason why TTP talks are being held in secret.

Point taken.

American rules world.

 

[kawaraj]

Yonekura is also chairman of Sumitomo Chemical, which in 2010 signed a tie-up agreement with American agrichemical giant Monsanto

Monsanto is just the American proxy of new colonization through bio-weapons. Think about they flood the world with poisonous GMO products. Japanese eat Tofu (bean curd) and they are trying to feeds Japanese with GMO soybean made Tofu.

 

[Aepsilons]

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics

Sachie Mizohata and the Association of University Faculties

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement is a proposed trade pact that Japan is currently negotiating with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam (as of September 2013). The TPP aims to increase the liberalization of economies in the Pacific region through abolition of tariffs on trade as well as reregulation.1 In 2008, the United States joined the talks “and has espoused a hard core complete free trade policy,” which has vastly expanded the scope of the negotiations.2 With both the US and Japan as participants, the pact would cover nearly 40% of the world’s economy.3 Japan officially joined one of final rounds of the negotiations in July 2013 in Malaysia, as the participating countries intend to finalize the TPP negotiations (at least partially) by the end of 2013.4

The TPP agreement affects not only trade issues, but also nontrade matters that immensely impact lives of citizens in all participating countries.5 The areas at stake include, for example:

• domestic court decisions and international legal standards (e.g., overriding domestic laws on both trade and nontrade matters, foreign investors’ right to sue governments in international tribunals that would overrule the national sovereignty)
• environmental regulations (e.g., nuclear energy, pollution, sustainability)
• financial deregulation (e.g., more power and privileges to the bankers and financiers)
• food safety (e.g., lowering food self-sufficiency, prohibition of mandatory labeling of genetically modified products, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease)
• Government procurement (e.g., no more buy locally produced/grown)
• Internet freedom (e.g., monitoring and policing user activity)
• labor (e.g., welfare regulation, workplace safety, relocating domestic jobs abroad)
• patent protection, copyrights (e.g., decrease access to affordable medicine)
• public access to essential services may be restricted due to investment rules (e.g., water, electricity, and gas)

Although the TPP negotiations have been held in the name of the people, the draft texts have been shrouded in secrecy not only from the public, but also members of the Diet, and civil society, thereby precluding public scrutiny and public input. Reportedly, the countries have signed up not to reveal the contents of the agreement for four years after the signing of the agreement. 6 All public information comes from leaked texts. Bizarrely, the TPP makes a special exception to “a group of some 600 trade ‘advisers,’ dominated by representatives of big businesses.”7

The TPP is a Trojan horse, branded as a “free trade” agreement, but having nothing to do with fair and equitable treatment. In reality, it is precisely “a wish list of the 1% ―a worldwide corporate power.”8 “Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas.”9 “The other chapters enshrine new rights and privileges for major corporations while weakening the power of nation states to oppose them.”10 As the Japanese people have increasingly become concerned about its potential implications on their lives, some groups have voiced their objections to the TPP.

One such group is the Association of University Faculties (AUF), a Board which Seeks Japan’s Immediate Withdrawal from the TPP negotiations. On April 10, 2013, some AUF members held a press conference, announcing that they had established the association and submitted a letter with an 839 signature petition to Prime Minister Abe to withdraw from the TPP negotiations.11 Since then, they have publicly warned against entering the negotiations, calculating estimated losses (see their website) due to the TPP and holding workshops and press conferences. On September 14, the AUF plans to hold a symposium with the members of Japan Medical Association, Network of Lawyers who oppose the TPP, Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives (or JA-Zenchu), Federation of Housewives, and other civic groups to explore how to stop the TPP.

Looking back at the history of TPP, Yonekura Hiromasa, chairman of Keidanren (the Japan Business Federation) said in October 26, 2010: “Japan will be left out as an orphan in the world” if we do not join the negotiations.12 Note that “Yonekura is also chairman of Sumitomo Chemical, which in 2010 signed a tie-up agreement with American agrichemical giant Monsanto.”13 Besides this orphan language, pro-TPP adherents used the kaikoku (opening the country) campaign, widely publicized by the mass media. The then Prime Minister, Kan Naoto called the TPP “the third opening of the country.”14

The kaikoku rhetoric evokes the history of the US-Japan relationship and coercive unequal treaties.15 “The first opening” was at the arrival of the Black Ships of Commodore Matthew Perry in 1853, subsequently signing the US-Japan Treaty of Amity and Commerce with no tariff autonomy to the Japanese side. “The second opening” refers to the US military occupation and its continuation to date. After defeat in the Pacific War in 1945, Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration, unconditional surrender, and occupation by the US military, subsequently signing the Security Treaty along with the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951.16

Obviously, both orphan and kaikoku languages are empty rhetoric. Japan is no longer isolated under the sakoku foreign relations policy. Rather, the country has been a World Trade Organization member since its creation of 1995.17 In addition, “actual trade barriers between these countries are already very low.”18 Thus, the removal of tariffs (e.g., 2 to 3% in the United States) will have little effect on exports.19

On November 11, 2011, Kan’s successor, Noda Yoshihiko of the Democratic Party announced Japan’s interest in joining the TPP negotiations.map.

Second, Japan’s nationalized health-care system is at stake. The annual US-Japan Business Council (USJBC) held in Tokyo on November 8-9, 2012, issued a public announcement: “USJBC companies can connect with Japanese industry and government to help shape transparent trade rules, standards and regulations in this dynamic region – particularly if Japan decides to pursue membership in TPP.”31 The USJBC’s chairman was Charles Lake II. Note that he is chairman of the American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus (Aflac) Japan, whose company revenues were $16.6 billion in 2008, about 70% of them from Japan.32 If the government embraces lucrative privatization accepting the ISD system, it would be detrimental to Japan’s long cherished national health-care system.

In conclusion, we have reviewed this extraordinary agreement, which would ruinously reverse and rewrite the history of humanity with its repeated struggles for democracy, freedoms, human rights, and welfare. As noted, “the secrecy of the Trans-Pacific Partnership process represents a huge assault on the principles and practice of democratic governance.”33 In translating the AUF’s “youbousho” as “petition,” I thought of another word: list of grievances. One such formal set of letters was “Cahiers de Doléances” written in 1789, the year the French Revolution started. Similarly, I thought of letters written by our ancestors on the eve of peasant uprisings in feudal Japan. The AUF petition evokes such indignation of citizens as it brings the TPP under public scrutiny.

Recommended Citation: Sachie Mizohata, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics: An introduction and a petition," The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 36, No. 3

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics: An introduction and a petition ＴＰＰ批判　序論と要望書 :: JapanFocus

This is difficult issue. Given, Japan has a greater (and growing) bilateral trade relations with China over say the United States. All other members of TPP are not even major trade partners of Japan. In fact, aside from the United States, all other TPP countries are so insignificant to us in trade relations. So, to me, this is an issue to consider.

Its a tricky, difficult situation.

 

[TaiShang]

if TPP is unfair to us, we simply quit the game.

Do you know the TPP has exit clauses or not? What are the consequences if one of the parties deviates? Being a rather formal (high-end) trade agreement, it must be quite hard to quit the agreement in a snap once you sign it. The US producers will eat you alive and you will become economically colonized.

Does your public even know the details about the TPP? What if your government signs it because some high politicians are bribed in one way or another?

Unlike SK-JP who can not go against US, when we quit TPP, it means we will join wt Russia to make more troubles to USA like selling lethal weapons to the US enemies ,train their soldiers to fight against US troops etc.. and US is smart enough for not turning VN into its enemy again

Are you joking or am I reading an Onion satire? I just hope your country won't sign the agreement with such an exit plan in the back of their mind.

So, VN-US will make a win-win TPP deal, both will win, China will lose, thats the best way to go

The problem is the TPP is not a US thing. US does not call all the shots. You have to negotiate with everybody not just your Obama. Look how Japan alone brings the negotiations to a deadlock. Maybe you just get rid of everybody and sign a US-VN TPP.

This is difficult issue. Given, Japan has a greater (and growing) bilateral trade relations with China over say the United States. All other members of TPP are not even major trade partners of Japan. In fact, aside from the United States, all other TPP countries are so insignificant to us in trade relations. So, to me, this is an issue to consider.

I guess the way forward is to first concentrate on the proposed trade agreement between CN-JP and SK. Northeast Asian economic union would by itself be a juggernaut. The process would be more democratic, open and soft, unlike the TPP. Thus, each party would both protect sensitive sectors and go ahead with areas where win-win is possible. In other areas, fair competition would be the way to go.


S. Korea hopes to realize FM meeting between China, Japan, S.Korea
Source:Xinhua Published: 2014-11-13 16:36:36

South Korea will make efforts to realize a foreign ministers' meeting between China, South Korea and Japan, saying that if the ministerial-level gathering is held, discussions will be made naturally on whether to hold the trilateral summit between the three nations, foreign ministry said Thursday.

The trilateral meeting of foreign ministers has not been held since April 2012 as territorial and historical disputes of Japan with China and South Korea escalated tensions in the region. The trilateral summit has also been halted since May 2012.

Regarding the bilateral summit between President Park Geun-hye and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Noh Kwang-il told a press briefing that Japan needs to make sincere efforts to repent its militaristic past such as the comfort women, or the wartime sex slaves for the Imperialistic Japanese Army during World War II.

Park has refused, since her inauguration in February 2013, to sit down face-to-face with , citing his wrong perception of history.

Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine in December 2013, becoming the first Japanese prime minister in seven years who pays tribute to the controversial shrine. It stirred a wide range of condemnation and stern response from Japan's neighboring countries, especially from China and South Korea.

 

[Aepsilons]

I guess the way forward is to first concentrate on the proposed trade agreement between CN-JP and SK. Northeast Asian economic union would by itself be a juggernaut. The process would be more democratic, open and soft, unlike the TPP. Thus, each party would both protect sensitive sectors and go ahead with areas where win-win is possible. In other areas, fair competition would be the way to go.

I agree. Afterall, the trilateral trade between China (im also including Taiwan), Japan and South Korea is close to $1 Trillion.

That's enormous. And the potential to increase this beyond $1 Trillion is there.

 

[NiceGuy]

Do you know the TPP has exit clauses or not? What are the consequences if one of the parties deviates? Being a rather formal (high-end) trade agreement, it must be quite hard to quit the agreement in a snap once you sign it. The US producers will eat you alive and you will become economically colonized.
.

VN-US deal is just like Russia-US deal, if we dont like, then we quit, then we will become ur enemy. What can u do to stop us ??

The problem is the TPP is not a US thing. US does not call all the shots. You have to negotiate with everybody not just your Obama. Look how Japan alone brings the negotiations to a deadlock. Maybe you just get rid of everybody and sign a US-VN TPP.

If other countries dont listen to US, then they will get sanction, and they will die.

 

[TaiShang]

VN-US deal is just like Russia-US deal, if we dont like, then we quit, then we will become ur enemy. What can u do to stop us ??

We are talking about TPP here. It is not a particular US-VN deal. You two are just two of the 12 something members/candidates.

If other countries dont listen to US, then they will get sanction, and they will die.

Japan does not listen and TPP drags on, and no Japanese dies. Japan has an option, a better one, what other option VN has on the economic side?

Russia is a great nation, a strategic partner to China. But how much they can help you economically?