<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Verdana"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm">http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm</a><br>
<br>
How US </font><font face="Verdana">sees </font><font
face="Verdana">trade rules </font><font face="Verdana"> </font><font
face="Verdana">being </font><font face="Verdana">basically </font><font
face="Verdana">the rules for the Internet, because the Internet is
the 'new shipping lanes' for global trade, and so on.<br>
<br>
And of course, the rival model is China's and how, and see the
blunt shift here, it is bad for human rights and the open
Internet.<br>
<br>
Open trade and open Internet are basically one - and so you choose
the side you want to be on (So much for the Seattle protesters,
and the World Social Forum and 'Occupy' kinds, who stand against
unbridled 'open' trade!) <br>
<br>
Also, since the US is on the right side, it is clear that it is
the US who will make the international trade rules, and thus, by
derivation, the Internet rules.<br>
<br>
And when they call the Internet as the new shipping lanes, to many
of us the connection to colonialism comes through strongly, and
somewhat chillingly. But then the US now has the global 1 percent
across the world supporting new forms of hegemonies, of which the
WEF is a good symbol. <br>
<br>
The US establishment's case is rather clear and precise. The rest
of the world, or people in general (including of the US), need to
state theirs. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________<br>
</font><br>
<span class="document_type_-_speaker_writer">Remarks</span>
<div id="templateFields"><span class="multiple_speakers">
<div id="grid"><span class="official_s_name">Ambassador Daniel
A. Sepulveda</span><br>
<span class="official_s_title-">Deputy Assistant Secretary and
U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and
Information Policy</span><span class="official_s_bureau">, Bureau
of Economic and Business Affairs</span><span
class="official_s_office"></span></div>
</span> </div>
<div id="templateFields"><span class="audience">U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and Association of American Chambers of Commerce in
Latin America<br>
</span> </div>
<div id="templateFields"><span class="location-">Los Angeles, CA<br>
</span> </div>
<div id="date_long">February 11, 2015</div>
<h1 class="entry-title">Trade Promotion and the Fight to Preserve
the Open Internet</h1>
<br>
<ul class="entry-meta">
<li> <a href="http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/rm/2015/237436.htm"
data-stat="rv-banner-meta-original"> original </a> </li>
</ul>
<div class="entry-content">
<div>
<div id="centerblock">
<p>Three billion people are connected to the Internet today.
And trillions of devices are set to join them in the
Internet of Things. Together, the connectivity of people and
machines is enabling economic and social development around
the world on a revolutionary scale.</p>
<p>But it will take open markets, the cooperation of leaders
around the world, the participation of a vibrant and diverse
range of stakeholders, and strong trade agreements, with
language preserving the free flow of information, to protect
the Internet’s potential as the world’s engine for future
growth, both at home and abroad.</p>
<p>As the number of Internet users worldwide has ballooned
from 2 to 3 billion, the increase in Internet use creates
significant economic potential. The Obama Administration is
working to unlock the promise of e-commerce, keep the
Internet free and open, promote competitive access for
telecommunications suppliers, and set digital trade
rules-of-the-road by negotiating new trade agreements. Trade
Promotion Authority legislation and the pending trade
agreements we expect Congress to consider over the coming
months and years will provide that kind of protection. These
agreements aim to ensure that the free flow of information
and data are the default setting for nations. This will
preserve the architecture that has empowered the Internet
and global communications to fuel economic growth at home
and abroad. It is in our interest, across parties and
ideology, to ensure we move forward and approve TPA and the
pending agreements for many reasons, but promoting the
preservation and growth of global communications and the
open Internet is one of the strongest.</p>
<p>Senator Ron Wyden, the ranking member on the Senate Finance
Committee, has made the argument well, stating, "America’s
trade negotiating objectives must reflect the fact that the
Internet represents <i>the shipping lane</i> for 21st
Century goods and services… Trade in digital goods and
services is growing and driving economic growth and job
creation all around the country. U.S digital exports are
beating imports by large margins, but outdated trade rules
threaten this growth by providing opportunities for
protectionist policies overseas. The U.S. has the
opportunity to establish new trade rules that preserve the
Internet as a platform to share ideas and for expanding
commerce..."</p>
<p>Senator Wyden is absolutely correct. Our pending agreements
with nations in the Pacific community will establish rules
for the preservation of those virtual shipping lanes as
enablers of the transport of services and ideas, allowing
startups and the voices of everyday people to challenge
incumbent power in markets and ideas.</p>
<p>If we are successful, the partnership of nations across the
Trans-Pacific Partnership and Trans-Atlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership regions coming behind agreements to
preserve the free flow of information will serve as a
powerful counterweight to authoritarian governments around
the globe that have demonstrated a clear willingness to
interfere with open markets and an open Internet. And make
no mistake about it, if we do not seize every opportunity at
our disposal to win commitments to an open, global Internet,
we risk letting others set the rules of the road.</p>
<p>Authoritarian regimes view the Internet’s openness as a
threatening and destabilizing influence. The Russian
government, just last month, pressured social media
companies to block access to pages used to organize peaceful
political protests. In China, authorities have blocked Gmail
and Google’s search engine. In addition to ongoing and
systematic efforts to control content and punish Chinese
citizens who run afoul of political sensitivities, such
measures are an effort to further diminish the Chinese
people’s access to information, while effectively favoring
Chinese Internet companies by blocking other providers from
accessing its market. And we know they are urging others to
take similar action. These trade barriers harm commerce and
slow economic growth, and they produce socially oppressive
policies that inhibit freedom.</p>
<p>The rules of the road for commerce, and Internet-enabled
trade and e-commerce, are up for grabs in Asia. We’re
working harder than ever to bring home trade agreements that
will unlock opportunities by eliminating barriers to U.S.
exports, trade, and investment while raising labor,
environment, and other important standards across the board.
Right now, China and others are negotiating their own trade
agreements and seeking to influence the rules of commerce in
the region and beyond. These trade agreements fail to meet
the high standards that we strive for in our free trade
agreements, including protection for workers’ rights and the
environment. And they don’t protect intellectual property
rights or maintain a free and open Internet. This will put
our workers and our businesses at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>We know that both old and new American businesses, small
and large alike, are dependent on the global Internet as the
enabler of access to previously unreachable consumers. In
the U.S. alone, American Internet companies and their global
community of users contribute over $141 billion in annual
revenue to the overall U.S. GDP, simultaneously employing
6.6 million people. And the Internet is not simply about the
World Wide Web, it is the communications platform for
managing global supply chains, distributing services, and
acquiring the market information necessary to succeed
anywhere.</p>
<p>Many countries no longer primarily produce products.
Rather, businesses produce product components and provide
services, many of which are delivered digitally. In order to
remain competitive globally and promote the capacity of
businesses to innovate, the United States and our partners
in the Western Hemisphere must build the Americas into a
shared, digitally connected, integrated platform for global
success. By working with our trade partners in Latin America
and Asia to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership we are
advancing this vision and making it a reality. We will set
the standards with twenty-first century trade agreements.</p>
<p>We know that not everyone is convinced of the merits of
open markets. And to win their hearts and minds, we have to
demonstrate and communicate how these two values – open
markets and the open Internet - are interconnected. And we
have to show that Trade Promotion Authority and our
agreements embrace the values that underpin the Internet
today.</p>
<p>As Ambassador Froman has said, “Trade, done right, is part
of the solution, not part of the problem.” And, because it
is true, our progressive friends should recognize that the
fight for open markets is the position most consistent with
our progressive tradition and values.</p>
<p>It was Woodrow Wilson who said, “The program of the world's
peace, therefore, is our program; and that program, the only
possible program, as we see it, is this” and he listed his
fourteen points. Among them was number three: “The removal,
so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the
establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all
the nations consenting to the peace and associating
themselves for its maintenance.”</p>
<p>It was Franklin Roosevelt who asked the New Deal Congress
for the first grant of trade negotiating authority.</p>
<p>In his remarks at the signing of the Trade Expansion Act of
1962, it was JFK who said, “Increased economic activity
resulting from increased trade will provide more job
opportunities for our workers. Our industry, our
agriculture, our mining will benefit from increased export
opportunities as other nations agree to lower their tariffs.
Increased exports and imports will benefit our ports,
steamship lines, and airlines as they handle an increased
amount of trade. Lowering of our tariffs will provide an
increased flow of goods for our American consumers. Our
industries will be stimulated by increased export
opportunities and by freer competition with the industries
of other nations for an even greater effort to develop an
efficient, economic, and productive system. The results can
bring a dynamic new era of growth.”</p>
<p>And it is consistent with the sentiments of these giants in
our tradition, our progressive tradition, that President
Obama most recently stated, “Twenty-first century
businesses, including small businesses, need to sell more
American products overseas. Today, our businesses export
more than ever, and exporters tend to pay their workers
higher wages. But as we speak, China wants to write the
rules for the world’s fastest-growing region. That would put
our workers and our businesses at a disadvantage. Why would
we let that happen? We should write those rules. We should
level the playing field. That’s why I’m asking both parties
to give me trade promotion authority to protect American
workers, with strong new trade deals from Asia to Europe
that aren’t just free, but are also fair. It’s the right
thing to do.”</p>
<p>Friends, we have both a political and economic interest in
promoting open markets and an open Internet. Preservation of
these ideals is and should remain a bipartisan, and broadly
held goal. It is critical to our future and contained within
the language we are asking Congress to approve.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>