Confirmed: Philippines wants to join TPP
- Thread starter Pinoy
- Start date
Let's see when you two can solve the rice and car issue.
Strategic Implications for Japan-China-US Relations , TPP
Each of the participants in the TPP brings its own agenda. However, those of the United States and Japan are particularly strategic in the sense that they mean to use the TPP not just for economic purpose, but also to further political and regulatory objectives at the international level.
While the Japanese and United States’ agendas share some similarities, they are sufficiently distinct to merit separate consideration. Both strategic agendas, however, are directed at China as a common target, even as they also focus on the construction of a harmonized global architecture for economic activity that crosses borders.
The Japanese (and rightly so) see the TPP as a counterweight to recent aggressive Chinese efforts to take the lead in determining the scope and shape of bilateral and multilateral relationships in the Pacific. Japanese goals are both economic and strategic. But perhaps more important is the way these objectives can be furthered through the TPP project. Among the most important of these – the value of which is sometimes underestimated – is the ability of Japan to use TPP as a driver of domestic reform.
The TPP’s strategic value lies in its use for refining the basic nature of Japan’s relationship with China and the United States, but in unequal ways. To China, the Prime Minister of Japan offers a Japanese framework for framing China-Japan relations, which is referred to as the policy of a “mutually beneficial relationship based on common strategic interests.” But that is tempered by the effects of what Japan sees as the core of its strategic relationship with the United States. That core of the relationship is grounded in a shared effort to maintain superiority in setting the terms of the economic , social and political rules of the game that will support globalization and the relationships among states.
This is why Prime Minister Abe has emphasized that “Japan’s relationship with China stand out as among the most important.”
Reference:
Gómez-Tarragona, E. B. (2015). The Tpp: How To Facilitate Business Through Legislative And Regulatory Reform?. Ilsa Journal Of International & Comparative Law, 21369.
Backer, L. C. (2014). The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Japan, China, The U.S., And The Emerging Shape Of A New World Trade Regulatory Order. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 13(1), 49-81.
Each of the participants in the TPP brings its own agenda. However, those of the United States and Japan are particularly strategic in the sense that they mean to use the TPP not just for economic purpose, but also to further political and regulatory objectives at the international level.
While the Japanese and United States’ agendas share some similarities, they are sufficiently distinct to merit separate consideration. Both strategic agendas, however, are directed at China as a common target, even as they also focus on the construction of a harmonized global architecture for economic activity that crosses borders.
The Japanese (and rightly so) see the TPP as a counterweight to recent aggressive Chinese efforts to take the lead in determining the scope and shape of bilateral and multilateral relationships in the Pacific. Japanese goals are both economic and strategic. But perhaps more important is the way these objectives can be furthered through the TPP project. Among the most important of these – the value of which is sometimes underestimated – is the ability of Japan to use TPP as a driver of domestic reform.
The TPP’s strategic value lies in its use for refining the basic nature of Japan’s relationship with China and the United States, but in unequal ways. To China, the Prime Minister of Japan offers a Japanese framework for framing China-Japan relations, which is referred to as the policy of a “mutually beneficial relationship based on common strategic interests.” But that is tempered by the effects of what Japan sees as the core of its strategic relationship with the United States. That core of the relationship is grounded in a shared effort to maintain superiority in setting the terms of the economic , social and political rules of the game that will support globalization and the relationships among states.
This is why Prime Minister Abe has emphasized that “Japan’s relationship with China stand out as among the most important.”
Reference:
Gómez-Tarragona, E. B. (2015). The Tpp: How To Facilitate Business Through Legislative And Regulatory Reform?. Ilsa Journal Of International & Comparative Law, 21369.
Backer, L. C. (2014). The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Japan, China, The U.S., And The Emerging Shape Of A New World Trade Regulatory Order. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 13(1), 49-81.
dichoi
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,240
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Chinese market is now bigger than the US market in many categories
US is only ahead in services consumption. Most goods consumption, China is either ahead of the US or about to surpass the US.
US needs China's market far more than China needs the US.
China's rise will only accelerate from now as China's market is now massive which allows domestic Chinese companies to sell into the Chinese market and advance technologically.
China is now without a shadow of a doubt the most powerful Asian country and China's lead will only get bigger as China's market get even bigger, Chinese investors go global, Chinese technology advances, Chinese brands become global, Chinese military advances.
Chinese tourist spending alone is big enough to support entire economies. That's how big and powerful China is.
Asia belongs to China and Chinese influence over Asia is only growing as the renminbi becomes the dominant Asian currency and Japan goes into complete irrelevancy.
Pls to read this text:
China would increase the size of its economy by about 2 percent by joining a Pacific trade pact in the view of the central bank’s chief research economist, according to presentation slides seen by Bloomberg News.
The country should join negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership as soon as possible to reap the benefits, Ma Jun of the People’s Bank of China said in an internal presentation in mid-June. South Korea and Vietnam would also add more than 2 percent to their gross domestic product as part of the TPP, the presentation showed.
While joining the talks may help China counter an economic slowdown without resorting to large-scale stimulus, the 12 nations currently negotiating the TPP are expected to wrap up an initial agreement before new members are admitted. The U.S. and Japan said in April that there’s “still much work to be done” on outstanding issues.
The pact would link an area with about $28 trillion in annual economic output, or 39 percent of the world total, and would be the biggest trade deal in U.S. history. In addition to the U.S. and Japan, nations seeking the deal are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand,Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
PBOC’s Ma Urges Joining TPP to Boost Growth, Report Shows | Information on anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures
Jlaw
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9,693
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
You know TPP's main beneficiary is US. Why would China want to join even if US ask? CPC government are not naive like Viet and Pinoy govt.
You need to understand that if you don't want to play catch up, you need to create your own game and rules. If you play by the rules set by the creators you will lose.
Zero_wing
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 4,296
- Reaction score
- -2
again no sense more belittling cant even spell right chinese god complex at works now you know why we call you nazi again point proven!
Tiger Genie
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,645
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
your example seems to prove the reverse? The small car imports from Japan, if that's what you are talking about, did two things: 1) It made Japanese car industry huge with Honda and Toyota taking over American roads, impacting Detroit negatively, not Japan and 2) It forced Americans and America to stop guzzlers. IOW it tremendously increased the industrial capability and capacity of Japan by providing it a huge market.
Hit the nail on the head. Regulatory reform and regulatory cooperation always seems to lead to qualitative improvement , in the end.
An impressive and dynamic potential, indeed. The trade pact, the TPP, would foment cross border ties and harmonize corporate laws and legal processes for the members, an economic community worth $28 Trillion. Future is bright, indeed. Its great that Japan and the United States are taking time to iron out regulatory reform and regulatory agreements so that all bases are covered.
Like in anything in business, its best to take time to construct a business plan. Successful organizations are built on said steady foundation.
Banzai!
LOL! kalma ka lang amigo @Zero_wing , i empathize with your righteous indignation, truly, considering the repetitive and vociferous lambasting by some of our Chinese members. But, its just best to ignore such drivel. In the end, all that matters is that the Philippines' economy is growing at a steady 5-7% rate, the Philippines is ever integrating with Japan and the United States, militarily and now economically vis-a-vis the TPP. The future is bright, indeed, for your country.
Focus on that aspect. And revel and delight in the growth, unperturbed growth of your country in years to come.
Zero_wing
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 4,296
- Reaction score
- -2
Hit the nail on the head. Regulatory reform and regulatory cooperation always seems to lead to qualitative improvement , in the end.
An impressive and dynamic potential, indeed. The trade pact, the TPP, would foment cross border ties and harmonize corporate laws and legal processes for the members, an economic community worth $28 Trillion. Future is bright, indeed. Its great that Japan and the United States are taking time to iron out regulatory reform and regulatory agreements so that all bases are covered.
Like in anything in business, its best to take time to construct a business plan. Successful organizations are built on said steady foundation.
Banzai!
LOL! kalma ka lang amigo @Zero_wing , i empathize with your righteous indignation, truly, considering the repetitive and vociferous lambasting by some of our Chinese members. But, its just best to ignore such drivel. In the end, all that matters is that the Philippines' economy is growing at a steady 5-7% rate, the Philippines is ever integrating with Japan and the United States, militarily and now economically vis-a-vis the TPP. The future is bright, indeed, for your country.
Focus on that aspect. And revel and delight in the growth, unperturbed growth of your country in years to come.
Alam ko thanks pare
LeveragedBuyout
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,958
- Reaction score
- 60
- Country
- Location
@Nihonjin1051
I am currently on a business trip, and will be out of town through the July 4 weekend, so I will not be able to address TPP comprehensively until next week.
I am typing on a mobile and have no patience with the inefficiency, so I just want to make a few quick points that I will expand upon next time:
-TPP is not anti-China, it is pro-developed world (and pro-Vietnam, which uniquely reaps outsized benefits)
-The heart of TPP isn't the reduction of trade restrictions, it is the setting of high standards. You already did a superb job explaining about regulatory cooperation and reform. This is exactly aligned with that: writing the rules at a high standard to aid in harmonization (cooperation, or reform by establishing entirely new standards) so that governments, businesses, and consumers will have very high confidence in the trading partners' institutions (e.g. a product certified in Vietnam will not need to be recertified in the US, it will be accepted as if it were certified by American regulators)
-China isn't part of TPP because its economic philosophy is contrary to the spirit of multilateral trade negotiations. This encompasses everything from China's mercantilism (forcing JVs and technology transfer for market access, capital controls, autarky, etc.) to China's preference for divide et impera tactics (as we can see in the SCS, where China rejects internationalization of disputes and demands all problems be settled only bilaterally, not multilaterally), to lack of respect for IP rights, etc. China isn't being excluded--it simply judges that the sacrifices necessary to join are not worth the cost.
-Korea isn't included because the FTA concluded with SK yielded virtually no benefits for the US
-TTIP looks dead in the water, thanks to the feckless Euros, and India destroyed the latest WTO round, so this might be the latest mega-regional trade agreement available for this generation.
Anyway, that's all for now. Great discussion, everyone.
I am currently on a business trip, and will be out of town through the July 4 weekend, so I will not be able to address TPP comprehensively until next week.
I am typing on a mobile and have no patience with the inefficiency, so I just want to make a few quick points that I will expand upon next time:
-TPP is not anti-China, it is pro-developed world (and pro-Vietnam, which uniquely reaps outsized benefits)
-The heart of TPP isn't the reduction of trade restrictions, it is the setting of high standards. You already did a superb job explaining about regulatory cooperation and reform. This is exactly aligned with that: writing the rules at a high standard to aid in harmonization (cooperation, or reform by establishing entirely new standards) so that governments, businesses, and consumers will have very high confidence in the trading partners' institutions (e.g. a product certified in Vietnam will not need to be recertified in the US, it will be accepted as if it were certified by American regulators)
-China isn't part of TPP because its economic philosophy is contrary to the spirit of multilateral trade negotiations. This encompasses everything from China's mercantilism (forcing JVs and technology transfer for market access, capital controls, autarky, etc.) to China's preference for divide et impera tactics (as we can see in the SCS, where China rejects internationalization of disputes and demands all problems be settled only bilaterally, not multilaterally), to lack of respect for IP rights, etc. China isn't being excluded--it simply judges that the sacrifices necessary to join are not worth the cost.
-Korea isn't included because the FTA concluded with SK yielded virtually no benefits for the US
-TTIP looks dead in the water, thanks to the feckless Euros, and India destroyed the latest WTO round, so this might be the latest mega-regional trade agreement available for this generation.
Anyway, that's all for now. Great discussion, everyone.
Last edited:
Kyle Sun
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2014
- Messages
- 2,689
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
What I want to say is the so called Free trade or TPP is not that easy . Gov will try to protect own industries.
American Gov tried to protect their own car industry when their car companies can not win the competition.
Just look at the TPP negotiation between Japan and USA . They are still arguing about the RICE and CAR .
LeveragedBuyout
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,958
- Reaction score
- 60
- Country
- Location
What happened to you? You used to be reasonable.
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
he still is, no worry
AndrewJin
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2015
- Messages
- 14,904
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
No need to be reasonable toward the unreasonable.
Edison Chen
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2013
- Messages
- 2,933
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
Since New Zealand, Singapore, Brunei and Chile proposed to found this TPP, it's the year 2005....
I don't know the details of each round of negotiations, but what do you expect from it since it's 10 years passed now....
I don't know the details of each round of negotiations, but what do you expect from it since it's 10 years passed now....
????
