|
southern Minnesota | Yes, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was indeed a treaty. It was a large, complex, and detailed agreement signed by twelve nations in 2016. The TPP was essentially a free trade agreement that aimed to reduce trade barriers and promote economic integration among its member countries.
Here's why it was considered a treaty:
Formal Agreement:
The TPP was a formal, written agreement between sovereign states.
International Law:
Treaties are a primary source of international law, and the TPP was intended to create legally binding obligations for its member countries.
Negotiation and Signature:
The TPP underwent extensive negotiations and was formally signed by representatives of the participating countries.
Ratification:
While the TPP was signed, it was never ratified by all of the original twelve member countries, which is a crucial step for a treaty to enter into force.
Withdrawal:
The U.S. withdrawal from the TPP demonstrates that it was treated as a binding international agreement.
Continuation as CPTPP:
Even after the U.S. withdrawal, the remaining 11 countries finalized a revised agreement called the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which largely incorporated the original TPP provisions.
While the TPP's ratification was stalled, the fact that it was negotiated, signed, and treated as a binding international agreement by its member countries confirms that it was indeed a treaty.
THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE BY USING THE GUN CONTROL EXAMPLE IS THAT TREATIES ARE ABOVE THE CONSTITUTION AND ARE VERY HARD TO SIDE STEP IF A CROOKED DEMOCRAT HIDES SOMETHING IN THEM THAT IS UNWORKABLE IN THE EYES OF THE POPULATION. MAYBE YOU SHOULD CHECK ON HOW SOME OF OUR FEDERAL HUNTING LAWS WERE ENACTED. YES IT WAS DONE BY TREATY............... BY THE WAY IF OBUMMER HAD HIS FINGERS IN IT IT WAS CROOKED......................
Edited by booked 7/23/2025 15:05
| |
|
Japan trade deal complete
