Another ambitious trade agreement gets bogged down
DEADLINES are to trade
negotiators what chastity and continence were to St Augustine: distant
aspirations rather than binding obligations. No surprise then that the target
of completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) this year will be missed. The
14th round of talks among nine states negotiating this “21st-century” regional
trade agreement ended on September 15th. The next, to be held in New Zealand in
December, and joined by two new members, Mexico and Canada, will not be the
last.
This is a shame. The world
economy could do with the boost that a big trade agreement would bring. A
global deal, under the Doha round, is not in prospect. The TPP is a regional
one that the Obama administration inherited from its predecessor and took on
with gusto—though it has not yet sought “fast-track” negotiating authority from
Congress. American business vests great hope in it, partly as a way of fighting
Chinese competition. Barack Obama this week responded to the widespread
American perception of Chinese trade cheating by announcing a WTO case over
alleged subsidies in the car-parts industry.
Many other Asian regional
agreements are mooted but none has reached the TPP’s nitty-gritty stage, where
hundreds of officials plough through 29 dense chapters while anti-globalisation
protesters harangue them for plotting a “secret corporate coup”. It is the only
trade show of any size still on the road.
The TPP groups some of the 21
members of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) forum, which held its
annual summit in Vladivostok earlier this month. In two decades APEC has not
made much progress towards its goal of a free-trade area covering half of global
commerce. This year the leaders reached agreement to cut tariffs on 54
categories of goods, such as solar cells, that are seen as environmentally
friendly. This is more than the WTO has managed in a decade, but hardly seems a
huge breakthrough, and is unenforceable. APEC is an exercise in “concerted
unilateralism”, not a strand in the tangled noodle-bowl of bilateral and
regional free-trade agreements.
Launched by Brunei, Chile, New
Zealand and Singapore, the TPP is now led by America, and faces intense
suspicion as a security alliance disguised as a trade negotiation. On this
analysis, the TPP is part of the Obama administration’s “rebalancing” towards
Asia, to counter the rise of China. China Daily, an official newspaper, carried
a commentary noting the view that America “is driving the TPP with the
strategic objective of marginalising China.” American officials insist that, on
the contrary, they would welcome China into the partnership. But provisions
intended to prevent state-owned enterprises (SOEs) from having unfair
advantages would make its membership difficult.
Measures directed at SOEs are
among the “high-quality” aspects of the TPP that make it both so ambitious and
hence so hard to achieve. Vietnam, for example, is in the TPP talks, but also
has a huge state sector, which is in some trouble. Optimists recall China in
the 1990s, when membership of the WTO was seen by some as a way of pushing
through domestic reform, and hope Vietnam will take a similar view. But this
seems wildly optimistic.
Other TPP provisions covering
labour, the environment, the protection of intellectual property, IT services
and even rules preventing governments from blocking websites for arbitrary
reasons, would be difficult for a number of countries. So are good old-fashioned
protectionist provisions such as one of the rules of origin in the apparel
trade designed to ensure that, to avoid punitive American tariffs, low-cost
garment-makers have to buy American yarn rather than non-TPP Chinese stuff.
For a poor country such as
Vietnam, or a tiny one such as Brunei, TPP negotiations place a huge strain on
government capacity. With Canada and Mexico joining, and Australia already in,
the group can no longer be portrayed as an American shark stalking a hapless
shoal of minnows. But it would look far more imposing if Japan—Asia’s
second-largest economy—were to sign on. Japanese politics precludes that for
now. Nor has East Asia’s next-biggest economy, South Korea, yet joined up.
Indonesia is more interested in pursuing another incipient trade pact,
involving China and the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN).
Rivalry from this “Asian” group
is more sand in the TPP’s gears. It would bring together all ten members of
ASEAN, plus South Korea, Japan and China (which are discussing a tripartite
pact of their own), as well as, perhaps, Australia, India and New Zealand.
Being “lower-quality”, it presents governments with fewer political problems at
home. But the global economic benefits could be even greater, since many of the
countries involved have high trade barriers, whereas much TPP trade is already
covered by “high-quality” agreements (such as NAFTA).
The planned ASEAN-centred block
is not, strictly speaking, in competition with the TPP, as their membership
overlaps (Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, etc). Its prospects look dim at the
moment, if only because the three big North-East Asian economies—China, Japan
and South Korea—seem more likely to go to war with each other than to make
historic trade breakthroughs.
Dreamland
However, the two routes to Asian
trade liberalisation are ever more widely seen as yet another facet of
Sino-American rivalry. In the unlikely scenario where both succeeded, the dream
is that America and China, the world’s two biggest economies, finding themselves
at a disadvantage in the other’s market, would have to reach a consolidated
agreement—on, hope the TPP’s promoters, their 21st-century terms.
This ideal outcome is far beyond
today’s horizons. In the shorter term, China will continue to fear that one
motive behind the TPP is America’s desire to contain it. And, looking at the
difficulties the TPP faces, China’s leaders may hope that, if a superpower is
going to end up marginalised, it will not be theirs.
Business & Investment Opportunities
YourVietnamExpert is a division of Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd, Incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Strategy, Investment and Management, focusing Healthcare and Life Science with expertise in ASEAN. Since we are currently changing the platform of www.yourvietnamexpert.com, you may contact us at: sbc.pte@gmail.com, provisionally. Many thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment