Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The strategic value of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the consequences of abandoning it for the US role in Asia

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The promotion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) represented a major component of the strategy of rebalancing. Through the TPP, the Obama administration aimed at achieving several objectives: (1) ‘locking in’ an America-friendly form of free market capitalism as the main normative platform for economic integration in the Asia Pacific region; (2) reaffirming Washington’s capacity to shape the rules and norms of the international order; (3) keeping the region open to US influence and preventing China from creating a network of international institutions based on its leadership. The likely rejection of the agreement would dramatically diminish the possibility of achieving those objectives, weakening the foundations of the US-led order in Asia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Rules of origin are the criteria employed to decide the national source of a product. The methods and rules applied to establish the origin of a product can vary significantly depending on the principles employed in defining where the product is considered to have originated.

References

  • Alle, T., and A. Lug. 2016. Who wrote the rules for the Trans-Pacific Partnership? Research and Politics 3 (3): 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acharya, A., and A. Acharya. 2007. The Myth of the second front: Localizing the ‘war on terror’ in southeast Asia. Washington Quarterly 30 (4): 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader, J.A. 2012. Obama and China’s rise: An insider’s account of America’s Asia strategy. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R.E. 2006. Multilateralising regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as building blocs on the path to global free trade. The World Economy 29 (11): 1451–1518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beeson, M. 2006. American hegemony and regionalism: The rise of East Asia and the end of the Asia-Pacific. Geopolitics 11 (4): 541–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergsten, C. F. 2007. China and economic integration in East Asia: Implications for the United States, Policy Briefs in Peterson Institute of Economics, No. PB07-3, Washington, D.C.

  • Berteau, D.J., Z. Cooper, and M.J. Green. 2014. Assessing the Asia Pacific Rebalance. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati, J. 1995. US trade policy: The infatuation with FTAs. Columbia University, Discussion Paper Series 726.

  • Bhagwati, J. 2008. Termites in the trading system: How preferential agreements undermine free trade. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bremmer, I. 2010. The end of the free market: Who wins the war between states and corporations?. New York: Portfolio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K. M. 2008. China’s challenge and Asia’s rise: The case for US strategic re-engagement in the Asia Pacific region. Congressional Testimony.

  • Campbell, K.M. 2016. The pivot. The future of American statecraft in Asia. Boston: Twelve.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K.M., and E. Ratner. 2014. Far eastern promises why Washington should focus on Asia Foreign Affairs 93 (3): p106–p116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. 2015. US Defense Secretary supports trade deal with Asia. The New York Times.

  • Capobianco, A., and A. Christiansen. 2011. Competitive Neutrality and state-owned enterprises: Challenges and policy options, OECD Corporate Governance Working Papers, 1.

  • Clinton, H. 2011. America’s Pacific century. Foreign Policy 189 (1): 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clover, C., and M. Peel. 2016. Philippines Dodrigo Duterte announces separation from the US. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/f12d3f18-969c-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582.

  • Cooper, W. H., and M. E. Manyin. 2013. Japan joins the Trans-Pacific Partnership: What are the implications? Congress Research Service.

  • Dai, X. 2015. Who defines the rules of the game in East Asia? The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the strategic use of international institutions. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 15 (1): 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. 2015. Obama promotes benefits of trade deals to workers and smaller businesses. The New York Times.

  • Donilon, T. 2011. America is back in the Pacific and will uphold the rules. Financial Times.

  • Drake, E. 2012. Chinese state owned and state controlled enterprises: Policy options for addressing Chinese State Owned Enterprises. Testimony before the US-China Economic Security Review Commission.

  • Drezner, D.W. 2011. Does Obama have a grand strategy: Why we need doctrines in uncertain times. Foreign Affairs 90 (4): 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elms, D. 2013. The Trans-Pacific Partnership: The challenges of unraveling the noodle bowl. International Negotiation 18: 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmers, R., and J. Ravenhill. 2011. The Asian and global financial crises: Consequences for East Asian regionalism. Contemporary Politics 17 (2): 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferdinand, P. 2016. Westward ho—the China dream and ‘one belt one road’: Chinese foreign policy under Xi Jinping. International Affairs 924 (3): 941–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fergusson, I. F. M. A. McMinimy, and B. R. Williams. 2014. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations and issues for congress. Congressional Research Service.

  • Frankel, S. 2012. The intellectual property chapter in the TPP. In Trans-Pacific Partnership: The quest for a 21st century trade agreement, ed. C.L. Low, D. Elms, and P. Low, 157–170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Froman, M. 2014. Remarks at CSIS-US chamber of commerce conference. September 18th 2014.

  • Froman, M. 2015. Remarks by Ambassador Michael Froman at the CSIS asian architecture conference. Washington, September 22.

  • Froman, M., and M. E. Janow. 2016. The future of U.S. Trade and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Council of Foreign Relations. http://www.cfr.org/trade/future-us-trade-trans-pacific-partnership-conversation-michael-froman/p37973.

  • Glaser, B.S. 2012. Pivot to Asia: Prepare for unintended consequences. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, J., Fox, B. (November 16th, 2016) World Leaders take aim at Trump over trade. Washington Post.

  • Goh, E. 2008. Great powers and hierarchical order in Southeast Asia: Analyzing regional security strategies. International Security 32 (3): 113–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, E. 2013. The struggle for order: Hegemony, hierarchy, and transition in post-cold war East Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Green, M.J., and N. Szechenyi (eds.). 2015. “Pivot 2.0” how the administration and congress can work together to sustain American engagement in Asia to 2016. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grey, A. and P. Navarro. 2016. Donald Trump’s peace through strength vision for the Asia–Pacific. Foreign Policy.

  • Grimes, W.W. 2011. The Asian Monetary Fund Reborn? Implications of Chiang Mai initiative multilateralization. Asia Policy 11 (1): 79–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbinson, S., and A.K. Lim. 2012. Trade in Services. In Trans-Pacific Partnership: The quest for a 21st century trade agreement, ed. C.L. Low, D. Elms, and P. Low, 133–146. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • He, K. 2015. Contested regional orders and institutional balancing in the Asia Pacific. International Politics 52 (2): 208–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inside US Trade. 2013a. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) regulatory coherence. http://insidetrade.com/iwpfile.html?file=oct2011%2Fwto2011_3025d.pdf. Accessed 4 Sept 2014.

  • Inside US Trade. 2013b. Trans-Pacific Partnership intellectual property rights chapter (selected provisions). http://insidetrade.com/iwpfile.html?file=oct2011%2Fwto2011_3025c.pdf. Accessed 3 Sept 2014.

  • Jacobs, S., and P. Ladegaard. 2010. Regulatory governance in developing countries. Washington, DC: International Finance Corporations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Y. 2010. Response and responsibility: China in East Asian financial cooperation. The Pacific Review 23 (5): 603–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, V. C. and Michael F. Martin. 2012. International trade: Rules of Origin Congressional Research Service RL34524. January 5.

  • Katada, S. 2009. Politics that constrains: The logic of fragmented regionalism East Asian Institute Fellows Program Working Paper no. 21.

  • Kawase. 2014. Trans Pacific Partnership and Rule making to regulate the state-owned enterprises. RIETI Policy Update 053.

  • Knowles. 2016. Trump Likens TPP deal to rape Bloomberg. http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-28/trump-channels-brexit-in-anti-trade-speech-at-pennsylvania-factory.

  • Labott, E., and N. Gaurette. 2016. TPP defeat, future of US Asia Alliance sour Obama’s final trip. CNN Politics. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/14/politics/tpp-trade-deal-trump-obama-trip/.

  • Manyin, M. E., S. Daggett, B. Dolven, S.V. Lawrence, M. F. Martin, R. O’Rourke, and B. Vaughn. 2012. Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration’s Rebalancing Toward Asia. Congressional Research Service.

  • Mastanduno, M. 2009. System maker and privilege taker. US power and the international political economy. World Politics 61: 121–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNally, C.A. 2012. Sino-capitalism: China’s reemergence and the international political economy. World Politics 64 (04): 741–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros, E.S. 2008. Pacific currents: The responses of US allies and security partners in East Asia to China’s rise. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer, J. 2016. Trump, trade and security. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2016/11/14/trump-trade-and-security-a-way-forward/.

  • Milbank, D. 2016. The Trumpification of Mike Pence. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-trumpification-of-mike-pence/2016/09/13/6d5128fc-79f1-11e6-bd86-b7bbd53d2b5d_story.html?utm_term=.60fb13083a42.

  • Philips, A. 2016. Progressive are putting Hillary Clinton on a though spot on trade (again). Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/14/how-progressives-are-putting-hillary-clinton-in-a-tough-spot-on-trade-again/.

  • Platzer, M. D. 2013. U.S. Textile Manufacturing and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations. Congressional Research Service.

  • Ravenhill, J. 2013. Economics and security in the Asia-Pacific region. The Pacific Review 26 (1): 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, R.S. 2012. Problem with the Pivot: Obama’s New Asia Policy is unnecessary and counterproductive. Foreign Affairs 91 (6): 70–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schott, J. J., and K. Cimino. 2014. Should Korea Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership? Peterson Institute of Economics Policy Brief 14–22.

  • Searight, A. 2010. United States and Asian Regionalism: The politics of reactive leadership. In Evolution of East Asian Regionalism: Ideas, interests, and domestic institutions, ed. V.K. Aggarwal, and Seungjoo Lee. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solís, M. 2015. The geopolitical importance of the Trans Pacific Partnership: at stake the liberal economic order. Brookings Institution. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/order-from-chaos/posts/2015/03/13-geopolitical-importance-transpacific-partnership.

  • Solis, M. 2016. The Trans-Pacific Partnership: The politics of openness and leadership in the Asia-Pacific. Asia Working Paper Group 6. Brookings Institution.

  • Song, G., and W.J. Yuan. 2012. China’s Free Trade Agreement Strategies. The Washington Quarterly 35 (4): 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szamosszegi, A. and C. Kyle. 2011. An analysis of state-owned enterprises and state capitalism in China. US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

  • The White House. 2009. Remarks by the President to Suntori Hall, Tokyo, Japan.

  • The White House. 2015. The National Security Strategy. Washington, D.C.

  • Tellis, A.J. 2014. Balancing without containment. An American strategy for managing China. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of State. 2016. Secretary John Kerry Remarks on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Wilson Center, Washington DC, 28 September.

  • US Trade Representative. 2016a. Trans pacific partnership final full text: chapter 3: Rules of origin and origin procedures. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Rules-of-Origin-and-Origin-Procedures.pdf.

  • US Trade Representative. 2016b. Trans Pacific partnership final full text: Chapter 11: Financial services. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Financial-Services.pdf.

  • US Trade Representative. 2016c. Trans Pacific Partnership Final Full Text: chapter 17, state-owned enterprises and designated monopolies. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-State-Owned-Enterprises-and-Designated-Monopolies.pdf.

  • US Trade Representative. 2016d. Trans Pacific Partnership Final Full Text: chapter 18, intellectual property https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Intellectual-Property.pdf.

  • US Trade Representative. 2016e. Trans Pacific Partnership Final Full Text: chapter 25, regulatory coherence. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Regulatory-Coherence.pdf.

  • Wan, M. 2010. The great recession and China’s policy toward Asian regionalism. Asian Survey 50 (3): 520–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye, M. 2015. China and competing cooperation in Asia-Pacific: TPP, RCEP, and the New Silk Road. Asian Security 11 (3): 206–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Bologna, Strada Maggiore 45, Bologna, BO, Italy

    Matteo Dian

Authors
  1. Matteo Dian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matteo Dian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dian, M. The strategic value of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the consequences of abandoning it for the US role in Asia. Int Polit 54, 583–597 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0051-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0051-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation