Yes to a Europe-US Treaty, but Not at Any Cost

[unhappycamper]

http://watchingamerica.com/News/234096/yes-to-a-europe-u-s-treaty-but-not-at-any-cost/

Yes to a Europe-US Treaty, but Not at Any Cost
Les Echos, France
By Zaki Laïdi
Translated By Bora Mici
5 March 2014
Edited by Gillian Palmer

Europe and the U.S. have been engaged in negotiations about a free trade and investment agreement since July 2013. The project has an obvious strategic dimension. It aims to bring together two great entities, which single-handedly represent more than 45 percent of the global gross domestic product and nearly a third of all trade. This rapprochement is in the service of one essential outcome: turning Europe and the U.S. into the leading center for defining global trade standards against the rise of emerging economies, especially China. A priori, this task falls on the shoulders of the World Trade Organization. However, under its jurisdiction, Europe and the U.S. are not allowed to satisfactorily impose high standards in highly delicate areas, like intellectual property, access to services, subsidies for public companies and access to public markets.

~snip~

Nevertheless, the importance and reality of this factor could not make us lose sight of the persistence of real regulatory divergences between Europe and the U.S. on multiple factors, such as a highly differentiated relationship to food industry risk. However, beyond the traditional question on genetically modified organisms, we can feel rising in Europe, especially with the coming elections, a real debate about whether or not to introduce a clause named "the investor state."

What is it all about? Fundamentally, it’s about establishing a legal framework that allows for protecting companies from potential spoliations. Yet, if protecting investors is absolutely vital, then we must legitimately ask whether a specific clause deserves to be introduced. What causes a lot of concern in Europe, especially in Germany, where the debate on this topic has progressed more than in France, would be seeing American companies use this provision to challenge the establishment of new public policies on health and the environment, professing that these measures would infringe on their hopes for profit.

Therefore, this clause could inhibit the establishment of new public policies. It's the reason why a country like Australia, despite being very much all about free trade, categorically refused to introduce a similar clause in its bilateral agreement with the U.S.


--

I had to look up 'spoliations':

spoliation

spo·li·a·tion
noun \ˌspō-lē-ˈā-shən\
Definition of SPOLIATION
1
a : the act of plundering
b : the state of having been plundered especially in war
2
: the act of injuring especially beyond reclaim

Origin of SPOLIATION
Middle English, from Anglo-French spoliacion, Latin spoliation-, spoliatio, from spoliare to plunder — more at spoil
First Known Use: 15th century