I have a short Cato paper discussing how the TTIP could actually get done, despite a few big hurdles it is facing. I tried to be optimistic, maintain a positive outlook, and suggest a way forward. However, I should note that what I hear from people who actually are insiders to the process (which I am not!) is mostly negative these days. Reports in Inside U.S. Trade read the same way.
The hurdles I mentioned in the paper are ISDS, GIs and regulatory issues. The short answer I give is to take out ISDS and GIs (there's just no middle ground here); and try to quickly get on the same page with regulatory issues, or remove them to a different forum.
Another hurdle might be human rights. This is from Embassy Magazine:
A clause that could lead to an eventual suspension of the Canada-European Union free trade deal over human rights issues has found its way into a recently announced political agreement between the two sides—despite Canada’s initial objection, Embassy has learned.
Several European Union officials in Brussels, the EU nerve centre, have confirmed the clause is included in the so-called Strategic Partnership Agreement, a deal that outlines an overarching framework for Canada-EU co-operation on various global issues, including security, energy, research and innovation as well as the Arctic.
...
Embassy reported in May 2013 about Canadian concerns over proposed text in the SPA that would link trade to human rights protection and nuclear non-proliferation, and which would allow the EU to suspend CETA if it found Canada wasn’t living up to human rights or non-proliferation standards. Canada could do the same to the EU.
...
The EU has been using this model in its political framework agreements with countries less developed than the 28 member states as a way to condition trade and development assistance to a country’s performance in maintaining international human rights and non-proliferation commitments.
The EU has argued this formula must be maintained with Canada as well in order to be consistent and to avoid setting a precedent that would jeopardize talks with other countries in the future.
It insisted both publicly and behind the scenes on this approach, aiming to reassure Canadians about the unlikelihood of the clause ever being invoked.
...
The technicalities
The SPA outlines a series of measures that could be taken by either side in case of violations of human rights or nuclear non-proliferation commitments. The issue could be dealt with institutionally, through dialogue or, if no solution is found, the SPA could also be suspended, the EU official explained.
In the event that the SPA is suspended, either side could also go further if the situation requires it, including by terminating the trade deal. But the CETA could only be suspended under its own rules, enshrined within the trade agreement, the official added.
...
... The operative paragraphs are only within SPA, the EU official explained. In other words, the suspensive clause is only in the SPA and can be technically used to suspend both agreements.
So Canada has apparently agreed to a human rights clause in relation to the SPA/CETA. Will the U.S. accept something similar in the TTIP? When I say the U.S, I'm thinking in particular of Congress. And if not, will the EU agree to leave it out? They seem pretty insistent. As with ISDS and GIs, compromise here is necessary, but is going to be a challenge.
