logo logo

TPP in trouble: why we can win this fight!

Friends of the Earth | 13 August 2015

TPP in trouble: why we can win this fight!

Bill Waren

On Wednesday, July 29 almost 400 Hawaiians and visitors from around the globe gathered on the beach in Kaanapali on the island of Maui. They came for a rally, which Friends of the Earth co-sponsored, calling for a stop to negotiations between12 Pacific countries led by the United States that opened that day with the expectation of completing a Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement.

The boisterous and good-natured TPP protest caught international press attention in part because it featured a traditional Hawaiian conch shell-blowing ceremony. Protesters broke the official Guinness record for the number of people simultaneously blowing conch shells and sent a strong message of disapproval to the trade negotiators cloistered nearby in the Westin resort.

This round of TPP talks was called on the heels of the Congress’ approval late June of Fast Track trade promotion legislation by the narrowest of margins. Fast Track makes it easier for President Obama and the Republican congressional leadership to push the TPP deal through Congress on a quick up-or-down vote, past the overwhelming opposition of Democratic lawmakers.

Michael Froman, the U.S. trade representative, received a sharp rebuke in Maui when the other parties to the talks rejected his package for a TPP deal. Froman will have to renegotiate and may have a hard time getting a deal that he can sell to Congress. Issues related to trade in sugar, dairy, and automotive products could prompt a sizable number of pro-Fast Track legislators to vote against the TPP. Intellectual property issues related to the cost of life-saving medicines could also cause some congressional supporters of Fast Track to spurn the TPP.

The TPP ran into more trouble immediately after the close of Maui talks: the Obama administration chose to upgrade the status of Malaysia on the State Department’s Trafficking in Persons report on human rights. Many in Congress reacted with disbelief and anger. The Menendez Amendment in the Trade Promotion Authority law enacted in late June denies expedited congressional consideration of trade agreements with countries on this U.S. human rights blacklist. Malaysia was previously on that list, which includes countries with the worst records of tolerating human trafficking for the purpose of sexual slavery, forced labor or similar exploitation.

The objection by Congress illustrates the problem that the Obama administration may have in getting even members of Congress who voted to approve Trade Promotion Authority legislation to ratify a TPP deal that includes gross human tights violators like Malaysia, Vietnam and the Sultanate of Brunei.Issues related to trade in sugar, dairy, and automotive products could prompt a sizable number of pro-Fast Track legislators to vote against the TPP. Intellectual property issues related to the cost of life-saving medicines could also cause some congressional supporters of Fast Track to spurn the TPP.

And time is running out for a congressional vote on a completed TPP deal during President Obama’s term of office. Even if Michael Froman announced tomorrow that he had a framework agreement on the TPP, it would take about four and one half months before Congress could vote on it.

It will take considerable time to translate a broad political deal into technical legal text and receive approval on the fine print from lawyers in all 12 countries. And this says nothing about accurately translating such a massive and complex document into so many languages. Lastly, when the legal document is complete, the Trade Promotion Authority law requires that the text be published and made available to the public for 60days before Congress begins consideration.

Ultimately, a TPP vote is likely to be pushed into the election year of 2016, when many members of Congress will be reluctant to cast a controversial vote for fear of losing their seats or when presidential campaign politics could peel off Democratic votes for the deal in the event Hillary Clinton feels compelled to state her flat out opposition to the deal or at least call for its renegotiation.

The stalemate in Maui is good news for the planet.

Froman’s failure to close the TPP deal in Maui is a welcome reprieve, given the profound threat it poses to the planet.

The TPP investment chapter would allow firms to sue governments for billions in money damages if climate, environmental or public health regulations interfere with expected future profits.

The TPP would stymie effective regulation of chemicals associated with breast cancer, autism and infertility, as well as food safety regulations and labeling requirements for food and other products. The deal would also encourage cost-benefit analysis of environmental and health regulations. This is an attempt to attribute a price to the intrinsic value of human life, living things and nature itself. Environmental standards would be lowered if the undervalued “benefit” of protecting nature is outweighed by the “cost” to corporate profits.

The TPP is designed to protect “free trade” in dirty energy products such as tar sands oil, coal from the Powder River Basin, and liquefied natural gas shipped out of West Coast ports. The result would be more climate change from carbon emissions across the Pacific.

A weak environment chapter could further erode Democratic support

The U.S. negotiators are trying to divert attention from the failure of the Maui talks by claiming that an agreement concluded there on the TPP’s environment chapter is a major success. This is incorrect.

Environmental chapters in recent U.S. free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia, Korea and Panama are narrow in scope, dealing mainly with conservation issues.[i] A leaked text of the U.S. counterproposal to the Consolidated Text of the TPP Environment Chapter shows that USTR tried to eliminate a mere reference to climate change. Not a single one of these agreements has resulted in a U.S. suit to enforce obligations to curb trade in illegally-harvested timber or illegal trade in endangered species. A briefing paper released by the Environmental Investigation Agency illustrates how the enforcement of environmental provisions in past trade deals has been deplorable,[ii]

Now, it appears hat the TPP environment chapter may be even weaker than its predecessors, and that many of its provisions could be merely aspirational and not legally binding.[iii]

A weak TPP environment chapter could erode support for the TPP among pro-trade Democrats in Congress. Of the House Democrats who voted for Trade Promotion Authority legislation, 19 have written Michael Froman, to say that “our support for TPA does not translate into automatic support for the Trans Pacific Partnership.” The final text of the TPP environment chapter dealing with conservation issues such as trade in illegally-harvested timber and endangered species, they cautioned, must withstand careful scrutiny and must incorporate the standards contained in the May 2007 agreement between House Democrats and the Bush administration.[iv]

In other words, these 19 Democrats believe the TPP environment chapter must not be significantly weaker than the environment chapters in the Peru and Colombia trade agreements with the United States.

Maui standoffs

If the TPP deal that fails to meet the most essential offensive and defensive demands of U.S. agricultural, pharmaceutical, and automotive industries, the agreement could be dead on arrival in Congress. Ambassador Froman therefore does not have much political room to resolve the key issues that led to the breakdown of negotiations in Maui: sugar, dairy , prescription drugs, and automotive products.[v] Although it may be a hasty conclusion, some analysts even believe that the failure of the Maui talks could mean the end of the TPP.[vi] All the same, it will not be easy to reconcile the economic interests of so many countries, including several that are economic and export powerhouses. The very size and ambition of the TPP project might be the ultimate roadblock to a final deal.


The U.S. offer on the TPP’s intellectual property chapter provisions on prescription drugs received a cold rejection from the other negotiating parties in Maui. The U.S. demand would extend Big Pharma’s patent protections for long periods of time, thus reinforcing it’s monopoly pricing power and imposing heavy costs on consumers and government health care programs. Especially in developing countries, it would effectively deny access to life saving medicines to millions of families.

Republican Senator Orin Hatch, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, calls Big Pharma’s demands “vital to securing congressional support for the trade deal,” and many congressional Republicans agree. Democratic Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut, who voted for the Fast Track bill, takes the opposite view, saying that if TPP “denies timely access to affordable medicines in the developing world,” he will vote against TPP. Other pro-Fast Track Democrats would likely follow his lead.

Mike Froman is boxed in.


National party members of Australia’s parliament, who largely represent rural areas and are part of the governing coalition, are so angry about not getting greater access to the protected U.S. sugar market that they are threatening to vote with the country’s Labour party to defeat TPP ratification. Australian negotiators got the message, promising to push back hard against the United States. Australian Trade Minister Andrew Robb promised that” I’m not going to sign it [the TPP] without something for the sugar industry,”

Froman did not immediately offer significantly greater access in the U.S. market for Australian sugar because of the power of the U.S. sugar lobby, which, over the years, has secured protection and economic security for its members through a generous government sugar program providing loans, price supports and import restrictions.

Trade associations representing sugar growers and refiners have a large membership spread across the United States and are astonishingly generous with their campaign contributions. If Froman accedes to Australia’s demands, the sugar lobby, which has many friends in both parties, might attack the TPP in Congress with telling effect.

What’s more, giving a break to Australian sugar could cut into Mexico’s share of the U.S. market, and Mexico is jealously protecting such benefits from NAFTA in TPP talks. If Froman takes care of Australia, he could lose Mexico.

Froman has no good options on sugar, but the scuttlebutt is that he is likely to make some concessions to Australia hoping to strike a balance between the demands of the U.S. sugar lobby and the Aussies. If so, it would be a neat trick because it won’t be easy to pull off. This might take the form of a larger quota for Australian sugar than that provided under a World Trade Organization agreement, an idea that the American Sugar Alliance opposes.


Market access for dairy products generated acrimony in Maui, and a compromise is nowhere in sight at the moment.

Japan and the United States provide some protection from international competition for their dairy farmers.[vii] Be that as it may, Canada with its New Deal-style supply management system for dairy provides protection and economic security for its many dairy farmers, with a system based on (1) the average cost of production, (2) a quota system that regulates production, limiting supply to keep prices high, and (3) dairy tariffs.[viii]

Australia and New Zealand, especially, are dairy powerhouses. Australia is the world’s third-largest dairy exporter, shipping 50 percent of its production overseas. New Zealand is the world’s largest dairy exporter, controlling 30 percent of the global market. New Zealand enjoys natural climatic advantages that allow cows in most areas to graze on grass year round. More important, New Zealand has consolidated its dairy industry around one giant, export-oriented company, Fonterra. Many U.S. dairy farmers and members of Congress believe that Fonterra exercises predatory power over the global dairy market.[ix]

The United States may accept more Australian and New Zealand dairy imports, but only if U.S. dairy producers are compensated with substantial access to the Canadian market. But, Canada has refused to budge, and Prime Minister Harper could easily lose his October election if Ontario dairy farmers revolt. If the New Democrats, perhaps in coalition with the Liberals, form the next Canadian government, changes in the Canadian supply management system for dairy are likely off the table.

As for the U.S. Congress, members close to the dairy industry like Jim Costa of California, a Democratic Fast Track supporter, will closely scrutinize any accommodation on dairy before they vote for TPP.

Automotive products.

One of Japan’s primary negotiating objectives in TPP talks is to further open up the U.S. automotive market. The United States currently applies a 2.5 percent tariff on Japanese cars and a 25 percent tariff on light trucks made in Japan. The U.S. negotiators appear to be accommodating Japan, alarming TPP negotiators from Mexico and Canada — to say nothing of the U.S. auto industry and members of Congress from auto-manufacturing jurisdictions.[x]

Canada and Mexico have large auto industries. U.S. auto makers have plants in Canada and their supply chain for parts extends into Canada. Post-NAFTA, the number of Mexican factories producing cars and light trucks exploded. Mexican production volume is now seventh in the world, ahead of France and Brazil. Mexico is the fourth-largest auto exporter in the world.

Reportedly, Mike Froman thought he had a deal with Japan on automotive products, but it blew up in the last hours of the TPP ministerial discussions in Maui.

Japan and the United States are said have reached agreement on “rules of origin” governing the supply chain for cars. Such rules determine what percentage of auto parts from outside the TPP zone can be used to manufacture a car in a TPP country for export to another TPP country without being subjected to tariffs and duties. Auto factories in Japan depend heavily on auto parts manufactured in Thailand, among other places.

Canadian and Mexican negotiators, especially, in Maui hit the ceiling when the rules of origin compromise was presented to them. There are reports that the Mexican minister dramatically walked out negotiating room in anger. Mexico is reported to have demanded that at least 65 percent of auto parts must come from TPP countries in order to receive duty-free treatment.

The TPP talks on automotive issues have also alarmed members of Congress from jurisdictions producing cars, trucks and auto parts, including pro-Fast Track members from southern states where Japanese plants could close if it is easier to sell vehicles made in Japan.

The tobacco monkey wrench

The most powerful member of Congress leading the fight for the TPP is Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority leader, but the Senator from the tobacco state of Kentucky now has the jitters. Reportedly, one issue that all the parties to TPP negotiations in Maui could agree upon was the need to craft language in the TPP investment chapter to prevent tobacco companies from using the investor-state dispute resolution process to claim multi-million dollar damage awards from governments that adopt anti-smoking measures.[xi] The word on the trade policy grapevine is that a framework deal on the TPP investment chapter is nearly sealed, and big tobacco will take a hit a hit.

Australia aggressively fought to exclude big tobacco from the benefits of the TPP investment chapter, having been sued by Phillip Morris for its law requiring plain packaging for tobacco products.[xii] Phillip Morris has been lobbying and threatening international investment suits against governments around the world which have adopted or are considering laws like Australia’s. All the TPP countries apparently are concerned about these threats and agreed that the TPP investment chapter must not be used for such nefarious purposes.

President Obama shares this concern, telling a meeting of the Export Council “The big bugaboo that’s lifted up there is tobacco companies suing poorer countries to make sure that anti-smoking legislation is banned, or at least tying them up with so much litigation that ultimately smaller countries cave.”

Mitch McConnell is having none of it, writing a strong letter warning U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman not to discriminate against tobacco companies by excluding them from the benefits of the TPP investment chapter. Thirty-four House Members signed a similar letter. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who voted for Fast Track, promised to vote no on TPP if the tobacco company carve out remains in the TPP investment chapter.

Adam Behsudi at Politico says “the ire of McConnell and other tobacco-state lawmakers throws a wrench into the [TPP] negotiations.” More likely, a couple Members, probably not including McConnell, who voted yes on Fast Track, will vote no on TPP. Mike Froman is in a Catch 22 situation. He does not have many “yes on Fast Track” votes to spare.

TPP could also founder on the shoals of human rights violations

On Thursday, August 6, Friends of the Earth and allies demanded answers as to whether Malaysia’s human trafficking ranking was raised in an attempt to facilitate the United States’ negotiation of the Trans Pacific Partnership. We demonstrated outside the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the State Department’s recent Trafficking in Persons Report . Recent media reports indicated that senior American diplomats meddled in the compilation of this important State Department publication, which rates governments on their efforts to combat human trafficking.

When the Obama administration obtained Fast Track authority to negotiate the Trans Pacific Partnership, Congress prohibited Fast Track consideration of trade deals with countries that have the worst records in combating human trafficking. Malaysia, a critical player in the TPP trade deal, was on this list at that time.

Congress approved the Menendez amendment on human trafficking with Malaysia specifically in mind, in light of mass graves of human trafficking victims recently discovered along the Thai-Malaysia border, among other atrocities. Many migrants are dragooned into forced labor in Malaysia’s environmentally destructive corporate palm oil plantations. Nonetheless, on the eve of the TPP negotiating round in Maui, the State Department took Malaysia off this human rights blacklist, apparently thumbing its nose at Congress.

At the hearing, Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey noted with incredulity that, the “ Malaysia upgrade [was] based on efforts not implemented before end of the reporting period...but not on discovery of mass graves.”

The chair of the committee, Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, said "I don’t see how anybody could believe there was integrity in this process." He further noted that, "This is possibly the most heartless, lacking of substance presentation I’ve ever seen about a serious topic."

This incident highlights the increasing probability that some members of Congress who voted for Fast Track Trade Promotion legislation will vote against the TPP, particularly in light of human rights abuses by Malaysia and other TPP countries.

With respect to labor rights, the AFL-CIO reports that in workers TPP partners “Mexico, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei face ongoing and systematic abuse and violations of workers’ rights with the complicity or direct involvement of the governments.”[xv]

According to Human Rights Watch, Vietnam’s human rights record is “dire in all key areas.” So-called “drug rehabilitation centers” operated by the Communist dictatorship use forced labor to manufacture goods for export and the domestic market. Police routinely engage in torture. Religious minorities are persecuted. Criminal justice is controlled by Communist Party political directives. The Party also represses political dissent. [iii]

The National Organization of Women, the Feminist Majority, and Pride@Work have objected to the TPP with specific reference to the oil-rich Sultanate of Brunei which has introduced of a harsh form of Sharia law that provides for the most barbaric forms of discrimination against women and members of the LGBT community. The new penal code authorizes death by stoning for same sex relations and adultery, flogging of women who have abortions, and fines or imprisonment for women who give birth out of wedlock. Marital rape is legal except when the wife is under 13 years of age.[xvi]

Obama faces a Hobson’s choice

If the TPP is not approved by Congress by February 2016, Hillary Clinton might well be forced in the midst of tough primary fights to oppose the TPP or demand that it be renegotiated. This would create a dilemma for 28 House Democrats who voted Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority to grease the skids for the TPP’s approval.

According to Gary Hufbauer, a TPP advocate at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, “Clinton might be forced by opponents such as Sen. Bernie Sanders into a position of opposing the agreement or promising to renegotiate if elected president.”

Similarly, it is hard to see how Clinton can square her current ambivalence about the TPP, and especially her past promotion of the deal, with her lifelong promotion of feminism in light of Brunei’s adoption of horrific treatment of women under its brutal form of Sharia law.

On top of the threat that delay in TPP negotiations presents to the Administration’s efforts to keep Clinton at least neutral, some of the House Fast-Track supporters could vote against TPP if they are dissatisfied about a number of issues: human trafficking in Malaysia; violation of labor rights in Vietnam; mistreatment of women and gays under Brunei’s harsh form of Sharia law; and especially currency manipulation that makes imports to the U.S. cheaper and U.S exports more expensive. But, the biggest threat to TPP approval appears come from politically powerful industry groups who may be in a position to sink the TPP.

The Obama administration may face a choice between two risky courses of action in TPP talks. They can play hardball on pharma, sugar, dairy and auto issues in negotiations risking the breakdown of talks, or they can accommodate other countries and risk losing both Republican and Democratic support for the TPP. The furious, multi-yeat campaign by progressives against Fast Track resulted in a vote that so close that it gives Froman little room to negotiate, He cannot afford to lose even a handful of pro-Fast Track members given the razor-thin margin by which that measure was adopted.

The fate of the TPP in upcoming negotiations, in Congress, and in the 2016 elections is very much up in the air. And, Mike Froman, who is very much of a realist, must know this – arguably, it is reflected in his behavior at the negotiating table:

Andrew Robb, the Australian Trade Minister says that if back channel negotiations do not produce a deal in the next several days, TPP talks could fall apart. Reuters reports that Japanese Economy Minister Akira Amari, said in a recent blog post on the Maui talks; "… we should meet again this month was because each country might lose interest …,"

"If they lose interest, it would take considerable time and effort to get motivation back to the original level, because the key to success is whether each country can maintain momentum towards an agreement," Amari said.

"What every country thought was strange was that the United States did not show its usual stubborn persistence this time but simply gave up,"


[i] The House version of the “Customs bill, a key part of the Fast Track package of trade bills, seeks to prevent the U.S. Trade Representative from addressing climate change in trade agreements. A group of pro-Fast Track Democratic Senators sent a letter to Senate Conferees urging them to take the anti-climate language out of the Customs bill.

[ii]The EIA briefing paper says that “while the U.S.-Peru FTA included laudable and innovative new provisions to address environmental impacts in trade agreements, the complete failure to enforce these obligations fundamentally undermines the effectiveness of these measures.” The EIA report shows that even when trade deals have strong and enforceable provisions, the resulting protection is only as strong as the willingness of the White House to use them, and President Obama has failed that test. Environmental Investigation Agency, Failure to Enforce Environmental Obligations of Peru FTA, June 4, 2015,

[iii]Chapter 20 of the Final Text: Environment Korea, Colombia, Panama Free Trade Agreements, White House Fact Sheet, The U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: More American Jobs, Faster Economic Recovery Through Exports.;Cherie Tremaine, Georgetown International Environmental Law Review On Line: The Bipartisan Trade Deal negotiated in 2007 describes the new enforcement process to be included in U.S. trade agreements (“The structures of the environmental chapters in the U.S. FTAs with Colombia (Chapter Eighteen of the FTA), Panama (Chapter Seventeen), and Korea (Chapter Twenty) are roughly equivalent. …The countries pledge that they will “effectively enforce [their] environmental laws,” and say they will not waive environmental rules for the sake of trade. The trading partners further commit to observing a list of multilateral environmental agreements that they have both signed. For each FTA, this list consists of the following seven agreements:

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
The Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of Shipping
The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat
The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling; and
The Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission.

Under the FTAs, the U.S. and the three trading partners have access to an enforcement mechanism [ state-to-state arbitration before an international tribunal with power to enforce decisions with retaliatory trade sanctions]in the event that one party feels the other is not adhering to its environmental commitments.")

[iv]The briefing paper released by the Environmental Investigation Agency illustrates the ineffectiveness of environmental provisions in past U.S. trade deals, based on a case study in Peru.

[v]A wild card in upcoming TPP negotiations is the “sacred agricultural products” of Japan. U.S. negotiators and others are asking the Japanese to lower their protections for the “sacred” producers of rice, sugar, wheat, barley, dairy, beef, and pork. Japan is unlikely to give much ground on rice in particular, which is regarded as a “spiritual cornerstone” of Japanese culture and as essential for food security in case the sea lanes are blocked by military conflict in the Far East. Although Japan imports about 10% of its rice consumption under a World Trade organization quota agreement, other rice imports face a the equivalent of a 778% tariff.

[vi]Angelo Young, “Trans Pacific Partnership: Is TPP Dead After Key sticking Points Block Recent Progress?” International Business Times, August 3, 2015.;The chief economist of The Economist magazine, Simon Baptist, in his e-mail newsletter, suggests that the damage done to the TPP in Maui could be mortal. “The latest talks on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) did not end well and election timetables in Canada and the US mean that the prospect of a deal being ratified before the end of 2016 (at the earliest) is remote. The usual problem of agricultural markets was prominent, headlined by Canada’s refusal to open its dairy sector. For New Zealand—one of the four founder countries of the TPP, along with Brunei, Chile and Singapore—this was a non-negotiable issue. Dairy was not the only problem. As usual, Japan was worried about cars and rice, and the US about patent protection for its pharma companies.” AG News, “Victory at last>? The Economist reports: “the TPP is dead.”, : “…

[vii]Japan’s trade policy continues to be driven by a well-organized and highly focused informal network of politicians and agricultural groups…” Robert A. Rogowsky, Gary Horlick. TPP and the Political Economy of U.S.-Japan Trade Negotiations, Wilson Center.p.5.

[viii]Steven Chase. Canadian dairy farmers head to Maui in last ditch effort against TPP, Globe and Mail, July 27, 2015.

[ix]Bill Waren, Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement: Should New Zealand Dairy Be Excluded,” Forum on Democracy & trade, June 2010 (on file); Fonterra, Company Overview, Dr. Pater Vitaliano, Written Testimony by the National Milk Producers Association to the International Trade Commission Concerning the U.S.-Trans Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement, Investigation Number TA 131-034 and TA 2104 -026, February 18, 2010, pp. 5-11. Camilla Ohlsson, New Zealand Dairy Cooperatives- Strategies, Structures, and Deregulation, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, 2004, p. 5. ; Jerker Nilsson, Camilla Ohlsson The New Zealand Dairy Cooperatives’ Adaption to Changing Market Conditions, Journal of Rural Cooperation, Vol.350, pp.43-70, 2007.

[x]When Japan sought to join the TPP negotiations.The UAW and the Ford Motor Company issues a joint statement declaring that, “We are together in opposing Japan’s entry into TPP.” Ambassador Froman ignored their plea and warmly welcomed Japan into the talks. Friends of the U.S. auto industry in Congress took notice. See, Doug Palmer, U.S., Japan agree on approach to Trans Pacific Partnership talks, Reuters, February 22, 2013, General Motors and American Automobile Policy Council said a good TPP deal would need to include provisions curbing currency manipulation. Japan has manipulated and devalued the Yen compared to the dollar, making U.S. exports to Japan more expensive and Japanese exports to the U.S., including cars and trucks, cheaper. Ambassador Froman ignored the industry’s plea. The TPP will not have binding provisions on currency manipulation. See, American Automobile Policy Council, Trans Pacific Partnership,

[xi] See generally. Andrew D. Mitchell, Sebastian M. Wurzberger , Boxed in? Australia’s Plain Tobacco Packaging Initiative and International Investment Law, Arbitration International, Vol. 27, 2011, U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 559 , July 28, 2011,;;Robert Stumberg, Safeguards for Tobacco Control: Options for the TPPA, American Journal for Law & medicine, 39 (20130: 382-441.

[xii] Philip Morris Asia Limited v. The Commonwealth of Australia, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. 2012-12 -

[xiii ] The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Remarks by the President at Meeting of the Export Council, December 11, 2014.

[xiiii] Adam Behsudi, Will Trans-Pacific trade deal go up in smoke over anti-tobacco proposal? Politico, August 12, 2015.

[xv]Charlie Fanning, TPP: Four Potential Partners Don’t Comply with International Labor Rights, 02/23/2015. [iii]Human Rights Watch: Japan.

[xvi]Feminist Majority, National Organization of Women, Pride@Work, Unite Here Local 11, Fast Track and TPP: A recipe for Disaster for Women and LGBT Communities.
 See more at:

 source: Friends of the Earth