Gabriel accused Washington of being "angry" about the deal that the EU struck with Canada, known as CETA, because it contains elements the U.S. doesn't want to see in the TTIP.
What would those elements be?
What would those elements be?
(Unless, of course, European parliaments discover some leftover spine in their bodies and vote against CETA.)
Evidently you thought that TTIP was some kind of reasonable deal for all parties however it is mainly beneficial to some large US corporations at the expense of the citizens everywhere.
To the contrary. I have attended quite some anti-TTIP rallies myself.
My suspicion is that what we're seeing right now was the strategy all along: The European opposition (both inside and outside the parliaments) focused on TTIP because the US is an easier enemy (with all the latent anti-americanism boiling all over Europe). So the government(s) are now dropping TTIP very loudly, and while the public feels appeased, CETA is silently signed into law.
In addition the text is easily available for people to read and review, unlike TTIP. However as I understand it the controversial ISDS remains however this may cause it to not be ratified by some EU nations.
The tinfoil hat summary is that the US is trying to push through its own policies worldwide, one dominated by lack of regulation, lack of work protection and lots of protection for investors and people with money.
If they would be able to strick similar deals worldwide, US companies would be able to move production to wherever it is cheap, and no workers right exist, while having the investors money covered in case the corrupt dictatorships screws them over.
Any new deal signed which mandates workers right, environmental protections, and doesn't put investor-money above human lives, is detrimental to this global power-grab effort.
There is no tinfoil hat about that...
Regulations are often introduced to advantage large, coherent interests such as unions and industries.