TTIP will provide multilateral economic
growth and such growth will lead to
sustainable development in almost all
areas of trade, the opponents of TTIP
claim the other way around. According
to the allegations of the opponents,
in the event TTIP comes into effect,
local competent authorities will have a
weaker position in terms of regulating
the internal market and determining
trading rules and procedures. The
opponents in the EU claim that such
practical problems will arise given the
fact that the US and EU have different
standards and perspectives on protection
of the consumers, environment and
public society. It is further emphasized
the decision-making power of the local
competent authorities on various aspects
because the new standards of TTIP will
become a benchmark not just for the
international trade relationship between
the US and the EU, but for any potential
treaties and arrangements which may
be established by them with other
third parties.
The main issue under discussion is
the potential risk of putting the corporate
interests of countries before the states'
and citizens' own interests. For example,
hygiene and safety standards in the
food and agriculture sectors or data
protection standards are quite different
in the US and EU, and thus it is difficult
to harmonize the two. It is alleged that
recognition of mutual standards on
the areas of environment, health, private
data protection and consumer/worker
rights will not be beneficiary due to the
conflicting standards between the EU
and the US.
and EU may still have a common goal
to attain. Needless to say, the trade load
has shifted to the East and China by
having lower standards and cheaper
labor force as compared to the US and
the EU. This area has become a leading
party in a very short time, especially
in the commerce of locally produced
industrial products. So, with the desire
of promoting sustainable growth in their
economies by removing the trade and