When a group of Malaysians staged a protest against the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), some derided them as being misguided, thinking that Malaysia should not oppose a so-called trade pact that might spell the end of privileges given to bumiputera companies and thereby raise the country's competitiveness.

However, similar demonstrations also took place in American and Canadian cities with a view to putting pressure on Washington and Ottawa not to sign the TPPA which could eventually undermine domestic businesses.

Overall, more than a dozen North American cities joined in last Friday to commemorate the International Day of Action against Corporate Globalisation, and what happened in Kuala Lumpur was just part of it.
 
For instance, activists in Toronto marched outside the Mexican and American consulates, urging a boycott of the TPPA negotiations currently under way, and questioning even the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) that has been in existence since 1994.
 
The raison d'être for these movements is simple: be it TPPA or Nafta, these arrangements only benefit the multinationals and global conglomerates, driving workers out of jobs while killing small and medium businesses.
 
In the context of Canada, a successful conclusion of the TPPA negotiations could give gigantic corporates full rights to explore the timber industry, while future Canadian governments could be ensnared by unending lawsuits should any of them dare to legislate tighter environmental laws in order to curb rampant logging activities.
 
The TPPA would only concede more rights to capitalists and corporations whose loyalty is of no fixed abode as they globetrot for more revenues, to the extent that even governments could be brought to their knees.
 
This is not something fanciful made up by TPPA opponents to advance their argument.

In fact, a report by the Globe and Mail, one of the largest newspapers in Canada, stated that in November 2012 Lone Pine Resources was already studying the possibilities of suing the Canadian government for C$250 million as compensation under Nafta's Chapter 11 which “allows investors from the US and Mexico to take government policies or actions that hurt their interests before a panel of arbitrators”.
 
Would Malaysians want the same fate to befall our country now that the shameless and brazen exploitation of Sarawak timber is already making headlines worldwide?

Would we just turn a blind eye while Putrajaya appears to have no qualms at signing away deals that could erode further the rights of the native populations to customary land?
 
'TPPA not the remedy'
 
We know Sarawak has lost much of its natural resources under Taib Mahmud's 33 years of corrupt rule, but the remedy for this is not for Malaysia to sign up to an ostensibly trade pact that could open up the resource-rich state for global conglomerates to exploit further what Taib and his cronies (including a good number of Chinese tycoons) have left off.

Rather, laws must be made more stringent so that all Malaysian states would see their natural resources better protected and safeguarded from unscrupulous political leaders and businessmen.
 
The thing is, if the TPPA go ahead and Malaysia becomes part of it, even a Pakatan-led government would not have a free hand in enacting more environmental-friendly laws without risking the consequences of being sued in court by multinationals from the TPPA countries.
 
If people in an advanced and developed country like Canada too are alarmed over their natural resources, what makes Malaysians think we would be in a better position to propel Malaysia's competitiveness to a new height through the TPPA?
 
In this regard, I echo fully the concerns of Nobuhiko Suto - a former Japanese lawmaker - who warned recently that the TPPA would only open Malaysia up to be sued by international corporations under the investor-state dispute settlement system.

Suto added also that special rights to the indigenous tribes and the Malay reserve land policy could be put at risk under the TPPA.
 
According to him, “It is an attempt by the US to change local laws, policies, and systems to give an advantage to giant American corporations who want to operate in a certain country.”
 
No doubt, non-bumiputera communities harbour considerable grievances over the abuse of the New Economic Policy (NEP) which should be looked into and rectified to make it more effective, equitable, and fair.

However, the TPPA cannot be perceived as a corrective measure for it would only worsen the rights of the indigenous populations to customary land, not to mention the consequences of more acrimonious inter-ethnic relations in Malaysia.
 
The TPPA is basically a blanket mechanism that covers all industrial sectors without helping Malaysia overcome its specific challenges.

I agree that Proton - the national car - and Malaysia Airlines have been sucking up too much public monies, and that they should be allowed to redeem themselves through mergers with foreign or regional giants, but the TPPA includes far more than just certain industries which may have been utterly unnecessary in the first place.
 
Malaysia is blessed with vast land and immense resources that need to be properly managed and not sold out, but the whole purpose of the TPPA is to empower the global corporations (especially those based in the US) while weakening, and dismantling even, Malaysia's integrity.

It is a poisonous deal that we certainly can do without.


JOSH HONG studied politics at London Metropolitan University and the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. A keen watcher of domestic and international politics, he longs for a day when Malaysians will learn and master the art of self-mockery, and enjoy life to the full in spite of politicians.