Japan's Abe says TPP would have strategic significance if China joined

[Aepsilons]

Can we please stick to the topic? Thanks.

------


While Chinese government cautiously welcomed the agreement reached by the 12 nations negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said it would create the world’s largest free trade area to usher a “new century” for Asia.


Japanese PM Shinzo Abe

Abe expressed hope China might one day join the historic accord.

“If China participates in this system in the future, that will contribute to both Japan’s security and the stability of the Asia-Pacific region,” he said.

A spokesman of the Chinese ministry of commerce said Beijing is “open to any mechanism” that follows World Trade Organization rules.

He hoped the deal will make a contribution to the development of trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region.

However, he did not indicate China would join the TPP.

China notably is not party to the negotiations and has embarked on plans to set up a rival agreement.

Xiang Songzuo, chief economist of the Agricultural Bank of China, said although TPP will not have a large impact on China’s competitive advantage in the near future, it will erode in the long run if the TPP takes more members, especially from European countries.

Hailing the deal in a televised news conference, Abe said: “A huge economic zone will emerge… the TPP will make our lives more prosperous.

“It’s the opening of a new century for the Asia-Pacific region,” he said, adding that the deal would “fundamentally strengthen rule of law in economic activities by establishing a free, fair and open international economic system.”

Spanning about two-fifths of the global economy, the hard-won agreement — which took five years to negotiate — aims to set the rules for 21st century trade and investment in the Pacific region.

Under the deal, 98% of tariffs will be eliminated on everything from beef, dairy, wine, sugar, rice, horticulture and seafood, through to manufactured products, resources and energy.



Abe has been a leading flag-waver for the TPP and in doing so has taken on the country’s entrenched agricultural lobby, usually staunch advocates of his Liberal Democratic Party.

“Melons made in Hokkaido, pears made in Oita and delicious rice will have a great opportunity” to access the global market, he said.

Abe also noted that Japan secured exclusion in the TPP’s tariff-free principles for some of its domestically sensitive products—such as the country’s staple food rice, sugar beet, beef, pork and in dairy.

“With strengthening in rules on intellectual property rights and measures to address piracy and counterfeit goods, Japan’s contents business will enjoy entering foreign markets with a sense of safety,” he added.

The accord must still be signed and ratified by the respective countries, including Japan.

Car manufacturers in the export-heavy economy are likely to benefit from the TPP.

“We welcome that tariffs on automobile parts will be removed immediately between Japan and the United States, and with Canada, relatively high tariffs on vehicles will be removed in a short period of time,” Fumihiko Ike, chairman of Honda as well as of the Japan Automobile Manufacturing Association, said in a statement.


TPP: China cautiously hails deal, Abe hopes Beijing will join pact | Asia Times

Abe expressed hope China might one day join the historic accord.

“If China participates in this system in the future, that will contribute to both Japan’s security and the stability of the Asia-Pacific region,” he said.

A spokesman of the Chinese ministry of commerce said Beijing is “open to any mechanism” that follows World Trade Organization rules.

I think this is very , very pertinent.

 

[biendong]

Enough.

Chinese member trolled about 1006 year first, bro.

OK, I turn back to the topic.

Trans-Pacific Trade Deal a Setback for China
TPP marks a victory for Japan and other U.S. allies in the battle with China over shaping the future of global commerce.

A sweeping trade deal concluded on Monday marks a victory for Japan and other U.S. allies in the battle with China over shaping the future of global commerce.

The 12-member Trans-Pacific Partnership, which doesn’t include China, highlights the price that Beijing is paying for delaying overhauls as other countries write a new rule book for trade across 40% of the global economy, experts say.

By
MARK MAGNIER in Beijing and
MITSURU OBE in Tokyo
Updated Oct. 5, 2015 8:31 a.m. ET
8 COMMENTS
A sweeping trade deal concluded on Monday marks a victory for Japan and other U.S. allies in the battle with China over shaping the future of global commerce.

The 12-member Trans-Pacific Partnership, which doesn’t include China, highlights the price that Beijing is paying for delaying overhauls as other countries write a new rule book for trade across 40% of the global economy, experts say.

Japan’s leadership views the agreement as key to its economic and security goals as China expands its influence in the region, especially in Southeast Asia, where Japan has long been a major investor and aid donor.

“We will help promote regional growth, prosperity and stability by deepening economic ties with countries that share values such as freedom, democracy, basic human rights, and rules of law,” Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said recently.

China is on a weeklong national holiday and officials weren’t immediately available to comment but the official Xinhua News Agency said Sunday that TPP negotiations lacked transparency.

Some Chinese analysts reiterated the long-standing criticism that Washington conceived the trade accord to hold China back. “Will China join? Does the TPP led by the U.S. intend to contain China?” said Fudan University professor Feng Wei on his verified Weibo social media account.

Years in the making, the agreement would lower barriers to the exchange of goods and services among members, which in the Asia-Pacific region also includes Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei.

China had been invited to join the trade group, but Beijing has been reluctant to comply with many of the required rules, such as opening up the financial sector. By not being a founding member, experts say, China misses the opportunity to help shape an important pillar of the global trading system—a priority for President Xi Jinping.

“The key is whether China’s domestic reforms will be enough or sufficient. If they are not, it will have to follow the U.S. and lose its chance with the TPP to help make the rules,” said Shi Yinhong, director of the Center on American Studies at Renmin University.

The trade deal is expected to help blunt Beijing’s efforts to chart its own course for the region. Those include its own proposed and modest regional trade bloc, the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific, and the new Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a rival to the Tokyo-led Asian Development Bank, which is based in Manila.

Other Asian countries are more likely to join the TPP rather than a trade bloc led by Beijing unless China opens up its economy, said Masahiro Kawai, a former Japanese finance ministry official and former World Bank chief economist for East Asia and Pacific.

The world’s second-largest economy also misses out on a grouping that includes many technologically advanced countries at a time when it is working hard to introduce high-tech innovation, analysts said. And its economy needs the pressure of foreign competition to give its stalled domestic reform agenda a push, as with the productivity burst China enjoyed after joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, they added.

Two years ago, Mr. Xi announced a broad overhaul to give markets greater sway in an effort to ward off a slowdown and shift the economy to services and consumption and away from industry.Restructuring, however, has been spotty, delayed by opposition from state companies, by the sharpness of the deceleration, corporate and local government debt and excess capacity in housing and industry.

China’s own nascent trade architecture—including bilateral agreements with Australia and South Korea and a proposed and relatively modest regional free trade area—is unlikely to give it the trade discipline needed to propel its slowing economy forward, Mr. Shi added.

Still, fear of being excluded and the opportunity to use foreign pressure as a justification to push through domestic restructuring could help pro-reform groups within China over the medium term and potentially accelerate negotiations over a U.S. Bilateral Investment Treaty, analysts said.

“One of the major problems they have is how to break the monopoly of state-owned companies,” said Jing Huang, professor with the National University of Singapore. “TPP may help Chinese leaders who want reform, although of course they don’t say that.”

Some Chinese companies aren’t waiting for Beijing to act.

Zhang Kui, general manager of Bros Holding Ltd., which operates textile and apparel factories in several Chinese provinces, said its $300 million investment in TPP member Vietnam since 2012—where wages are about 60% those of eastern China—should allow it to ship goods from that country to other member nations at favorable tariff rates.

Beijing could face significant internal and external hurdles if it eventually moves to join the trade bloc, said University of Chicago professor Dali Yang, especially given concern among some that it hasn’t always followed the rules since joining the WTO. Even inside China, there is growing recognition that China’s somewhat capricious system—where regulations can be applied arbitrarily and state-owned companies still dominate large swaths of the economy—makes membership unlikely soon, he added.

“The Chinese economy needs a jolt. It really needs reform,” Mr. Yang said. “Many feel the TPP was borne out of a frustration after the WTO, that China went back on its word in telecommunication, for instance, by not letting foreigners have a major stake.”

But China is setting the stage to join TPP in a few years by lobbying European and other U.S. allies to accept China as a market economy; slowly reforming its state-owned companies and eventually forging an investment deal with the U.S., said University of Singapore’s Mr. Huang. “I don’t think they want to join very soon, it’s not realistic,” he said. “But their view is, ‘We’ll get in sooner or later.’ China is keeping its options open,” he added.

Fanfan Wang contributed to this article.

Trans-Pacific Trade Deal a Setback for China - WSJ

 

[Aepsilons]

Chinese member trolled about 1006 year first, bro.

OK, I turn back to the topic.

Thanks man. Let's just keep it cool in here.

 

[Viva_Viet]

JP was forced to join the TPP, and its PM just try to gain some benefit by 'inviting' CN to join and share the 'loss' with JP.

I told you guys already, only greedy US and VN gain benefit in TPP. Japan may gain the control of SK,TW, but gain Nothing in economy benefit

 

[TaiShang]

JP was forced to join the TPP, and its PM just try to gain some benefit by 'inviting' CN to join and share the 'loss' with JP.

Wise points, bro.

China won't bite the bait.

 

[Aepsilons]

OK, TPP countries, we should use English like second language.

Ha ha ha, a very GOOD point !

Japan may gain the control of SK,TW, but gain Nothing in economy benefit

Japan will be able to tap into the massive US market in terms of auto sales and manufacturing, as the major barrier in the past was US tariffs. Mind you that the US-Japan bilateral trade this year has been north of $200 Billion (USD). Let us say we expect that to increase substantially after TPP is implemented operationally. Naturally id love to see US-Japan trade levels to reach $300 Billion , even $500 billion levels.

To be honest, the Japanese farming sector might loose a bit, but you know what, they can be subsidized. And to be honest, Japanese agri sector isn't really a 'major' sector in Japanese economy. So we have to think pragmatically speaking. This means more and more Japanese imports of agri, livestock, fish from Vietnam, from US, from Malaysia, from Mexico, from Chile, from Canada , from Australia.

We win some, we loose some, most importan is we benefit, too. The whole region benefits.

 

[Kyle Sun]

I told you guys already, only greedy US and VN gain benefit in TPP. Japan may gain the control of SK,TW, but gain Nothing in economy benefit

Are you listening to yourself ??

 

[Viva_Viet]

Japan will be able to tap into the massive US market in terms of auto sales and manufacturing, as the major barrier in the past was US tariffs. Mind you that the US-Japan bilateral trade this year has been north of $200 Billion (USD). Let us say we expect that to increase substantially after TPP is implemented operationally. Naturally id love to see US-Japan trade levels to reach $300 Billion , even $500 billion levels.

To be honest, the Japanese farming sector might loose a bit, but you know what, they can be subsidized. And to be honest, Japanese agri sector isn't really a 'major' sector in Japanese economy. So we have to think pragmatically speaking. This means more and more Japanese imports of agri, livestock, fish from Vietnam, from US, from Malaysia, from Mexico, from Chile, from Canada , from Australia.

We win some, we loose some, most importan is we benefit, too. The whole region benefits.

and you think US will let its car makers die bcz of JP car ???

Nope, they will do many dirty tricks to take JP car sale down. Dont forget US is the one who make TPP rule, others nations ( except VN) are forced to follow. JP CAD Aussie have No different with former S.VN _

I guess we must encourage him to talk more. LOL.

Yeah, talk more about VN benefit in TPP is good...specially while watching RMB falling like an old leaf in near future

 

[Aepsilons]

and you think US will let its car makers die bcz of JP car ???

Nope, they will do many dirty tricks to take JP car sale down. Dont forget US is the one who make TPP rule, others nations ( except VN) are forced to follow. JP CAD Aussie have No different with former S.VN _

Well they've been complaining because of lack of saturation into the Japanese market. I suppose more US autos will penetrate Japanese market, and ... Japan will penetrate deep in US market.

So its dual penetration scheme, is suppose.

LOL

Yeah, talk more about VN benefit in TPP is good...specially while watching RMB falling like an old leaf in near future

Hopefully the RMB won't fall that much, since there is so much VN-CN intertrade using the Yuan as currency. In fact it would affect VN a lot, too. One thing is for sure bro, VN and CN are inextricably linked due to the geographic proximity and just the shear cross-border trade; remember its over $60 Billion already (thats more than the economies of Laos and Cambodia combined).

 

[Viva_Viet]

Well they've been complaining because of lack of saturation into the Japanese market. I suppose more US autos will penetrate Japanese market, and ... Japan will penetrate deep in US market.

So its dual penetration scheme, is suppose.

LOL

If things are easy for other TPP nations like that, then US wont force people to make the deal in secret.

We know US made many diry trick on the deal, just like how they treat our former S.VN Govt .

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Forgetting China, the FLAW at the centre of TPP – Peter Robertson

Published: 8 October 2015 9:38 AM

Like many trade policy initiatives, the newly finalised 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is motivated by a desire to help domestic exporters get better foreign market access.

The key idea is one of mutual concessions, in exchange for foreign market access we give up some of our own subsidies or protection.

Despite the headlines, however, the TPP agreement has LITTLE TO DO with the ECONOMIC argument for FREE TRADE.

This is because the economic gains from trade trade don’t come from exporting more, or from preferential market access. They have nothing to do with mutual concessions. Rather the gains from trade are derived from being able to IMPORT at LOWER prices.

This means that costs of trade barriers are INCURRED by consumers in the country that IMPOSES the trade barriers. Consequently the benefits of free trade can be mostly gained by removing one’s own trade barriers.

When one thinks about the costs of trade barriers and the benefits of trade liberalisation, it is easy to see major flaws in the TPP as an economic policy.

Firstly because tariff barriers are ALL ALREADY VERY LOW between the member countries, any economic gains that might be realised by mutual concessions are likely to be EXCEEDINGLY SMALL. Reasonable estimates come up with numbers like 1/10 of a percent of GDP. This, as the Nobel Laureate and economist Paul Krugman notes, is HARDLY WORLD-SHAKING.

Second, the TPP is an international club with exclusive benefits for members. Like any selective club, it’s not so much about who you let in, but WHO YOU KEEP OUT, like China.

This exclusivity and security baggage is the SECOND FLAW. If, as they claim, the 12 TPP countries really wanted to promote economic growth and raise living standards, they WOULD HAVE SOUGHT to include China from the OUTSET.

The omission of China is of course STRATEGIC. But it is further CAUSE for SKEPTICISM over the claim that the TPP is designed to generate economic BENEFITS. The benefits would have been much larger with China and larger still with other countries.

Am I being too idealistic? Proponents of TPP say the collapse of the multilateral World Trade Organization (WTO) process, at Cancun in 2003, shows that is unrealistic to expect a trade deal that is all inclusive. This then NECESSITATES regional agreements with like-minded nations.

That failure, however, was not a result of too many countries with different agendas. Rather it was caused by the REFUSAL of the United States, and a few other RICH COUNTRIES with high levels of agricultural protection, to reduce those protection levels.

This hurts US consumers since US farm support schemes are currently costing taxpayers US$20 billion per year. But, along with similar schemes in OECD countries, it also depresses world prices and so which redistributes income away from many of the WORLDS' POOREST COUNTRIES that export agricultural products.

So the exclusivity of the TPP agreement, and the omission of China, is not borne of necessity. It results from the TORPEDOING of the WTO PROCESS by the PROTECTIONIST stance of some influential large countries with highly protected agricultural sectors.

Thus the TPP seeks to remove barriers only where there is the least political cost, and excludes countries and sectors where there could be significant economic gains.

As such it appears to be maximising political kudos while minimising the potential for economic gains.

The eminent trade economist Jagdish Bhagwati has labelled it “a TESTAMENT to the ability of US to OBFUSCATE PUBLIC POLICY”.

No doubt the politicians are pleased with the last minute deal.

The Economist magazine suggests it has saved face for US political leadership. But, as Shania Twain says, that don’t impress me much. – Jakarta Globe, October 8, 2015.

* Peter Robertson is a Winthrop professor at University of Western Australia.


I agree with the author, "it’s not so much about who you let in, but WHO YOU KEEP OUT" and the next question is why?

China will soon be overtaking USA as the world biggest consumer market and the world largest economy.
USA fears the RISE OF CHINA, not so much of militarily than in economy.

Just imagine Chinese brands e.g. Xiaomi, Huawei, Lenovo, BYD, Chery, HSR, etc flooding the USA market, USA will be totally HELPLESS in trying to stop this.

Hence USA group their usual OBEDIENCE and compliance team together in secret negotiations and created sugar-coated NEW RULES to prevent the Chinese invasion they feared.

TPP should not and will not affects developed nation like Singapore, Japan, Australia but for poorer nations e.g. Vietnam, etc they have sacrifice more for a small gain. ( Is that why Philippines refuse to sign up so far?)
Another example TPP is supposed to lift tariff yet the latest information is tariff for all Japanese vehicle entering into USA will remain for the next 30 odd year. Then what is the difference?

If poor economy like Vietnam imagine that MNC will now flood their nations with new factories to replace China, think again e.g. where does most of the products manufactured at Intel eventually ended up in. An offended China can easily offset the game by raising the tariff or even banning the import from Vietnam for a short period and everything will dry up for Vietnam. Vietnam trade with USA is so small that even a small island like Singapore dwarf hers.
Next if Vietnamese fanboys think USA will come to rescue the COMMUNIST regime in Vietnam, they must be fantasizing.

 

[Viva_Viet]

Hopefully the RMB won't fall that much, since there is so much VN-CN intertrade using the Yuan as currency. In fact it would affect VN a lot, too. One thing is for sure bro, VN and CN are inextricably linked due to the geographic proximity and just the shear cross-border trade; remember its over $60 Billion already (thats more than the economies of Laos and Cambodia combined).

Nope, we dont negotiate with the invaders, so no VN-RMB swapt. We will soon say no to CN machineries and replace by used US's ones instead.

 

[Aepsilons]

If things are easy for other TPP nations like that, then wont force people to make the deal in secret.

We know US made many diry trick on the deal, just like how they treat our former S.VN Govt .

The US will also be held accountable to anti-graft , anti-corruption policies. In fact the US would absorb the costs in a way since it is willing to sacrifice some capital in order to assuage the region in regards to America's "Asian Pivot". I suppose economic capital can be absorbed, so long as there is political / geopolitical victory.

The Americans , remember, are in for the geopolitical aspect. Obama, for example, is a politician in that regard. The TPP has been the hallmark of his 2nd term.

Nope, we dont negotiate with the invaders, so no VN-RMB swapt. We will soon say no to CN machineries and replace by used US's ones instead.

LOL, bro, i think you are a bit emotional. Come, sit down, drink some tapioca durian juice, and let's talk after you calm down. OK?

Nope, we dont negotiate with the invaders, so no VN-RMB swapt. We will soon say no to CN machineries and replace by used US's ones instead.

If i may imitate @mike2000 is back , "hhahahahaha OOOOOOKAY!!"

 

[Kyle Sun]

Dont forget US is the one who make TPP rule, others nations ( except VN) are forced to follow. JP CAD Aussie have No different with former S.VN _

okay , US makes the rules , no doubt.
others nations are forced to follow, no doubt.

And (except VN). Do you mean VN does not need to follow TPP rules ?

 

[Obambam]

US makes the rules , no doubt.
others nations are forced to follow, no doubt.

Not to China's interest, no doubt.

We already have deals trade relations with all members of this so called pact. It makes little sense to join unless we want to destroy all the hard work laid down by our forefathers, put a dent to our national interest and fuel the momentum of a frame work that's designed, essentially to aid America and let us be milked).