Panning the Decision To Back Out of Key Trade Deal

Latest Polls (view all)

Where do you stand on the Transgender Issue now that the issue has gotten to the overt point of the open celebration of this lifestyle choice, dictated by certain direct and explicit actions.

84.13% I do not approve of behavior that has within its expressed tenants policies that harm children.

14.29% I do support the Trans Community in all its many facets because diversity is at a premium in today's society.

1.59% What is a "Children's Drag Queen Story Hour?"

Click Here to Vote
63 Vote(s)

View all Polls

Panning the Decision To Back Out of Key Trade Deal

Published: Thursday, November 26th, 2020 @ 8:05 am
By: John Locke Foundation ( More Entries )

Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the John Locke Foundation. The author of this post is Mitch Kokai.

Editors at National Review Online remind us about the costly decision to remove the United States from an important trade agreement.

Within weeks of his 2016 election victory, President Trump announced plans to withdraw the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a multilateral trade deal intended to build an economic bulwark against China. That decision paved the way for this weekend's signing of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a free-trade agreement between China and 14 Asian neighbors.

The RCEP — signed by the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations as well as Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea — covers 2.3 billion people, making it the largest-ever trade agreement, even after India's withdrawal scaled it back. Though of marginal material consequence to the global economy, its signing represents another step in China's march to regional dominance.

The RCEP will phase out most tariffs between member countries over a 20-year period, a provision that essentially replicates existing trade arrangements. Indeed, previous deals with much more comprehensive and stringent rules have already achieved most of the trade liberalization included in the RCEP, muting its effect. ...

... It does, though, contain one significant provision instituting a common rule of origin. Whereas previously businesses had to attain various certifications to ship products between member countries, they now need just one so-called certificate of origin. That makes supply-chain management easier and could incentivize companies to locate more of their production in the region. ...

... Still, the sheer extent of the trade zone should worry Washington, which has missed opportunity after opportunity to convert the grievances of China's neighbors into meaningful policy victories. If previous ASEAN agreements are any indication, the scope of the RCEP is likely to expand over time. And those nations most willing to partner with the U.S. against China — Japan and South Korea — rank among the largest beneficiaries of the agreement.

Go Back