EN — LARRY ROMANOFF: The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

 October  1June 01, 20234, 2022



The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

Larry Romanoff 




This is without question the most ambitious bullying project ever attempted by the Jewish bankers in The City of London, far exceeding their attempted fascist coup on the US government[1], or even their looting of the gold of all the world’s nations central banks prior to World War II. [2] This was an enterprise designed to effectively eliminate the actual sovereignty of nation-states and turn the world into an agglomerate of geographical puppets with no purpose other than to serve the financial and political interests of these bankers. We can give thanks that it failed; had it succeeded, a handful of banks and a few hundred multi-national corporations would have had the power to rule the world. The governments of our existing nations would have had only two purposes: (1) tax and revenue collection for the bankers, and (2) population suppression of the citizens unprepared to live in such an environment. As always, the US State Department and military were functioning as “The Bankers Private Army” to facilitate this dramatic alteration of our national landscapes. The TPP was being promoted as an American initiative, when it was no such thing, but the Americans were touring the world in an outrageous attempt to bully many nations into signing this “agreement”.


In late 2013 the US was nearing the hoped-for culmination of the so-called Trans-Pacific Partnership which was presented as an Asian Free-Trade Agreement (the US of course being an “Asian” country) but was in fact an astonishingly aggressive attempt to forcibly impose commercial hegemony and a European legal jurisdiction deep into the nations of Asia. The Americans were attempting to bully the world into accepting a set of ‘standards’ in all areas of economic and social life, Asian media containing repeated references to the “extreme pressure” the Americans were exerting on all Asian nations to accept all provisions of the proposed agreement. These nations were bitterly opposed to many provisions that were presented as non-negotiable, as well as the US attempting to force open the agricultural sectors of all countries without any movement in opening its own heavily protected and subsidised industry.



Moreover, all nations were being bullied into signing the entire agreement without being able to see its content, on the basis that some nations had already signed and approved various sections and that all other nations must therefore accept these portions in their entirety – sight unseen. In late 2013, US Secretary of State Kerry was attempting to strong-arm Vietnam into signing the TPP agreements, claiming this would increase ”transparency and accountability” in the country, a rather bizarre claim considering the intense secrecy surrounding every aspect of this effort.


The precise the approach being taken on the TPP was that multi-national corporations had (or would have from now on) a level of sovereignty surpassing that of sovereign nations and that their interests would have a higher priority, with the result that any government hindering the profits, or indeed any actions, of a multinational company, for any reason, under any circumstances, would have to compensate that firm for profits it might have made, but didn’t. This would apply even in a case where, for example a nation must reduce interest rates to boost its economy during a time of recession. Citibank could then appeal to the US-controlled TPP arbitration panel for compensation for lost profits, and the government would be forced to pay.


If China decided to subsidise the purchase of electric vehicles for the sake of long-term environmental concerns, GM could appeal to the TPP for compensation for its lost sales of gasoline-burning vehicles. In 2015, China imposed a ban on all imports of poultry and eggs from the US, including live animals and breeding stock, due to the discovery of various strains of H5N8 bird flu in both wild and farmyard birds in several states. Twenty other countries did the same, but US media invective was reserved for China, with Jim Sumner, President of the US Poultry Export Council, claiming China had “absolutely no justification” for such a ban since the bird flu discoveries were “isolated incidents” and perhaps “hundreds of miles” from major poultry-producing areas. The implication was clear: American chicken producers had a right to export their birds to China, bird flu or no bird flu. Of course, if the reverse were true, American officials would merely be exercising due prudence in protecting their population from dangerous Chinese chickens. Under the TPP, given the Americans’ claim of ‘no justification’, China would have been liable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to American poultry producers in compensation for their lost profits in being unable to dispose of their diseased chickens in China.


The TPP was a bold move by the Jewish bankers in The City of London as a final hopeful effort to cast their net of jurisdiction and political power over much of the world. The TPP was not a series of international agreements willingly signed by all parties, but a program of colonisation created by a handful of Jewish bankers who drafted the provisions and made the decisions, dictating to the world the content of the New World Order. The TPP represented Jewish banking and corporate domination over national and individual sovereignty, food sovereignty, creative freedom, healthcare access and the environment, replacing laws passed by national governments with rules developed in secret by bankers, executed by multinational corporations unaccountable to the people affected by them, with disputes settled by “arbitration panels” selected by the bankers – whose rulings had no appeal – and enforced by the US military and State Department.


While the TPP was said to be a “US-sponsored initiative”, and while the US government was indeed “leading” the negotiations, the TPP was neither sponsored by nor being negotiated by the American government as such. The White House staff in this scene were puppets driven primarily by the Jewish bankers in their quest for world supremacy. In fact, the American “government” – the elected members of the House of Representatives and the Senate – were not even permitted to view the agreements. The TPP was being negotiated entirely without their knowledge or approval. Hundreds of members signed a petition to then-President Obama protesting the nature in which this agreement was being implemented, but to no avail.


After years of attempts by members of Congress to even see the TPP, only one congressman, Alan Grayson, was able to review only a few selected portions of the agreement, but the Obama administration declared the content “classified” and a “matter of national security”, and threatened Grayson with criminal charges if he attempted to reveal any of the content. Even then, he was permitted to view the document only in a private room where computers, mobile phones, cameras and even pencil and paper were forbidden. Grayson characterized the TPP as an “assault on democratic government”, a runaway abuse of power by the federal government and yet another use of the police state secrecy tactics that had already made the American government utterly unaccountable to the people. Six hundred American and European Zionist (primarily Jewish) “corporate advisors” had input into the TPP, but the draft text has not been made available to the public nor to the media or elected policy makers. The level of secrecy around this agreement was unparalleled, with the nation’s own representatives – the elected US government – being kept entirely in the dark.


The most frightening provisions of the TPP agreements was that they were perpetual – they would never expire – and could not be repealed or altered by the individual nations foolish enough to have signed them. The repeal provision stated that the TPP rules could be altered only by agreement of all signatories to the document. Note that it does not state “all signatories except the US”. Since the US is one of the signatories, any repeal or amendment would require the agreement of the US, which of course would never be forthcoming. This restriction would remain true regardless of changes in future governments, changes in public opinion, or more dramatic, proven concerns about food safety or national security. Those documents were being presented simply as “trade agreements” but they were no such thing. They would serve to function in precisely the same way as did Paul Bremer’s “Provisional Orders” in Iraq, the superimposition onto all signatory nations a series of perpetual laws with such high standing they could not be repealed by any subsequent government. This TPP agreement, its provisions and arbitration, were superordinate to any national government or its Supreme Courts.


Those agreements, being removed entirely from the realm of public control, would have had an automatic power to overturn decades of laws and regulations in every nation. The Jewish designers and promoters of those agreements were doing their best to dispel fear of the obvious dangers, but their claims attracted mostly ridicule. EU “trade spokesman” John Clancy said fears were entirely unwarranted, claiming that the (undefined) “status quo” is at the heart of all problems, with the TPP’s so-called investment protection regulations (ISDS) “closing loopholes and improving transparency” while creating “modern, state-of-the art investment arrangements”. He offered no explanation of how the status quo was problematic, nor did he try to explain why modern nations required these so-called “state-of-the art investment arrangements”. Another spokesman assured that “Investment protection provisions do not limit the ability of states to make or repeal any law or regulation”, but those claims were outright lies.


One of the key issues was the provision for Investor-state dispute settlements, or ISDS. Those provisions were included in other trade agreements to provide compensation for losses to an investor caused if a government reneged on some portion of the agreement, but these have proven controversial, and have often been applied by corporations well outside their intended purpose, used by large multinational companies to sue governments acting in their own public interest. For example, the Philip Morris tobacco company sued the Australian government for restricting promotional packaging on cigarettes, and Canada was being sued by the pharma firm Eli Lily for revoking drug patents that were apparently issued on false evidence. In all these cases, regardless of the merit of a government’s position, and of its sovereign right to pass whatever legislation it deemed desirable, these firms demand payment for the loss of future profits as if those profits were a right granted to them by God regardless even of criminality or other serious matters. Moreover, the settlement of these issues was designed to entirely bypass the local judicial systems and domestic laws, and would be decided by unaccountable “investor tribunals” composed of the same Jews or their representatives, that would pay little heed to national considerations.


In October of 2014, George Monbiot reported in The Guardian that if the EU agreed to the terms of the same TPP, it would suppress the ability of all European governments to put their own public interest ahead of the profits of foreign multinational corporations. His example was that it would expose individual governments to cases like that of El Salvador where “an Australian company is suing the government before a closed tribunal of corporate lawyers for $300m (nearly half the country’s annual budget) in potential profits foregone. Why? Because El Salvador refused permission for a gold mine that would poison people’s drinking water.” This is the true condition that would universally emerge from this misbegotten, greed-driven plan.


The European Commission insisted the TPP would include safeguards to prevent corporate misuse and guarantee the right of European governments to “pursue legitimate public policy objectives such as social, environmental, security, public health and safety” without the risk of being sued. But this was false. The arbitration panels were not accountable to anyone except privately to their Jewish masters, and would have no incentive to bow to any country’s fundamental issues of national interest when making decisions. Disputes between governments and foreign corporations should be decided by a nation’s courts and judges, but the ISDS system in the TPP is a one-way street where foreign corporations can challenge domestic government policies, but the agreements give neither governments nor individuals any right to hold those corporations accountable. This was a frightening attempt to remove from national jurisdiction, in fact to remove from the government of a nation, all control over a vast array of legislation covering entirely the areas in which foreign multinationals relate to governments. In fact, these agreements gave multinational firms wide-ranging powers to sue governments that adopt public policies deemed to “discriminate” against free trade, regardless of other more important considerations. In signing these TPP agreements, nations would in fact be surrendering a vast amount of their sovereignty to American and Jewish multinationals – in perpetuity.


While it was technically true that states would retain the power to create or alter legislation, it was also true that any such contemplated move could have proven so prohibitively costly as to be impossible to implement. The TPP contained punishing enforcement provisions totally under the control of the multinational corporations that would have given them an unprecedented right to demand taxpayer compensation for any policies that these corporations considered a barrier to their profits. “Under this regime, multi-national corporations could skirt domestic courts and laws, bypass national judicial systems altogether, and could sue governments directly before tribunals where the “judges” consist of three private sector Jewish-appointed corporate lawyers, where they could demand taxpayer compensation for any domestic law that they believed would diminish their expected future profits.”


Consider the case of China, where the Americans have exerted great pressure on both the Central and local governments to permit privately-owned healthcare and educational facilities. If China’s government subsequently concludes these operations are not proving to be in the nation’s best interest, the door is already closed. In theory, China would have retained the power to pass new regulations or laws restricting this area, but in so doing, it would have to compensate every foreign multinational involved in any sense in the healthcare field in China, for the loss of the entire future profit stream of its enterprises, in perpetuity. Similarly, China’s Central government is strongly resisting the establishment of GM seed and GM food in the country. And while China would theoretically retain the ability to regulate or eliminate this time bomb from within its borders, if it should attempt to do so, it would have to pay Monsanto the present value of all its lost profits indefinitely into the future. This means the government of China would have to collect sufficient extra money in taxes – from the citizens of China – to pay Monsanto all the money it would have earned forever into the future had it been able to remain in the country and control most of China’s food supply. And this financial obligation remains true regardless of any subsequent proven health, medical, military or other dangers, or the risks to a nation’s food supply or national security. And the “court” where Monsanto would sue China to collect its money, would be composed of three so-called judges who would be Jewish lawyers, quite possibly Monsanto’s lawyers.


In reality, the TPP was a wish list, a backroom deal, a massive worldwide corporate power grab by the Jews in The City of London, for their industries and banks. The TPP was not about free trade, nor about trade at all. Of the 29 Chapters that formed the agreement, only 5 dealt with trade in any form. The entire remaining content consisted of a bold attempt to enshrine enormous legal rights and commercial privileges for US and Jewish-owned multinational corporations and banks while simultaneously weakening the power of nation states to restrict or oppose them. The TPP was nothing less than the deep extension of sovereignty, under legal jurisdiction into other nations, in effect replacing and superseding all manner of laws and standards already existing in these other nations, and giving way to the arbitrary laws and commercial provisions of the TPP.


National sovereignty in areas of food, communications, IP protection, Internet freedom, pharmaceuticals, health care, derivatives trading, copyright issues, food safety, environmental standards, civil liberties and much more, would have been entirely subjugated to Jewish multi-national commercial and political interests. The TPP would have inserted these greedy standards, policies and values far more deeply into all of Asia and Europe, in preparation for the emerging New World Order economic system. This was an attempt to re-order the economic structure of all nations to suit the best interests of the Jews. The TPP proposals granted enormous freedom and powers to the bankers, financiers and corporations, attempting to transplant control over the economies and financial systems of all Asian and European nations to this same small group of individuals.


TPP sponsors proposed to control the entire Internet, not only dictating standards but monitoring and policing all user activity in all nations, beyond the control of local governments. The TPP would have forced all local ISPs to conduct full-scale monitoring and espionage, or to permit the US (the NSA or Mossad, in fact) to conduct it, with full power for enforcement, punishment, imprisonment of local citizens in any nation, and to remove individuals from the internet altogether. The TPP provisions even claimed the right of its tribunals to automatically bypass local governments and punish by criminal sanction – entirely on their own authority – any ISP in any nation that violated their interests.

Starting on January 2022, alert consumers may have noticed labels on some foods that say “bioengineered” or “derived from bioengineering,” per new federal standards. Ted S. Warren/AP


The TPP proposed to take control of domestic labor regulations, workplace safety standards, social welfare regulations, all food standards, and much more, removing them from the control of domestic governments by superseding domestic laws. It attempted to control the nature and delivery of health care to citizens in all nations. It would even have been able to control public access to these essential services, based on the dictates of the Jewish bankers. And it attempted to dictate to the entire world the policies and content of every matter dealing with copyrights and patents, all designed only to serve these Jewish corporations and their best interests. Under the TPP, the labeling and identification of GM seed and food was to be forbidden. GM seed and foods would have to be permitted and grown without restriction in all nations, ignoring the threat to a nation’s food supply, the serious environmental and health concerns, and the obvious military dangers of weaponised GM seed. Generic drugs and medications would have all but disappeared and all State-Owned Enterprises would have been forbidden in Asia.


“Fair use” copyright material would have been banned, and many civil actions would have become criminal offenses. On this latter point, countries would have reverted to the past atrocity of “debtor’s prisons”, using the domestic police and courts as the Jews’ bill collectors. This is actually already occurring in the US, where the police are in some cases acting as bill collectors. The process is simple: if a citizen delays or refuses to pay a bill or debt of any kind, the police simply re-classify it as “a theft of services” and it magically becomes a criminal rather than a civil offense. And now you go to jail for not paying your VISA bill or your student loan.


If it had been implemented, the TPP would have hugely affected the lives of citizens in all participating countries. It would have stripped local governments in all nations of the power to regulate transnational corporate activities. In each Chapter, the TPP actually prohibited a member nation from passing any laws that were not “consistent with the provisions of this Chapter”. The TPP provisions would have over-ridden domestic laws on both trade and non-trade matters, subordinating domestic courts and even international legal standards to the very small number of Jews who would appoint and control the TPP tribunals. The TPP would have inserted itself so deeply into a nation’s laws that it would even have controlled the separation of criminal and civil matters; on IP infringement, for example, even simply copying of a song or a page for personal use, would have been a felony requiring imprisonment for what is now in most nations simply a civil matter. The Jews were attempting to forcibly export these draconian – and reprehensibly anti-consumer – laws into the societies of all nations.


The Pharmaceutical and Health Industries


On pharmaceuticals, Natural News stated the following: “The intellectual property provisions of the TPP are also a big handout to Big Pharma. They allow American (primarily Jewish-owned) drug companies to shut down generic drug manufacturers in Asian nations that were currently keeping medication costs low. Under the TPP, drug companies like Merck would be able to enforce global monopoly pricing, even across poor nations where the costs of a month’s medications would exceed monthly income. The IP intent was to strengthen their aggressive patent regime and force foreign countries to comply with it, but it went much farther. The IP controls on pharmaceuticals would have provided firms (again, almost entirely Jewish-owned) with virtually perpetual patents while severely restricting the use of domestic or generic medications, which would have resulted in much higher health care costs and would have had adverse effects on the health care of many nations.” These same people are now patenting surgical procedures, and the TPP would have expected all nations to pay royalties or license fees each time they performed surgical operations on their own citizens. The TPP contained dozens of measures that would  have limited competition of pharmaceutical firms, and would have dramatically raised prices of medications.

Indeed, all the TPP proposals were outrageously socio-pathic, consistently trying to bully through measures that would have made all medications more expensive and less accessible. As well, the proposals would have created new global legal norms that would have permitted these firms and bankers to win huge damage awards against any government that refused to embrace the TPP’s fiercely anti-consumer practices. These tactics were an integral and very dangerous part of the proposed TPP. What this means in simple terms is this: If Merck Pharma wanted to create a second version of its Vioxx that could potentially kill millions of Chinese, but China’s government refused to permit that medication to be sold, Merck could make a similar claim and the Chinese government would have to pay Merck US$10 billion each year in compensation for its lost profits.


This is far more serious than you might imagine, because the twisted mentality emerging from the TPP has been incubating for decades and is already a cornerstone of US commercial foreign policy. Consider the US position on prescription medications: First, we already know that medications cost far more in the US than in any other nation because the US pharma companies bullied Congress into making illegal the negotiation of lower prices for the nation’s entire health care service, meaning Americans must pay whatever unreasonable prices these firms demand, and are also forbidden from using generic medications. But now try to follow this reasoning:


In what can be categorised only as bizarre and greed-driven convoluted thinking, the US government and its pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers have adopted the position that US drug prices are high because US consumers are subsidising costs that the pharma companies cannot recover from consumers in other countries. According to the theory, this occurs because many other countries like China and Canada use their bulk-purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices, and therefore the governments and people of these other nations are having a free ride on the backs of US consumers. The position – extolled in all its insane wonder by AmCham – further states that these governments, including China and Canada, must either (1) totally deregulate their medications market to permit US firms to charge the highest prices possible, or (2) raise the taxes on all medications and devices by an amount equal to the difference between their low negotiated cost and the US prices, and pay those taxes directly to the US pharma companies. The pharma companies claim this money received would then “fairly compensate” US consumers – who of course would never see the money.


The arrogance and greed involved in such a position are alarming if not actually frightening. The Jewish-controlled pharmaceutical industry is claiming an absolute God-given right to charge extortionate prices for their products and, if a government refuses this “right”, then it must calculate the “losses” these firms have suffered by not being able to extort these prices, must then collect that money in taxes from the population and forward that money as compensation to the Jewish firms. If this isn’t a perfect example of the Satan-worshippers in The City of London being overcome by blind greed, I can’t imagine what would be.


The Financial Industry


It was the same with the financial industry; the Jews attempting to impose their own unregulated financial standards onto the entire world, to the extent that if a nation took any steps to try to regulate these financial outlaws or the industry in which they operate, or if a country attempted to evict the international bankers and establish a public (government-owned) central bank to represent the nation’s interests, the country could be sued in the same so-called “courts” at the risk of potentially trillions of dollars in compensation awards. Among other things, the TPP would have forbidden prohibitions or regulations on risky financial products, including the same toxic derivatives that caused the massive 2008 US financial crisis.


The Food Industry


Total control over a nation’s food supply was at stake with the TPP, a direct assault against the food sovereignty of nations, where the profits of multinational companies were placed ahead of the food security needs of individual nations. The TPP was based on the premise that food is just another commodity subject to speculation solely to increase the profits of multinational corporations. Under the TPP, most nations would have been forced to sacrifice their food sovereignty to the commercial rights of companies like Monsanto. The TPP was designed to help (primarily Jewish) agribusiness become far larger and more powerful and to consolidate IP ownership of the worldwide food system, from the seeds to the eventual retail products. The TPP would have granted automatic power to agribusiness firms like Monsanto, Cargill, Syngenta and Dupont, to sue countries for trying to limit the kinds of food they imported or for having domestic food safety standards that limited imports like Monsanto’s GM seed crops. Agribusiness firms would have been able to dictate food safety standards and regulations in all countries signing the TPP, forcing them under threat of heavy penalties to permit the import of substandard meat and vegetable products as well as GM seed and food for which proper labeling would have been prohibited.


Monsanto has always been a Jewish company, and the chief agricultural negotiator for the TPP was the former Monsanto lobbyist, Islam Siddique, so it isn’t a surprise that the TPP prohibited all nations from banning genetically-modified organisms of any kind. It was similar with environmental and financial regulation or deregulation; the TPP provisions designed by this small group would have taken precedence over all national laws. Food safety, from GM seed to Mad Cow Disease, food labeling, would all have passed from domestic control to the arbiters of the TPP. The TPP contained many regulations affecting food systems and food safety, and procurement rules specifically forbade discrimination based on the quality of production, meaning that nations would have been forced to accept substandard shipments of agricultural products, regardless of local laws or food safety and health standards.


As an indication of the bitter truth that national sovereignty is already nearly a corpse because our politicians are all “bought and paid for”, Canada’s tragically-corrupt Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, said the deal will give Canada “preferential access to half a billion consumers in the world’s most dynamic and fast-growing market a move that will strengthen Canadian businesses, grow the economy, and create more well-paying jobs for middle class Canadians.” [3] If only Canadians knew the truths of their own government. In fact, Justin Trudeau is famous for saying that Canada is the world’s first “post-national state.”[4] When did treason become praiseworthy?


As I wrote at the outset, we are fortunate indeed, perhaps due to Divine Providence, that this reprehensible project failed. Had it succeeded, we would be doomed.



Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons)

His full archive can be seen at

https://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/   + https://www.moonofshanghai.com/

He can be contacted at:




[1] The Attempted 1933 Jewish Fascist Coup in America

[2]The Jews were busy in the 1930s

[3] The dangers of Trudeau’s ‘postnational’ Canada

[4] Canada welcomes release of final text of CPTPP deal


Copyright © Larry RomanoffBlue Moon of ShanghaiMoon of Shanghai, 2023