What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)? Explained, Objectives, and Aftermath
AN
Summary:
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a significant international trade agreement involving 12 Pacific Rim economies, including the United States. This article delves into the comprehensive history of the TPP, its objectives, the factors leading to its demise in the U.S., and the aftermath, including alternative agreements. Explore the intricacies of the TPP and its role in shaping global trade dynamics.
What was the Trans-Pacific partnership?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a groundbreaking trade agreement designed to foster economic cooperation among 12 Pacific Rim nations. These countries included Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam. The core objective of the TPP was to promote international trade by reducing tariffs and eliminating various trade barriers.
Historical context
The TPP emerged in the context of the Obama administration’s broader strategic pivot toward East Asia. The administration aimed to strengthen economic and diplomatic ties with the region, recognizing the growing significance of Asia in global trade and politics. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton articulated this approach in a Foreign Policy magazine article in October 2011.
Early support and opposition
In the early stages, the TPP received support from key figures, including Secretary Clinton, who referred to it as the “gold standard in trade agreements.” Her endorsement was likely influenced by a primary challenge from Senator Bernie Sanders, who held strong views against trade agreements. However, as the political landscape evolved, both Clinton and her 2016 presidential campaign opponent, Donald Trump, eventually opposed the TPP.
Debate over the trade deal
The TPP stirred significant debate, characterized by several key points of contention:
Secrecy and transparency
Critics of the TPP raised concerns about the secrecy surrounding the negotiations. They argued that the lack of transparency was undemocratic and hindered public scrutiny of the agreement’s terms.
Job losses
Opponents of the TPP contended that trade deals often led to increased foreign competition, contributing to the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs. This concern gained prominence during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS)
A notable aspect of the TPP was the inclusion of the “investor-state dispute settlement” (ISDS) clause. This provision allowed corporations to sue national governments for alleged violations of trade agreements, leading to concerns about national sovereignty.
Supporters’ arguments
Proponents of the TPP put forward several arguments in its favor:
Market access
They contended that trade agreements like the TPP opened new markets for domestic industries, providing opportunities for growth and job creation.
Economic growth
Supporters argued that trade deals, including the TPP, played a vital role in stimulating overall economic growth and expanding the global economy.
Partisan politics
Some proponents asserted that opposition to the TPP was influenced by partisan politics, with members of both major parties adopting positions based on political considerations.
The demise of the TPP in the United States
The fate of the TPP in the United States was sealed with the 2016 presidential election. Both major-party candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, voiced opposition to the agreement. President Trump, after taking office, took swift action to withdraw the U.S. from the TPP. On January 23, 2017, he signed a memo instructing the U.S. trade representative to formally withdraw as a signatory to the deal. This decision effectively marked the end of U.S. participation in the TPP.
What happened next?
Following the United States’ withdrawal from the TPP, the remaining signatory countries explored various alternatives:
Pursuing the agreement without the U.S.
One option considered was to proceed with the TPP without the United States. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull held discussions with the leaders of Japan, New Zealand, and Singapore regarding this possibility. However, it became apparent that the absence of the U.S., the largest economy in the partnership, presented significant challenges.
The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)
In response to the U.S. withdrawal, the remaining TPP nations engaged in negotiations to create the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). This agreement aimed to preserve the core principles of the original TPP while addressing some concerns raised during the debate.
China’s Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)
China, recognizing the void left by the TPP, pushed for a multilateral Pacific Rim trade deal known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). This agreement included numerous Asian nations and aimed to strengthen economic ties among its member countries while reducing trade barriers.
Frequently asked questions
What were the primary objectives of the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
The main objectives of the Trans-Pacific Partnership were to promote international trade and economic cooperation among its member nations. It aimed to achieve this by reducing tariffs and eliminating various trade barriers.
Why did the United States withdraw from the TPP?
The United States withdrew from the TPP due to political opposition. Both major-party nominees in the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, opposed the agreement, ultimately leading to President Trump’s decision to withdraw.
Were there any alternatives considered after the U.S. withdrawal?
Yes, following the U.S. withdrawal from the TPP, signatory countries explored various alternatives. These included pursuing the agreement without the United States, negotiating the CPTPP, and considering China’s RCEP proposal.
Key takeaways
- The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a significant trade agreement among 12 Pacific Rim nations, aimed at reducing tariffs and trade barriers.
- Supporters believed the TPP would open new markets, stimulate economic growth, and create jobs, while opponents cited concerns about secrecy and potential job losses.
- The United States withdrew from the TPP in 2017, leading to discussions about alternative trade agreements like the CPTPP and China’s RCEP.
- The TPP’s legacy continues to influence international trade and economic relations among Pacific Rim countries.
Share this post: