COMMENT The Trans-Pacific Partership Agreement (TPPA) is finally finalised, after long arduous negotiations. However, much more explanation and clarifications are necessary, for more national support.

The setting up of an operations room to answer all queries is therefore an innovative initiative on the part of the government.

International Trade and Industry Minister Mustapa Mohamed and his dedicated officials deserve our congratulations for optimising Malaysia's gains in the newly-minted agreement, despite tough talks .

Carve-outs

Indeed many analysts are surprised that Malaysia succeeded in getting so many carve-outs or deep concessions and exclusions.

For instance 30 percent of government procurement has been set aside for Bumiputera contractors, for construction services. Bumi suppliers and manufacturers will also continue to enjoy the price preferences for goods and services.

Thus it is understood that the status quo for the bumis, will largely remain. This was in doubt before and caused a lot of local opposition to TPPA before.

However, it would have been preferable, if these liberal concessions were also made available to all small medium enterprises, regardless of race, with greater priority given to bumis .

The international TPPA should not be seen as racially biased. It is also not clear how the US government could condone with raced-based business deals and practices?

Opponents

Prof Joseph Stigltz who consistently opposes the TPPA, has stated that "Malaysian negotiators are giving away much to advanced country business interests" but the reality appears to be contrary in the now revealed TPPA.

Stigltz also quotes a United Nations report that forecasts Malaysia would be a "net trade loser by joining the TPPA by about US$17 billion a year. But here again there are doubts as to the accuracy of these quick UN projections?

There have also been serious doubts raised about the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism. The ISDS allows foreign companies to sue host governments when they think the host country's laws can harm their company profits .

But here again the ISDS cannot just be so arbitrary in its judgments and go against the very principle of international jurisprudence in the future, can they?

Surely the ISDS will have to take into account world legal opinion?

The TPPA is against capital controls. But if there are national legal provisions already in place, can they be challenged?

Then national sovereignty can be affected, but the international community of nations will not tolerate injustice, would they?

Similarly, would the intellectual property rights cause medicines to cost unnecessarily much more, when cheaper generic medicines will do?

Hence, it is clear that there are still some major concerns, as to the fairness and equity of the TPPA. Will it be fair and just to all, the rich and poorer countries alike.

Or will the powerful countries use the TPPA to bully and dominate or even "colonise" us, as warned by the ideologues and alarmists?

The challenges ahead

The government's challenge therefore is to be open, honest and transparent and to convince all Malaysians that we have a fair deal in the TPPA .

However, there is considerable consensus, that on balance, Malaysia will benefit greatly from the huge market and easier access that we will gain from the TPPA.

Most importantly, as Mustapa points out, the TPPA membership will encourage us to become much more competitive.

We will also not be left behind in our race to break out of our middle income trap and to become a developed nation by 2020, on a sustainable basis.

Moreover, the world will better understand our internal economic policies. This openness and global monitoring will enable Malaysia to transform at a faster pace and compete more effectively.

Of course in any negotiation, no country can afford to win everything and not give up anything. There has to be some give and take in any negotiation .

Even in the US, there are severe critics that accuse the US of selling out, to its own large corporations and to foreigners like us, at the expense of its own American citizens.

Some of our own parochial and short sighted businessmen, who do not like competition, are also resisting the TPPA.

But they should be grateful for the carve-outs that the able MITI negotiators have won for them.

These carve-outs, could perhaps have been won at the cost of our longer term competitiveness, of the whole Malaysian economy and its future prospects.

But that is unfortunately something that is not easily appreciated, by some of our self-centred businessmen, who obviously have powerful influence like the strong multinationals.

It's a challenge to maintain the balance of all interests?

Conclusion

However, my considered view is that, it appears that Malaysia, has struck a good deal in the TPPA under the challenging circumstances.

But we need to better understand the details, nuances and full implications of the TPPA.

Thus I would hope that Mustapa and his strong MITI team, will give us all more explanations and clarifications on the many questions that have and will be raised.

This is necessary to ensure that the government gets the maximum support for the TPPA, and for it to be well received by most, if not all Malaysians, for the long term benefits to our country.

So let's ensure the TPPA survives, for our trading nation to thrive.

RAMON NAVARATNAM is chairperson of Asli/Centre of Public Policy Studies.