“We are closely monitoring the progress in TPP negotiations. However, we must carefully consider the kind of situation the country will face should South Korea be left out of the great global value chain.”“In that sense, I believe we must actively consider our participation in the TPP. South Korea cannot afford to be left out of what would be a great global value chain.”– Yoon Sang-jick, the minister of trade, industry and energy
The Korea International Trade Association has predicted that Washington will try to conclude TPP negotiations in the near future before it heads into an election year in 2016.(image courtesy of Yonhap)
While meeting with reporters, Yoon Sang-jick, the minister of trade, industry and energy, said the government has not yet made a final decision on joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
“We are closely monitoring the progress in TPP negotiations,” Yoon said. “However, we must carefully consider the kind of situation the country will face should South Korea be left out of the great global value chain.
“In that sense, I believe we must actively consider our participation in the TPP,” he added.
The Korea International Trade Association has predicted that Washington will try to conclude TPP negotiations in the near future before it heads into an election year in 2016.
Once signed, the TPP is expected to create one of the world’s largest economic blocs as the negotiations currently involve 11 other countries: Australia, Canada, Japan, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
South Korea and Taiwan both expressed their interests in joining the multilateral agreement in late 2013.
Many contentious issues, such as agriculture and intellectual property, have prevented the conclusion of TPP negotiations that began in 2005.
However, a ministry official earlier said the participating countries, especially the United States and Japan, may have recently narrowed their differences.
The official, while speaking on condition of anonymity, also said South Korea has already lost its chance to take part in the negotiations for the TPP. Seoul can only accept the outcome of the ongoing negotiations should it decide to join the regional trade deal.
Many argue that this will not be overly disadvantageous to South Korea since it has already implemented a bilateral FTA with the United States, commonly known as the KORUS FTA.
“TPP, in many respects, is KORUS plus agreement … Korea’s commitment to a high standard for agreements in the KORUS makes it a natural candidate for negotiations for the TPP,” Wendy Cutler, acting deputy of the U.S. Trade Representative, said Monday while speaking at a Seoul meeting with the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea.
“From the U.S. perspective, Korea’s membership meaningfully contributes to the value of the TPP and increases its benefits for other parties,” she said.
The Korea-U.S. FTA, enacted three years ago, eliminates import tariffs on nearly all products traded between the two countries within 10 years of implementation, making it one of the highest-level trade pacts for both parties.
(Yonhap)
Global Trade Deals;
CAUTION to the Peace Loving People of South Korea; Don’t Make the Same Mistakes as Canada is Continuing to Make.
‘Well, YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN’; President George H.W. Bush on the U.S. Reneging on the Free Trade Agreement.
Trans Pacific Partnership, TTIP, et al, next?
…One of the things that the 95% – 99% of Canadians who make up the grassroots of Canada & who can not afford to be shareholders of corporate Canada in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), etc., & the other non shareholding citizens of the potential signatories of the TPP, such as Australia, might consider remembering is a remark by former U.S. president George H.W. Bush regarding the arrangements between corporate America & corporate Canada in the NAFTAgreement,
&
that is:
“Well, you should have known”.
Did he mean that the Canadian politicians, &/or, the members of corporate Canada that Bush was dealing with should have asked him (Bush) if all of the relevant contingencies had been discussed, understood & agreed upon, including dispute mechanisms & escrow accounts, funded by corporate Canada & corporate America, set up to cover the costs of adjudicating any dispute resolutions and
to pay for any punitive penalties, &/or, damages prior to finalizing any deals, arrangements, treaties, agreements, et al.
Or, did President Bush mean that the aforementioned Canadians representatives did do their due diligence & it was the Canadian representatives who should
have told the aforementioned 95% – 99% of the grassroots Canadians that the above due diligence procedures were in place, but, the grassroots Canadians have to pay the costs of procedures & penalties because they, the grassroots
Canadians, had not thought to inquire that the procedures were in fact “in
place”, & thereby, ensure that the aforementioned procedures, etc. would ensure that the either, corporate Canada, or, corporate America would pay for both; the penalties & the procedures.
Or, should the grassroots of Canada have known that corporate America had no intention of honoring parts of the treaty right from the start, but the US- Canada
Agreement (NAFTA) was quickly ratified with suggestions that any deficiencies, or,
“forget-me-nots”, etc. to the agreement would be amicably settled on a on going basis?
Therefore, when it comes to any present arrangement, treaty, &/or, agreement that may have anything to do with corporate American, such as; the TPPartnership, law enforcement, etc., we now know better, but, now, do not ask, or,
insist that the enforceable procedures, penalties, escrow funding from corporates Canada & corporate America, et al, be agreed upon by the grassroots Canada in a series of plebiscites prior to proceeding any further?
And, if corporate Canada fails to provide the plebiscites, et al, when will the grassroots be enabled to sue both of the corporate Canada’s escrow accounts which corporate Canada will have to set aside the funds for the grassroots
legal funds as a prerequisite (ie. to investigate & prosecute…
(Edited) Or, did President Bush mean that the U.S. would make sure that corporate Canada would get its “future considerations” for the U.S.’s reneging on the soft lumber dispute mechanisms of NAFTA by enabling Canada to recoup its losses at Japan’s expense via the TPP?
******
Please consider sharing the enclosed information & questions with 10 members of your family, friends, associates in order that they can use the due diligence info to make more informed decision about their families’ financial planning, & then they can share it with 10 others…
******
…For the FULL ARTICLE,
see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com
To SHARE Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics in 1) Native Canadian Treaties and 2) the C-CI Treaty,
the CET Agreement, the TPPartnership, et al, via The WAD Accord
and
the List of RECENT ARTICLES, LETTERS & NOTIFICATIONS by DEHS,
see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com
Gain a political ‘Smidge’, Loose (‘Hidden’ & Secret Costs) a Lot; The NET EFFECT.
TTP & GLOBAL TREATIES;
Global Corporate Economy Conniving to Get Harmless NON Shareholders to Pay Trillion$ in Court Costs, Punitive ‘Penalties’, etc.
No Treaties = Corporations/SHAREHOLDERS pay for Their ‘Mistakes’.
How Many Preferred Shares of TPP, C-CIT, TTIP, CETA, et al, Generated Enterprises are You Selling your Right to Sue the Global Corporate Economy for? ‘New’ Shareholders Can Say ‘NO’ to & Over-Rule TPP, CETA, TTIP, et al, Plans?
Will corp.’USA’ et al, & Feds to Prepay $Billions for All ‘Trade’ Treaty/’Arrangements’, et al, Secret (‘Death-Star-Chamber) Tribunals’ Punitive Damages to Protect Home Territory’s Taxpayers? Other Territories, Municipalities, et al, “…(we) need to control corp. USAs ‘Contributions’”.
Undemocratic, Higher Taxes & More Cuts to Services to Pay Secret Penalties; NON Shareholders Have to Pay corporates USA, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada, et al, & their SHAREHOLDERS.
But, If Not PUTIN; ‘The WHITE KNIGHT’, then Who Do YOU Want to Bankroll the Saving the harmless NON shareholders of the World from Fast Tracking TPP’s, CETA’s (TTIP) Secret ‘Death-Star-Chamber’ Tribunal Penalties?
Will China, Iran, the Muslim World, et al, Support Putin in Suits?
How about Warren Buffett, &/or, the ‘coveted’ Hong Kong investor, et al?
It will be good for, not only the NON shareholders of the enterprises that can be generated by the on-going global ‘cooperation’ of corporate treaties, agreements, partnerships, et al, including the Trans Pacific Partnership, the EU – Canada CETA, TTIP, the China – Canada Investment Treaty, et al,
but,
for the potential shareholders, as well,
who are quite interested to know if President Xi Jinping (China) will support Russia as a co-member of B.R.I.C.S. when President Putin uses his potential role as ‘The White Knight’.
And, while President Putin’s potential support as ‘The WHITE KNIGHT’ in the development of the TPP, et al, litigation below can dramatically off-set the hundreds of billions of dollars due to the present & future sanctions leveled by American led, et al, corporations & financial institutions via their governments’ signing their global corporate economic treaties/’arrangements’,
and the potential for making trillions of dollars for the Russian economy over the next 30 – 40 years & beyond,
are the citizens (SHAREHOLDERS & NON shareholders) of Germany & JAPAN just being prudent in wanting to wait for the outcome of:
1) The Submission to The SUPREME COURT of CANADA & the highest court in Germany, et al, to make their findings regarding ‘The Submission’:
‘The SHAREHOLDERS & Corporations of AMERICA, CHINA, Japan, Germany, Canada, et al
v
the harmless Canadian NON shareholders, both; Native & non Native, et al’?
(see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com)
and
2) ‘The MERKEL (Chancellor of Germany) Letter; To Sue, or, Be Sued?’
(see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com)
Have the federal representatives of the nations that are the potential signatories of TPP, TTIP, et al, willingly provided the NON shareholders of US, Canada, Europe, the Trans Pacific nations, et al, with the aforementioned information? Are the federal representatives, et al, depriving the NON shareholders of Canada, et al, of the due diligence information that enables the family of the NON shareholders of Canada, et al, to make informed decisions regarding their financial planning?
And, would a reasonable person conclude by a preponderance of the evidence, &/or, beyond a reasonable doubt, that these documents, et al, demonstrate that the SHAREHOLDERS of AMERICA, CANADA , the EU & Trans Pacific nations, et al, really do not care which NON shareholders pay them the punitive penalties, etc., by way of their secret (‘Death-Star Chamber’) TRIBUNALS, as long as its not the SHAREHOLDERS who pay & not their corporations regardless of which country the corporations:
1) operating from,
2) maintain their headquarters,
3) use to do their cyber banking, accounting, ‘taxation’, etc.
&
4) et al?
And, re; the CHINA – Canada Investment Treaty (C-CIT), et al, is it understandable why the ‘coveted’ Hong Kong investor & his associates are ‘concerned’ with the aforementioned findings of The SUPREME COURT of CANADA, et al, & the effects of the potential findings, et al, on the EU, AMERICA, the Trans Pacific nations, et al, treaties with CHINA, et al?
In regard to arms sales (and other ‘contentious’ products & services & investors, repatriating profits, et al) ; how about the sale of arms (non nuclear) in general in regard to the ‘trade’ treaties that are continuing to be secretly negotiated and how will the Tribunals, both; B.R.I.C.S. & non BRICS, adjudicate, decide & penalize the NON SHAREHOLDERS for the sale of legitimate, semi- legitimate & ‘illegal’ sales of arms within the signatories nations & the those of others, &/or, unaligned? Of particular, interest is China, which does have an treaty with Canada, which puts China ‘at odds’ with other arms manufacturing & nuclear powers that it (China) does not have any ‘arrangements’ with.
Are these types of questions that your politicians & the corporate lobbyists calls ‘forget-me-nots’ (‘Buyer Beware’) that will be (maybe) worked out after the fast tracked signatures are obtained?
And, what do you think is the significance of the line in The Submission to The Supreme Court of Canada ‘…And, lest one forgets that the revelation of the present perilous international treaties/’arrangements’ began with the regard for the rights of Native Canadians as per the Treaties/’arrangements’ that corporate Canada & the Government of Canada have ‘foisted’ upon Native Canadians…’? What are the various ways that this line will cost the SHAREHOLDERS, et al?
On the other hand, it may be worth repeating yet again,
‘What the TREATY of VERSAILLES was to the 20th century PALES in COMPARISON to the TPP, CETA, C-CIT, NAFTA, et al, in the 21st’.
And, how will YOUR submission to YOUR highest court IMPROVE upon The Submission that is presently before The Supreme Court of Canada?
David E.H. Smith
- Researcher
- ‘Qui tam…’
******
Please consider sharing the enclosed information & questions with 10 members of your family, friends, associates in order that they can use the due diligence info to make more informed decision about their families’ financial planning, & then they can share it with 10 others…
******
For more Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics by way of the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, TPP, et al, and The WAD Accord
&
List of RECENT ARTICLES, LETTERS & NOTIFICATIONS by DEHS,
see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com