Dana Gabriel, Contributor
Activist Post

As part of the Beyond the Border initiative, the U.S. and Canada are strengthening cybersecurity cooperation. In a move that received little attention, both countries recently announced a joint cybersecurity action plan. Cyber threats know no national borders which has made the issue an important security concern. A fully integrated North American security perimeter would be entrusted with preventing and responding to any such attacks.

One of the key priorities identified in the November 2011 Beyond the Border Action Plan is cybersecurity. The agreement lays the framework for enhancing U.S.-Canada, “bilateral cyber-security cooperation to better protect vital government and critical digital infrastructure and increase both countries’ ability to respond jointly and effectively to cyber incidents. This will be achieved through joint projects and operational efforts, including joint briefings with the private sector and other stakeholders, and the enhancement of real-time information sharing between operation centres.” The deal will also works towards strengthening, “cooperation on international cyber-security and Internet governance issues to promote prosperity, enhance security and preserve openness in our networked world.”

Merging cyber threat strategies would force Canada to further bring its security practices in line with American ones and under the reach of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

On October 26, Public Safety Canada and the DHS released a Cybersecurity Action Plan which represents a key commitment under the Beyond the Border agreement. A press release explained that the specific goals include, “enhancing collaboration on cyber incident management between each country’s cyber security operations centres, improving information sharing and engagement with the private sector, and continuing the ongoing collaboration between Canada and the U.S. on the promotion of cyber security awareness to the public.” The new joint action plan promotes a shared approach to cybersecurity and digital critical infrastructure protection. Building on these initiatives, both countries also seek to further integrate cyber capabilities into military command structures.

Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta authorized the creation of the Joint Cyber Center (JCC) run by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and U.S. Northern Command. The JCC will bring together personnel from the intelligence, operations and command control systems divisions. The aim is, “To better integrate cyber into the headquarters missions by improving situational awareness in the cyber domain, improving the defense of the commands’ networks and providing cyber consequence response and recovery support to civil authorities.”

In June, DefenseNews reported that Secretary Panetta, “approved a new organizational framework, a plan designed as a ‘first step’ towards standardized cyber operations.” This includes having a JCC at each geographic combatant command which is part of ongoing efforts to not only boost U.S., but continental cyber defense capabilities. In the near future, the U.S. and Canada could create a binational “cyber-NORAD” to protect North America from shared threats.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) released an updated Policy on Cyber Defence in June 2011. According to NATO’s website, “This revised policy offers a coordinated approach to cyber defence across the Alliance with a focus on preventing cyber attacks and building resilience.” It will act as the framework, “for how NATO will assist Allies, upon request, in their own cyber defence efforts, with the aim to optimise information sharing and situational awareness, collaboration and secure interoperability.” The new policy also, “sets the principles on NATO’s cyber defence cooperation with partner countries, international organisations, the private sector and academia.”

In May of this year, the Chicago Summit Declaration, “committed to provide the resources and complete the necessary reforms to bring all NATO bodies under centralised cyber protection.” It also pledged to, “further integrate cyber defence measures into Alliance structures and procedures.” U.S.-Canadian military cooperation also extends through NATO and this includes in the realm of cybersecurity.

There are reports that President Barack Obama may be close to issuing a cybersecurity executive order as a means of bypassing Congress. Under the guise of cybersecurity, the U.S. and Canada have been individually pushing draconian legislation domestically which would grant government agencies sweeping new powers. The implications would be far reaching and pose a risk to privacy and civil liberties. Through the Beyond the Border initiative both countries are pursuing an integrated cybersecurity agenda. As they move forward and address common threats to North America, cyber and perimeter security will be further defined and dominated by U.S. interests.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel
Taking the U.S.-Canada Partnership to the Next Level
Pretext for a North American Homeland Security Perimeter
Strengthening U.S.-Canada Security Interests in North America
Perimeter Security and an Integrated North American Command

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel
Activist Post

Some of the corporate interests that are steering the U.S.-Canada Beyond the Border integration agenda are not quite satisfied with its progress so far and they would like the implementation process to be accelerated. The bilateral initiative which was launched almost two years ago promotes a shared vision for perimeter security. It seeks to improve information sharing between security agencies.

Under the agreement, both countries are moving towards a coordinated entry/exit system and are developing a harmonized cargo security strategy. In addition, the U.S. and Canada are strengthening integrated cross-border intelligence sharing and law enforcement operations. Canada’s own electronic eavesdropping agency is also working hand and hand with the NSA. They are both increasing data collection and surveillance in the North American Homeland.

Minister of Transport Lisa Raitt gave a speech at the Association of Canadian Port Authorities annual conference in August. She stated that, “Ensuring the security of our transportation systems is key to strengthening the Canada-U.S. trade relationship. To build prosperity through trade, businesses and governments on both sides of our shared border must have confidence that our transportation systems will work together to meet our mutual security needs. That is why Canada and the United States are working closely together to implement the Beyond the Border Action Plan.”

While she didn’t reference the Maritime Commerce Resilience Project by name, Raitt acknowledged that the U.S. and Canada are, “developing a joint cross-border approach to help maritime commerce recover faster after a major disruption.” This would include a significant natural disaster or terrorist attack that impacts North America. She also mentioned a pilot program underway at the Port of Prince Rupert which is part of efforts to harmonize the cargo screening process between the U.S. and Canada. Both countries continue to advance this agenda through the Integrated Cargo Security Strategy, a key component of the Beyond the Border deal.

The Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) is an influential organization that lobbies the government on behalf of Canada’s largest corporations. Throughout the years, they have tirelessly pushed for deeper continental integration. In a letter sent to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, John Manley, President and CEO of the CCCE lays out what some of the Conservative Party’s priorities should be in the next session of parliament. As far as the North American partnership goes, the CCCE called on Canada, the U.S. and Mexico to further strengthen and renew their trilateral relationship. This includes forging a North American energy advantage through projects such as the Keystone XL pipeline which it noted was, “An essential step is the development of a comprehensive strategy to expand and enhance cross-border energy infrastructure.”

The CCCE’s letter to Prime Minister Harper also stressed that, “The Canada-U.S. Beyond the Border and Regulatory Cooperation initiatives that you helped launch two years ago hold much promise, although so far tangible benefits have been few and far between.” In other words, big business who have to most to gain from these agreements want to speed up the whole process of North American integration.

At the end of June, the Department of Homeland Security and the Canada Border Services Agency began Phase II of the Entry/Exit System, a commitment of the Beyond the Border action plan. The project builds on Phase I which involved collecting and exchanging biographic information at four selected land border crossings. Phase II has been expanded to include the exchange of biographic entry data collected from third-country nationals and permanent residents of Canada and the U. S. at all common ports of entry. In 2014, they will also start sharing biometric information at the border. Both countries are moving closer to fully implementing a biometric entry and exit data system. They are laying the groundwork for the creation of a North American biometric ID card. The U.S. and Canada are further merging databases and are expanding surveillance and intelligence gathering activities.

On July 12, Montana Democratic Senator Jon Tester chaired the hearing, Protecting our Northern Border: Enhancing Collaboration and Building Local Partnerships. The meeting emphasized how, “Securing such an expansive border requires a multi-faceted approach. In addition to a smart and effective deployment of technology and manpower, we must also be doing everything we can to ensure federal, local, state and Canadian partners are working very closely and collaboratively.” It also described other, “opportunities for collaboration and cost-sharing, including stronger partnerships between agencies, local officials, tribes and the private sector.”

Before the hearings took place, Senator Tester talked to the CBC about the prospect of deploying a high-tech cable sensor along the U.S.-Canada border. This would include the installation of the Blue Rose in-ground perimeter defense security system. The low-level surveillance radar is based on fiber optic technology which is used, “to detect sound and vibration transmitted by intruders such as people walking or running and moving vehicles near the sensor.” The increased militarization of the northern border is forcing Canada to further comply with U.S.-style security measures.

A controversial U.S.-Canada cross-border law enforcement initiative which is essentially a land based version of the Shiprider program has been delayed due to legal ramifications. Under the Beyond the Border perimeter security plan, the Next Generation pilot project which would create integrated teams in areas such as intelligence and criminal investigations was scheduled to be launched in the summer of 2012. According to an RCMP memo, the U.S. is demanding that its agents taking part in the bilateral undertaking be exempt from Canadian law. This has raised serious concerns about transparency, accountability and responsibility. It is yet another attempt by the U.S. to chip away at Canadian sovereignty.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

An article by Michael Harris warned that, “Once you give the U.S a platform to carry weapons and perform investigative duties inside our country, how far will they push the next envelope?” The pilot project is part of the process of further acclimating U.S. policing activities in Canada. As part of a North American security perimeter, both countries continue to expand the nature and scope of joint law enforcement operations, along with intelligence collection and sharing.

An example on how North America is being increasingly viewed a single entity occurred several months back during a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein displayed a map that was designed by the National Security Agency (NSA) which showed domestic and global terror activity that it has allegedly helped disrupt. When it came to North America, the diagram identified Canada and Mexico as part of the U.S. Homeland. While the move garnered a lot of speculation, RT pointed out, “Whatever the reason for the NSA’s creation of the Homeland, the spy agency has already been condemned for failing to respect the sovereignty of other nations through its extensive data-collection efforts.”

The NSA is also working in close partnership with Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC). An article from Global Research explained that, “the two organizations have integrated personnel—i.e. swap personnel to improve seamless collaboration. They also share Internet surveillance programs.” It went on to say that the NSA, “shares information on Canadians’ communications with Canada’s national security apparatus in exchange for information that CSEC gathers on Americans.”

The never ending war on terrorism is being used to justify the huge police state security apparatus being assembled. This includes the militarization of the northern border and the creation of a North American security perimeter. In the name of national security, there has been a steady erosion of civil liberties and privacy rights in both the U.S. and Canada. Our freedoms are under assault. The amount of information being collected and shared on all aspects of our daily lives has expanded and is being stored in massive databases. Sweeping new surveillance powers targeting terrorists and other criminals are being increasingly turned against those who are critical of government policy. There is a concerted effort to demonize political opponents, activists, protesters and other peaceful groups. We are witnessing the criminalization of dissent where those who oppose the government’s agenda are being labelled as terrorists and a threat to security.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:

• Canada Being Assimilated Into a U.S. Dominated North American Security Perimeter


• U.S.-Canada Harmonizing Border Security and Immigration Measures


• U.S.-Canada Integrated Cybersecurity Agenda


• The Pretext for a North American Homeland Security Perimeter

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel, Contributor
Activist Post

Both Canada and Mexico have been invited to join the U.S., along with other countries already engaged in negotiations which will deepen trade and economic ties within the Asia-Pacific region. Such a deal would surpass NAFTA in size and scope.

The U.S. led talks which have been criticized for their secretive nature, could be used to update aspects of existing trade pacts among member nations. This would provide the perfect opportunity for a backdoor renegotiation of NAFTA without officially having to open it back up.

After expressing interest in joining trade talks back in November 2011, NAFTA partners have been invited to join the U.S. backed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which also includes Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk welcomed both Mexico and Canada into the TPP fold.

He noted that, “Mexico has assured the United States that it is prepared to conclude a high-standard agreement that will include issues that were not covered in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).” He added, “Inviting Canada to join the TPP negotiations presents a unique opportunity for the United States to build upon this already dynamic trading relationship. Through TPP, we are bringing the relationship with our largest trading partner into the 21st century.” A joint statement by the U.S. and Canada acknowledged that, “The TPP presents an opportunity to conclude a high standard agreement that will build on the commitments of NAFTA.”

The Council of Canadians who continue to be vocal opponents of NAFTA and other trade deals that follow the same flawed template, are strongly against Canada’s entry into the TPP. Its national chairperson, Maude Barlow warned that this, “could force Canada to change its drug policies, its copyright policies, its environmental and public health rules – all without going through the normal parliamentary process.”

The organization cautioned how, “TPP negotiations could mean up-front concessions in a number of areas, including intellectual property rights, where the U.S. is making considerable demands on TPP member countries that will undermine access to essential medicines so that its multinational drug firms can increase profits.”

They also emphasized that, “Supply management, which guarantees fair wages and stable prices for farmers in non-exporting sectors, is too valuable to Canada to sacrifice on a negotiating table.”

Others have pointed out that it is important as a buy-local program, as well as key to Canada’s food security and food sovereignty. The Council of Canadians maintains that, “the TPP is by and large a NAFTA renegotiation but on U.S. President Obama’s terms.”

Not surprisingly, the CanadianCouncil of Chief Executives, an organization that lobbies the government on behalf of the country’s largest corporations, welcomed the announcement that Canada has been invited to join the TPP talks. Its President and CEO John Manley stated that:

By signing on to the TPP, the federal government has taken an historic leap toward securing Canada’s long-term strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region. 

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce have also applauded Canada and Mexico’s entry into the TPP. Its President and CEO Thomas Donohue argued that, “negotiating the TPP together is an excellent strategic decision for North America.” Back in January, the Council of the Americas explained how, “it makes little sense for the United States to enter into potentially significant trade arrangements with countries in the Pacific region without our NAFTA partners.” They view the TPP as a “promising vehicle to support the updating of our bilateral and trilateral trading relationships within North America to the high standards of twenty-first century free-trade agreements.”

In his article, Will invitation to join TPP talks lead to NAFTA 2.0?, Peter Clark one of Canada’s leading international trade strategists concluded that, “A successful TPP would allow NAFTA to essentially be re-opened without the optics of it actually being re-opened.” He went on to say, “The business leaders in all three NAFTA countries, as strong supporters of TPP invitations to Canada and Mexico, understand that after nearly 20 years, modernization of NAFTA is needed. For rules of origin, supply chain management and manufacturing integration.” Clark stressed that, “All Canadians should be clear about this – TPP is the negotiation of NAFTA 2.0 and it could have major implications for Canada-USA trade relations.”

Meanwhile, both countries are implementing the Beyond the Border Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness Action Plan which has been described as the most significant steps forward in U.S.-Canada cooperation since NAFTA.Christopher Sands of the Hudson Institute observed how, “The TPP negotiating agenda is at once similar to the bilateral agenda that Canada and the United States are pursuing, and also more ambitious and multilateral.”

In May, the TPP held its twelfth round of negotiations with the next set of talks scheduled to take place in San Diego, California from July 2-10. So far, there has been a real lack of transparency, but what is clear is that the TPP seeks to go beyond other trade agreements. According to a leaked text by Public Citizen, it would expand on the investor privileges found in NAFTA, granting corporations more power and further threatening the sovereign rights of member nations. In the meantime, the U.S. continues to spearhead TPP negotiations as a way of countering growing Chinese influence. The door is open for other countries to join which is why it is considered to be a stepping stone to a larger free trade area of the Asia-Pacific and an important part of the international corporate globalization agenda.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

Trade deals such as NAFTA and now the TPP are being used to smuggle through a new setof transnational corporate rights, trapping nations in a web of treaties that further trump their own laws. All too often, these agreements fail to deliver on the promise of prosperity and only serve to accelerate the path towards economic enslavement. Globalization has meant sacrificing self-sufficiency and sovereignty for foreign dependency which is a sure path to world government.

Related Articles By Dana Gabriel:
Canada and Mexico to Join U.S. in NAFTA of the Pacific
Building Blocks Towards an Asia-Pacific Union
NAFTA Partners Take Steps to Boost Trilateral Relationship
U.S. Economic, Political and Military Expansion in Asia-Pacific

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at beyourownleader.blogspot.com

You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Dana Gabriel, Contributor
Activist Post

Overshadowed by the upcoming American election are reports that the U.S. and European Union (EU) are working towards launching official negotiations on a deal that would further deepen their transatlantic trade partnership.

According to a recent Reuters article, “Europe and the United States are set to launch trade talks early next year to deepen the world’s largest trading relationship.” It goes on to say that, “An expert group co-chaired by EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht and U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk will in December issue a report recommending pursuing talks.” An EU official explained that, “The report will recommend the negotiation of a comprehensive agreement between the United States and the European Union.” Last week, the European Parliament also approved a resolution calling for talks on a possible trade deal with the U.S. to begin in 2013. The U.S. and EU have already made incremental strides with regards to economic integration.

With renewed political support, momentum for a transatlantic trade accord is building.

In 2007, U.S. President George W. Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel established the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) to help eliminate trade barriers and harmonize standards. The move was seen as a step towards creating a single transatlantic market. Throughout the years, the TEC has advanced deep U.S.-EU integration. It has helped align policies in areas of investment, accounting, import safety, supply chain security, automobile standards, renewable energy, as well as others. The TEC continues to guide and stimulate transatlantic economic convergence.

At the U.S.-EU Summit in November 2011, leaders from both sides directed the TEC to create a High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth. This was viewed as another step forward to an eventual free trade deal. The Working Group was tasked with identifying, “policies and measures to increase U.S.-EU trade and investment to support mutually beneficial job creation, economic growth, and international competitiveness.” It was entrusted with examining options in areas of, “Conventional barriers to trade in goods, such as tariffs and tariff-rate quotas; Reduction, elimination, or prevention of barriers to trade in goods, services, and investment; Opportunities for enhancing the compatibility of regulations and standards; Reduction, elimination, or prevention of unnecessary ‘behind the border’ non-tariff barriers to trade in all categories; Enhanced cooperation for the development of rules and principles on global issues of common concern and also for the achievement of shared economic goals relating to third countries.” A U.S.-EU trade agreement could serve as a model for the rest of the world, setting common standards on regulations, tariffs and investment rules.

In June, the U.S.-EU High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth issued an interim report which endorsed beginning talks on a comprehensive trade deal. It outlined categories that a potential agreement should include such as tariffs, non-tariff barriers, regulatory issues, services, investment, procurement, intellectual property rights and rules. A Joint U.S.-EU Statement urged, “the Group to complete its work as quickly as possible, including consultations with public and private stakeholders, in accordance with the respective processes of both sides, with the goal of reaching a recommendation to Leaders later this year on a decision as to the negotiations.” At a press conference following the G20 Summit in Mexico, President Barack Obama also acknowledged that, “the United States and the European Union agreed to take the next step in our work towards the possible launching of negotiations on an agreement to strengthen our already very deep trade and investment partnership.” An official announcement is expected sometime after the U.S. election and if trade talks begin early next year, a deal could be signed before the end of 2014.

The U.S.-EU partnership remains the foundation for an international economic order. Regardless of whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney wins the upcoming election, it appears as if U.S.-EU trade negotiations will become a priority. More globalization is not the solution to our financial woes. Such an agreement would serve to further erode U.S. sovereignty and economic freedom. If you factor in that the EU already has a trade deal with Mexico and is close to signing one with Canada, combined with a future agreement with the U.S., you then have the basis for a NAFTA-EU free trade zone. This would be an important step in advancing the goal of creating a Transatlantic Union.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:
Growing Opposition to the Canada-EU Trade Agreement
Advancing the Transatlantic Agenda
From NAFTA to CETA: Canada-EU Deep Economic Integration
Spreading NAFTA’s Love Across the Atlantic

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel, Contributor
Activist Post

In a move that signalled the importance placed on the NAFTA partnership, Mexico’s new president visited the U.S. and Canada before his inauguration. This was seen as a step forward in further strengthening political, economic, energy and security ties between all three countries. Other recent high-level meetings and policy papers are also shaping the future of North American integration.

Before his recent trip to the U.S., Mexico’s new President Enrique Pena Nieto emphasized in a Washington Post editorial the opportunity both countries have to build on their economic partnership. He explained that, “in NAFTA we have a solid foundation to further integrate our economies through greater investments in finance, infrastructure, manufacturing and energy.” As part of his government’s strategy to reduce violence, he stated that it is, “important that our countries increase intelligence-sharing and crime-fighting techniques and promote cooperation among law enforcement agencies.” In a White House press release, Pena Nieto invited President Barack Obama to participate in the next North American Leaders Summit which will take place in Mexico sometime in 2013. With regards to U.S.-Mexico relations, Obama said that he was also looking forward to finding ways, “to strengthen our economic ties, our trade ties, our coordination along the border, improving our joint competitiveness, as well as common security issues.”

According to the new policy brief, A New Agenda with Mexico put out by the Woodrow Wilson Center, “declines in illegal immigration and organized crime violence in Mexico, open up an opportunity for U.S. policymakers to deepen the economic relationship.” The report recommended working, “together with Mexico and Canada to strengthen regional competitiveness and to grow North American exports to the world.” It further elaborated on how, “Economic issues can drive the next phase in deepening U.S.-Mexico cooperation. Investments in trusted shipper programs, pre-inspection programs, and enhanced border infrastructure will be crucial.” The study called on Washington to offer more, “support for Mexico’s criminal justice institutions, and strengthen U.S. anti-money laundering efforts in order to combat organized crime and violence.” It also recommended engaging, “Mexico more actively on hemispheric and extra-hemispheric foreign policy issues, ranging from terrorism to international trade and finance, as Mexico’s role as a global power grows.”

In a recent article, Laura Carlsen, director of the Americas Policy Program scrutinized some the new Mexican president’s policy initiatives. In the area of security, she pointed out that, “A real change in paradigm would require two measures that the Pena government has said it will not take: withdrawing the armed forces from counternarcotics efforts and renegotiating security cooperation with the U.S. government.” She noted, “Pena Nieto has reassured the U.S. that his administration will continue the drug war.” Carlsen acknowledged how, “The U.S. government has actively promoted and supported the drug war model of enforcement and interdiction through the Merida Initiative and spearheaded the massive expansion of U.S. counternarcotics activities in the country.” She further added, “U.S. defense, intelligence and security companies depend on the Mexican drug war to obtain multi-million dollar government contracts. The Pentagon and other U.S. agencies have achieved unprecedented freedom to act and even direct actions on Mexican soil.” As far as economic policy goes, Carlsen was also critical of President Pena Nieto’s commitment to deepen rather than fix NAFTA.

Just days before being sworn in as Mexico’s new president, Pena Nieto also visited Canada. In a press statement, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he was looking forward to working with him in improving trade ties, as well as strengthening North American competitiveness and security. In an editorial that appeared in the Globe and Mail, Pena Nieto announced that, “One of the areas with the largest potential for co-operation between Mexico and Canada is energy production and development. Mexico’s energy sector is about to change. I want to enhance its potential by opening it up to national and foreign private investment.” He went on to say, “We can cultivate a closer relationship in this area in order to attain North American energy security.” Canada-U.S. energy issues are also at the forefront. Following his re-election, President Obama is under pressure to make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. The proposed project would carry oil from western Canada to the Texas gulf coast.

In the report, Forging a New Strategic Partnership between Canada and Mexico, Perrin Beatty and Andres Rozental recognized the opportunity both countries have to reshape bilateral relations. Among other things, the policy paper recommended removing the visa requirement for Mexican visitors to Canada. It supported increasing funding to the Anti-Crime Capacity Building Program which is aimed at enhancing the ability, “of government agencies, international organizations and non-governmental entities to prevent and respond to threats posed by transnational criminal activity throughout the Americas.”

In addition, the study called for institutionalizing the North American Leaders Summit and establishing a complementary North American Business Council. It also advocated pursuing further economic cooperation with the U.S. on a pragmatic basis and suggested that, “Ongoing border and regulatory initiatives should be results-oriented and pursued in the most effective way possible, bilateral or trilateral, as the case may be. This policy recommendation can be extended to any North American issue, including continental security perimeter initiatives and anti-narcotics efforts.”

Last month’s NAFTA20 North America Summit examined NAFTA’s evolution, as well as its future prospects. Speaking at the conference, Thomas Donohue President and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged Canadian, Mexican and U.S. leaders to move forward with, “the integration of our markets to further rationalize our supply chains, increase efficiency, and better position North America in the global economy.” He went on to say, “We need to advance regulatory cooperation, streamline our border, and reform immigration practices to ensure the free flow of products, people, capital, and ideas.” Donohue concluded that Canada and Mexico joining the U.S. and other countries as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement would help maximize the strength of the North American market. Meanwhile, there are growing concerns over the secrecy surrounding the TPP. This includes fears that it would grant corporations more power and further put the sovereignty of member nations at risk. It could also be used as a backdoor renegotiation of NAFTA without officially having to open it back up. With the 15th round of talks coming to a close in New Zealand, a final TPP deal could be reached before the end of 2013.

In October, Ottawa hosted the North American Forum. The annual get-together includes, “Canadian, Mexican and American thought leaders, whose purpose is to advance a shared vision of North America, and to contribute to improved relations among the three neighbors.” Much like other secretive gatherings, reporters were barred from entering the Forum’s events. This year’s discussions centered around energy and North American economic competitiveness. Canadian Defence Minister Peter MacKay also delivered a keynote address which focused on continental security issues. He highlighted the bilateral defence relations that the U.S. and Canada enjoy through NORAD. MacKay remarked on how, “Canada and Mexico are also becoming important strategic partners and stronger defence ties with Mexico are a priority.” He praised the first meeting of North American Defence Ministers as a, “great opportunity for our three nations to identify ways to work together to address shared defence and security challenges.” The trilateral defence meeting which took place in March is part of the process of integrating Mexico into NORAD and establishing a North American security perimeter.

While NAFTA partners pursue a trilateral approach with respect to different initiatives, the U.S. also has a separate bilateral border and regulatory agenda with Canada and Mexico. This is part of ongoing efforts to create a common economic and security perimeter. As the incremental path towards a North American Union continues, citizens from the U.S., Canada and Mexico are not being consulted, much less being given a choice in the matter even though the plan threatens the future sovereignty of each country.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel
Using the TPP to Renegotiate and Expand NAFTA
North American Integration and the Ties That Bind
NAFTA Partners Take Steps to Boost Trilateral Relationship
The North American Leaders Summit and Reviving Trilateral Integration

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel, Contributor
Activist Post

The U.S. and Canada have made significant progress in advancing the Beyond the Border deal and continue to implement various perimeter security initiatives. Without much fanfare, they have signed an immigration agreement that would allow them to share biographic and at a later date, biometric information. As part of a North American security perimeter, both countries are further harmonizing border security and immigration measures.

Canada is further taking on U.S. security priorities and this could include a bigger role in the war on terrorism.

It’s been over a year since Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President Barack Obama announced the Beyond the Border and the Regulatory Cooperation Council action plans. On December 14, 2012, the U.S. and Canada issued the Beyond the Border implementation report that highlights the objectives that were achieved over the past year and the work that has yet to be done. It explained that moving forward, “Key future initiatives include harmonizing our trusted trader programs, making significant infrastructure investments at our key land border crossings, fully implementing an entry/exit program at the land border, expanding preclearance operations to the land, rail, and marine domains.” The report also acknowledged challenges facing the Next-Generation pilot project which would permit teams of cross-designated officers to operate on both sides of the border. It was originally scheduled to begin last summer. While steady progress has been made, a lot more work is needed to meet the goals of the Beyond the Border action plan. Over the next several years, other aspects of the deal will be phased-in incrementally with specific deliverables due this year, in 2014 and also in 2015.

Another important facet of the economic and security perimeter agreement is the U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). A progress report to the leaders outlines accomplishments made in aligning regulations in the areas of agriculture and food, transportation, the environment, health and personal care products, workplace chemicals, as well as nanotechnology. This includes cooperation on pilot projects, scientific and technical collaborations and harmonized testing procedures. RCC working groups have developed detailed work plans for the various initiatives with objectives that will be implemented over the next couple of years. In Canada, some fear that deepening regulatory integration with the U.S. could weaken and erode any independent regulatory capacity. This could lead to a race to the bottom with respect to regulatory standards.

In December of last year, the U.S. and Canada signed the Immigration Information Sharing Treaty which is tied to the Beyond the Border deal. Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney stated that the, “agreement builds on our countries’ mutual efforts to protect our common borders and the surrounding perimeter, through improved screening of immigrants and visitors.” He went on to say, “Enhanced information sharing of foreign nationals will protect the safety and security of Canadians by helping us prevent terrorists, violent criminals, and others, who pose a risk, from entering Canada or the United States.” Under the treaty, Canada and the U.S. will share biographic information from third country nationals who apply for a visa, a travel permit or claim asylum. In 2014, it will also include the sharing of biometric information. There are privacy concerns on how far-reaching the data collected will be shared. This threatens the sovereignty of Canada with regards to retaining control over information at its own borders.

On December 28, 2012, President Obama signed into law, the Countering Iran in the Western Hemisphere Act which is designed to curb Iran’s presence and activity in the region. The bill calls on the Department of Homeland Security to work with Canada and Mexico, “to address resources, technology, and infrastructure to create a secure United States border and strengthen the ability of the United States and its allies to prevent operatives from Iran, the IRGC, its Qods Force, Hezbollah, or any other terrorist organization from entering the United States.” Julie Carmichael, spokeswoman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews discussed Canada’s efforts to counter any perceived hostility from Iran in the Americas. She is quoted in the Globe and Mail as saying, “We continually assess threats while co-operating with international partners, including the U.S., to address threats to our common security.” Carmichael added, “The Beyond the Border Action Plan as announced by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama provides a framework to identify threats before they reach North America.” Under the perimeter security deal, Canada is further aligning itself with U.S. foreign policy interests and could be expected to play a greater role in the global war on terror.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

Through the Beyond the Border agreement, the U.S. and Canada are deepening economic and security integration which is laying the foundation for a North American security perimeter. Both countries are also engaged in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations with Mexico and other member nations. This is part of efforts to create a free trade area of the Asia-Pacific and could be used to update and expand NAFTA. Another key priority for U.S.-Canada relations is North America’s energy future. President Obama is expected to make a final decision on the Keystone XL pipeline sometime this year. Meanwhile, there is growing environmental opposition to the proposed project which would carry oil from western Canada to the Texas gulf coast.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:
Merging U.S.-Canada Arctic Foreign Policy
U.S.-Canada Integrated Cybersecurity Agenda
Shaping the Future of North American Integration
Taking the U.S.-Canada Partnership to the Next Level

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Dana Gabriel
Activist Post

The U.S. and EU have agreed to launch negotiations on what would be the world’s largest free trade deal. Such an agreement would be the basis for the creation of an economic NATO and would include trade in goods, services and investment, as well as cover intellectual property rights.

There are concerns that the U.S. could use these talks to push the EU to loosen its restrictions on genetically modified crops and foods. In addition, the deal might serve as a backdoor means to implement ACTA which was rejected by the European Parliament last year. A U.S.-EU Transatlantic trade agreement is seen as a way of countering China’s growing power and is the foundation for a new global economic order.

In his recent State of the Union address, President Barack Obama officially announced that the U.S. would launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union (EU). A joint statement issued by European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and U.S. President Obama explained that, “Through this negotiation, the United States and the European Union will have the opportunity not only to expand trade and investment across the Atlantic, but also to contribute to the development of global rules that can strengthen the multilateral trading system.”

In a separate speech, European Commission President Barroso also emphasized that, “A future deal between the world’s two most important economic powers will be a game-changer. Together, we will form the largest free trade zone in the world. So this negotiation will set the standard – not only for our future bilateral trade and investment, including regulatory issues, but also for the development of global trade rules.”

The decision to pursue a free trade deal was based on the recommendations put forth by the High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth which was created to deepen U.S.-EU economic integration. In their final report, they called on leaders from both sides to, “initiate as soon as possible the formal domestic procedures necessary to launch negotiations on a comprehensive trade and investment agreement.”

According to U.S. and EU officials, talks could start in June with the hopes of completing a deal by the end of 2014. The proposed trade pact would include removing import tariffs, dismantling hurdles to trade in goods, services, and investment, as well as harmonizing regulations and standards. It would also cover intellectual property protection and enforcement. This could be used as an opportunity for a backdoor implementation of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). It was a result of public pressure associated with risks to internet freedom and privacy which lead to ACTA being rejected by the European Parliament in July of 2012. There have already been attempts to use Canada-EU trade negotiations tosneak in parts of ACTA.

Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch Director, Lori Wallach cautioned how U.S.-EU talks, “are aimed at eliminating a list of what multinational corporations call ‘trade irritants’ but the rest of us know as strong food safety, environmental and health safeguards.” She went on to say, “European firms are targeting aspects of the U.S. financial reregulation regime, our stronger drug and medical device safety and testing standards and more.” Wallach further added, “U.S. firms want Europe to gut their superior chemical regulation regime, their tougher food safety rules and labeling of genetically modified foods.”

In a press release, Earth Open Source warned that, “An EU-U.S. free trade deal would obliterate EU safeguards for health and the environment with regard to genetically modified (GM) crops and foods.” Research Director Claire Robinson pointed out, “If the new trade agreement goes through, it will be illegal under World Trade Organisation rules for the EU to have a stronger regulatory system for GMOs than the U.S. system.” This is disturbing considering that in many cases, GM foods in the U.S. do not require any special regulatory oversight or safety tests.

Overshadowed by the proposed U.S.-EU trade deal is ongoing Canada-EU negotiations on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). Despite talks being in their final stages, both sides still have some important gaps to be bridged before a deal can be reached. Thomas Walkom of the Toronto Star acknowledged that, “Europe’s real interest in negotiating a trade deal with Ottawa was to demonstrate to the Americans that a trans-Atlantic free trade pact was possible.” He noted, “EU negotiators will be even more reluctant to make concessions to Canada for fear of weakening their bargaining hand with the Americans.”

Walkom argued that, “Canada is under more pressure to make a deal while Europe is under less.” He concluded that. “A Canada-EU deal seems inevitable. But now, with America in the mix, the terms for Canada may be even less favorable than expected.”

The Globe and Mail recently reported that the EU is demanding additional concessions from Canada before any agreement can be signed. In order to wrap things up, a desperate Canada may be willing to give up even more. This was a bad deal from the start and it would be in their best interest to just walk away from CETA.

In the coming months, you can expect the anti-corporate globalization movement on both sides of the Atlantic to mobilize against the U.S.-EU trade agreement. It is big business and financial institutions who are pushing this deregulation agenda which threatens health, environmental and food safety standards. Just like NAFTA, the proposed U.S.-EU trade deal is also likely to include an investor-state dispute process which would give corporations the right to challenge government policies that restrict their profits. A trade agreement between the U.S. and EU is the building blocks for a new global trading system. If you combine NAFTA, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and a U.S,-EU Transatlantic trade deal, you have the makings for a global free trade area.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:
Deepening the U.S.-EU Transatlantic Trade Partnership
Growing Opposition to the Canada-EU Trade Agreement
Advancing the Transatlantic Agenda
From NAFTA to CETA: Canada-EU Deep Economic Integration

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel
Activist Post

Pressure is mounting on Canada to finish up a long-delayed trade deal with the EU. Despite outstanding issues that still must be settled, there is a final push to try and complete an agreement this summer. If both sides are able to secure a deal, it would lay the groundwork for the proposed U.S.-EU trade pact.

There is the possibility that the U.S.-EU transatlantic trade talks could also include the other NAFTA partners and maybe even other countries. Mexico has already shown interest in joining and if Canada can’t put the final touches on their own agreement with the EU, they might also be part of the negotiations. This would facilitate plans for a coming NAFTA-EU free trade zone and the formation of a transatlantic economic union.

After almost four years, negotiations between Canada and the European Union (EU) on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) are bogged down in the final stages. Both sides have missed numerous deadlines to wrap things up. There is uncertainty when or if CETA will even get done. Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently tried to boost trade talks. He acknowledged that considerable progress towards a free trade deal has already been achieved, but admitted that there are still important issues that need to be resolved before any agreement can be finalized.

Harper also explained that it would be to Canada’s advantage to sign a deal with Europe before the U.S. does. He made the comments while meeting with French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault who was in Ottawa for an official visit. As part of a joint statement, both leaders said they looked forward to a successful conclusion to CETA negotiations. Before his trip to Canada, Ayrault was sent a letter by civil society groups voicing opposition to CETA and the investor protection chapter that would grant corporations the power to challenge government policies that restrict their profits.

There are key issues which remain stumbling blocks and are preventing Canada and the EU from reaching an agreement. Academic researcher and law professor Michael Geist argued that, “with the EU the stronger of the two parties, it doesn’t see any urgency to compromise. In fact, with a growing number of EU negotiations (including talks with the U.S.), compromise with Canada may undermine its position in more economically important deals.”

He also laid out different possibilities for the future of CETA. This includes Canada continuing to hold out hope for a compromise which thus far has failed. They could cave to the EU demands, but this might hurt the Conservatives’ chances in the 2015 election. Geist pointed out another scenario which would involve Canada joining the U.S.-EU talks and CETA being replaced by the Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA). He noted, “The argument for TAFTA would be that Canada is consolidating its negotiations into major agreements covering the Pacific (TPP) and Atlantic (TAFTA) to ensure that it is part of two potential large trading blocks. The danger with this approach is that Canada becomes a bit player in both negotiations with even less leverage to promote Canadian interests.”

During a speech given in November of last year, EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht called on Mexico and the EU to modernize their existing trade agreement. Glyn Moody of TechDirt recently reported that Mexico is now looking to join the U.S.-EU transatlantic deal. This would be one way for the EU and Mexico to upgrade trade relations. Moody emphasized that the U.S. strategy is to, “make TPP the defining international agreement for the entire Pacific region. TAFTA obviously aims to do the same for the Atlantic. As well as establishing the U.S. as the key link between the giant TPP and TAFTA blocs, this double-headed approach would also isolate the main emerging economies — Brazil, Russia, India and above all China.”

Just like the U.S. dominated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Mexico and Canada could also be a part of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership talks. This would make it a true NAFTA-EU trade bloc-level negotiations. There might be an opportunity for other countries to join as Turkey is also pushing to be included in the trade deal.

In a recent article, Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians described how CETA negotiations have laid the groundwork for a U.S.-EU free trade zone. She insisted that it would be a mistake for all three NAFTA countries to be a part of a transatlantic agreement. Barlow warned about some of the same dangers found in CETA that the U.S. could face in their own trade deal with the EU. She stressed how opening up local procurement to the EU should be of great concern to U.S. states and municipal governments. In Canada, a number of municipalities have passed motions demanding that they be excluded from the procurement rules in CETA which would restrict local hiring and purchasing initiatives.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

Barlow also cautioned that an investor protection chapter like the one in CETA would allow European multinationals to sue for any potential profit losses related to U.S. government policies and regulations. This would be worse than NAFTA’s Chapter 11 and as a result, the U.S. would lose more sovereign rights. The Australian government has already stopped the practice of including investor-state dispute resolution procedures in trade agreements and now it’s time for other countries follow suit.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:
Deepening the U.S.-EU Transatlantic Trade Partnership
Growing Opposition to the Canada-EU Trade Agreement
Spreading NAFTA’s Love Across the Atlantic
U.S.-EU Trade Deal is the Foundation For a New Global Economic Order

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Dana Gabriel
Activist Post

In a short period of time, the Pacific Alliance has emerged as one of the leading economic integration projects in Latin America. It aims to succeed where others have failed by creating a gateway to Asian markets and building a Pacific-rim trade deal. The U.S. and Canada are both pursuing deeper ties with the group and have been granted observer status.

This is part of efforts to revive and expand their presence in Latin America. In some areas of integration, the Pacific Alliance has surpassed NAFTA. By merging the two together, it could be used to fill the void left by the collapse of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

The Pacific Alliance was officially launched by Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru in June 2012. Its objectives include to construct, “an area of profound market-driven economic integration that will contribute to the free movement of goods, services, capital and persons.” The group also seeks to, “become a platform for economic and commercial integration as well as political coordination with global outreach, particularly towards the Asia Pacific.”

A key requirement in joining the Pacific Alliance is to have free trade agreements with all existing member states. Costa Rica recently received approval to become a permanent member. Other countries have also shown interest with a growing number requesting observers status. The goal of the Pacific Alliance is to go beyond traditional free trade deals and pursue even more liberalized economic policies.

The May 23, 2013 Pacific Alliance Summit in Cali, Colombia marked the next steps in the consolidation and deepening of the Latin American trade bloc. The presidents of the four founding member countries agreed to remove tariffs on 90 percent of the goods traded between them and to gradually eliminate duties on the remaining 10 percent. They also adopted measures to begin visa-free travel between member states and moved closer towards full labor mobility. In addition, the leaders announced the creation of a cooperation fund and ratified agreements to open up joint embassies and trade offices in Asia and Africa. They also pledged to continue to deepen regional financial integration. The stock markets of Chile, Peru and Colombia have already been merged together and Mexico is expected to join them within the next year. While other Latin American countries are seeking to curb U.S. influence, Pacific Alliance members seem to have a willingness to maintain and increase ties with Washington.

Just days after the Pacific Alliance Summit, Vice President Joe Biden met with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos where he praised the progress the economic bloc has made and also expressed interest in the U.S. joining as an observer country. On July 19, the Department of State announced U.S. participation as an observer in the group. While full membership may be far off, the U.S. is expanding cooperation with Alliance members. Over the years, there has been a steady erosion of U.S.-Latin American relations. Some analysts have pointed out that that both the U.S. and Canada’s grip on Latin America is loosening. This ties in with an article from Global Research which noted that the Obama administration is stepping up its strategy of regime change against the left-of-center governments in the region. The U.S. could use the Pacific Alliance as a means to recover political and economic influence in Latin America.

When Prime Minister Stephen Harper attended the Pacific Alliance Summit in May, it was expected that he would request full membership. Canada already achieved observer status back in November 2012. While Harper acknowledged their accomplishments, he said that it was too soon to decide whether Canada should join the trade bloc. During his trip, Harper also took the opportunity to meet with mining company executives. The Conservative government has been criticized for not putting enough emphasis on corporate accountability with regards Canadian mining operations in the region. Maude Barlow explained that, “The Pacific Alliance, like Canada’s existing trade and investment deals in Latin America, puts the profits of those companies above anything else. The deals, like the Alliance, have nothing to say about the environmental and human rights impact of mining in the region.” The Pacific Alliance appears to be another attempt to accelerate the privatization of natural resources. It goes against the efforts of some Latin American countries that have joined together to fight the growing problem of investor-state privileges found in NAFTA-style trade agreements. These rules allow foreign corporations to sue for any potential profit losses related to government policies.

A recent article by Eric Farnsworth advocated linking NAFTA with the Pacific Alliance. He recommended that the leaders from both trade groups, “should consider meeting to forge a pragmatic economic agenda for cooperation. This offers an important opportunity to kick-start a common agenda with willing partners that has languished since the FTAA.” Farnsworth also described how, “building out a NAFTA-Pacific Alliance economic relationship would improve the collective regional approach toward the Asia-Pacific region, which currently includes precisely the same Western Hemisphere nations within APEC and the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations except Colombia. It would also offer a means to improve market efficiencies and update NAFTA without the need to re-open or re-negotiate its provisions.” There is an overlap between the Pacific Alliance and the much larger TPP trade talks. Both initiatives seek to bridge the Americas with Asia and create Pacific-based trade blocs. With the possibility of TPP negotiations dragging on and the difficulty the deal might have getting ratified by the U.S. Senate, the Pacific Alliance could open new doors to trade with Asian countries sooner.

In Latin America, there is a growing divide over the future of continental political and economic integration. Some countries have banded together to resist U.S. imperialism and any attempts to destabilize the region. There is also a move to end the destructive cycle of investment treaties and replace it with an alternative economic structure that better respects the sovereignty of nation states. The Pacific Alliance stands as a counterbalance to some of the other regional integration efforts that are trying to protect against the dangers of globalization. It is designed to signal a commitment to free trade and open markets to its neighbours and to the rest of the world. In many ways, the Pacific Alliance represents a resurgence of the failed U.S. initiated FTAA which was part of an agenda to consolidate corporate control.

Related articles by Dana Gabriel:
Using the TPP to Renegotiate and Expand NAFTA
Canada and Mexico to Join U.S. in NAFTA of the Pacific
Building Blocks Towards an Asia-Pacific Union
Beyond NAFTA: Shaping the Future of North American Integration

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader