The Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership and its Implications for China's Role in East Asia Regional Integration

Abstract

International relations have undergone major transformations since the end of the Cold War. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and retreat of communism, the rise of liberalism pushed the world towards temporary peace while facilitating the spread of global capitalism. The collapse of the iron curtain and developments in technology ushered in the age of globalization, in which states become highly interdependent, and ideological confrontation and military competition have yielded their place to the market and economic cooperation. However, the stagnation of negotiations towards liberalization since the WTO Doha round provided a wakeup call for many states. States no longer simply embrace the ideal of multilateral trade liberalization and begin to adopt a more pragmatic approach towards global trade. Under the conception of "gaining the entry ticket first before upgrading the seat," states have turned their attention to the formation of regional trading networks, hoping to increase bilateralism before pushing for multilateral and trans-regional linkages.The development of regionalization in East Asia has lagged far behind the European Union (EU) and the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA). Regionalization in East Asia only began to take off after the Asian financial crisis, with the political and historical contradictions in the region affecting the delay in regional cooperation. Even though China, Japan and Korea have subsequently proposed schemes for regional cooperation since the early 1990s, territorial disputes and historical conflicts have hindered the realization of regional projects. Currently, regionalization in East Asia is centered on ASEAN. Over the years, ASEAN has expanded from the original ten countries in Southeast Asia to overlapping regional architectures that have different strategic implications such as ASEAN +

Cross-Strait Relations and Regional Integration: A Review of the Ma Ying-jeou Era (2008–2016)

“…Noting the RCEP as an alternative to the TPP, Taiwan has also expressed a strong interest in participating in the initiative. While some observers view the RCEP as a China-led counter proposal to the TPP (Hung and Liu 2012;Chang, Gordon 2015;Morimoto 2016), Taiwan finds no contradiction in potentially participating in both initiatives, following in the footsteps of countries that are already party to both RCEP and TPP negotiations, such as Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Australia, and New Zealand. In particular, following the conclusion of the ECFA and the ensuing détente across the Strait, Taiwan has repeatedly made clear to China its interest in RCEP membership.…”

Swords into ploughshares? China's Soft Power strategy in Southeast Asia and its challenges1

“…The US led Transpacific Partnership (TPP) initiative poses challenges Revista BRasileiRa de Política inteRnacional against China's effort to consolidate its leadership role in East Asia. The TPP contests the growing prominence of the ACFTA by bringing the leadership question in East Asia to the forefront of debates once again (Hung and Liu 2012). As a plan that essentially extends the concept of APEC, the TPP places the US at the heart of regional integration, a move that corresponds well with Washington's "return to Asia" policy.…”

Whither East Asian Regionalism? China's Pragmatism and Community Building Rhetoric

“…By referring to the US as an 'Asia Pacific nation' and himself as 'America's first Pacific President' , Obama essentially reiterated Washington's claim to influence in the Asia Pacific while hinting at a Pacific order or community that includes the US and centers on its leadership (Hung and Liu, 2012). As Amy Searight (2010: 8) puts concisely, 'TPP is very much a child of APEC.'…”

“…As Amy Searight (2010: 8) puts concisely, ‘TPP is very much a child of APEC.’ In terms of community building, the TPP is significant in that realization of the agreement would reconsolidate America's role in East Asia, a status that has been unsettled in recent years due to US exclusion from the ASEAN Plus process and the failure of APEC to achieve breakthroughs. By referring to the US as an ‘Asia Pacific nation’ and himself as ‘America's first Pacific President’, Obama essentially reiterated Washington's claim to influence in the Asia Pacific while hinting at a Pacific order or community that includes the US and centers on its leadership (Hung and Liu, 2012). Regardless of whether the US can steer the development of regionalism in East Asia in the near future, TPP negotiations thus far have greatly altered the regional atmosphere for integration by encouraging Asia to hedge its support (Goh, 2005; Chase, 2011).…”