Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#1

Post by sdoering » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 1:37 PM UTC

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)
wikileaks.org

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#2

Post by Gusfoo_2 » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:18 PM UTC

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#3

Post by eli » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:27 PM UTC

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

True, though it would be cool to be able to get input from a wider audience before it's final.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#4

Post by sdoering » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:29 PM UTC

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

Non the less. It might be, despite the gonzo title, quite interesting for some people, to see, what the positions of different countries are.

And what comes of it, when it is finalized.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#5

Post by acodesmith » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:35 PM UTC

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

Confidential: intended to be kept secret.

We shouldn't split hairs to justify the lack of transparency, especially for such a wide-reaching agreement.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#6

Post by mrspeaker » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:38 PM UTC

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

What's the difference between secret and confidential (honest question!)?

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#7

Post by Tarang » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:39 PM UTC

mrspeaker wrote: post #6

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

What's the difference between secret and confidential (honest question!)?

There's a section on it on wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOFORN#Levels_of_classificatio...

Basically to do with the harm it can cause if it were known. Secret is rated higher than Confidential because it can cause more of a threat to national security.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#8

Post by sp332 » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:43 PM UTC

mrspeaker wrote: post #6

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

What's the difference between secret and confidential (honest question!)?

Confidential negotiations are good for the negotiators, because they can make bluffs and propose compromises without the public breathing down their necks, or second guessing every move. As long as the final text is public before it's put to Congress, I'm fine with that in general.

My problem with the TPP is that it pretends to be a trade agreement but is really targeted at expanding intellectual property laws. The nature of what's being negotiated is being hidden behind the excuse of confidentiality.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#9

Post by aroch » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:49 PM UTC

I'll wait for someone who doesn't want to blow their brains out after reading the first few pages to do an analysis.

Re: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

#10

Post by Zigurd » Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 2:49 PM UTC

Gusfoo_2 wrote: post #2

It's not secret, it's confidential because it's not finalised. This is perfectly normal for treaty negotiation.

The problem is information asymmetry. But not between the parties negotiating. They all see the working text.