There is an awful lot to unpack in this seemingly obscure article talking about Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and a new trade approach he is pitching to Pacific/Asia and Atlantic/European nations. [Story Here]
Before getting to the substance of the outline, something important needs to be shared for context.
Do you remember the 2014, 2015 and 2016 top story conversations and debates over the Transpacific Partnership trade deal known as TPP?
You might also remember the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership trade deal known as TTIP.
The TPP (Pacific) and TTIP (Atlantic) were two major multinational trade deals negotiated between 2013 and 2016. While both sparked plenty of debate, most of the spotlight was on the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Hillary Clinton was in favor of TPP as were most of the traditional republican field of candidates in ’15/’16. However, Donald Trump was strongly against TPP and pledged to exit out of any negotiations and scrap the U.S. participation if he was to win the 2016 election. Some of you may begin to remember this.
Donald Trump agreed with our position, that TPP was being falsely sold as a beneficial 12-nation massive trade agreement between the USA and pacific rim countries including Australia and Southeast Asia nations.
With the history of NAFTA behind us, we could see two major issues with TPP: #1: It was structured with a back door to let China into the deal. And #2) it was created to ensure the USA remained a “service driven economy.”
Supporters of TPP and TTIP claimed this multinational trade deals would create smooth supply chains and align on ‘rules of origin.’ They believed TPP would benefit companies and lead to cheaper products. Critics, however, argued that the agreements were designed to exploit the U.S. consumer market and prevent the country from ever regaining a strong manufacturing base.
I share those reminders to set up the big 800-lb gorilla question.




