The "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" should not and cannot become an exclusive "small circle"
May 25, 2022 16:40:00 source: China today Author: Zhang Xudong,
Following the introduction of the "Indo Pacific Strategy" at the beginning of 2022, the Biden administration finally announced the launch of the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" in May. Although this framework aims to establish high standards for cooperation in digital trade, clean energy, supply chain security and tax anti-corruption, which is conducive to maintaining the leading position of the United States in economic and trade cooperation in the region, it has many inherent shortcomings in the face of domestic political resistance and concerns of countries in the region, not only the lack of key incentive measures such as tariff reduction and market access, And the strategic direction of isolating and excluding China has made many countries in the region hesitate. In order to resolve a series of questions about the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" and dispel the concerns of countries in the region, the United States must make a wise answer to the fundamental direction of the "Indo Pacific Strategy", otherwise any new strategic framework will be unpopular and will be in a dilemma.
Biden administration complements the important weakness of "Indo Pacific Strategy"
In February 2022, the Biden administration of the United States officially issued the "Indo Pacific Strategy" document. In the strategic design of the U.S. government, economic security is an important part of national security, and economic and trade cooperation with the Indian Pacific region is related to the competitiveness and attractiveness of the United States in the region. However, since the Trump administration withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement at the beginning of taking office, the United States has failed to participate in the multilateral economic and trade agreement negotiations in the Asia Pacific region for many years. During this period, not only has the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement without the United States been officially effective, but also China, which is regarded by the United States as a major competitor, has actively sought to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans Pacific Partnership, which has been upgraded after the withdrawal of the United States, and the Digital Economic Partnership agreement, which is regarded as a template for the digital trade agreement. This makes the weakness of the US "India Pacific Strategy" in the economic and trade field more prominent.
On the afternoon of May 23, 2022 local time, in Tokyo, Japan, US President Biden officially announced the launch of the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework", with 13 countries including the United States, South Korea, Japan, India, Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam and Brunei becoming initial members.
The United States cannot accept a "post American Era" Asia Pacific Economic and trade cooperation system, nor does it want to miss the dominant power in the formulation of global digital trade rules. Since the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement has been judged as a "political death" in the United States, the Biden administration, which has established the policy of "American workers first", is unwilling and unable to negotiate a new comprehensive economic and trade agreement with Asia Pacific countries. In this case, the feasible strategy for the United States is to strive to build a loose economic and trade cooperation framework with Asia Pacific countries that highlights the priority concerns of the United States and does not touch sensitive domestic topics, preferably without congressional approval. U.S. trade representative Katherine Tai once said: I think there is an extremely profound lesson here, that is, the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement is ultimately quite fragile as expected. Trade is an important component of this framework, but not the only component.
Based on the above, nearly one and a half years after taking office, US President Biden began his first visit to East Asia during his term of office, and the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" that had been negotiated with allies and partner countries for months in the early stage also officially surfaced. On May 23, Biden announced in Tokyo, Japan that the United States and 13 countries including Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei have become founding members of the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework". It is estimated that the population covered by the "framework" is 2.5 billion, and the economic aggregate of each member state accounts for 40% of the global total. It is worth noting that the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" includes all members of the four nation mechanism of the United States, Japan, India and Australia and all military allies of the United States in the Asia Pacific region, as well as all ASEAN countries except Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia.
According to the assumption of the United States, the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" will contain four pillars: first, formulate so-called fair, high standard and binding rules in the fields of digital trade, labor and environment; Second, improve the toughness and security of the supply chain of important industries such as chips, high-capacity batteries, medical products and key minerals; Third, promote high standard infrastructure construction, decarbonization and green technology development; Fourth, promote regulatory cooperation in taxation, anti money-laundering and anti-corruption. In order to improve the overall inclusiveness of the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework", the United States does not require Member States to participate in negotiations in all areas. Member states need to identify pillar areas for consultations before mid June, and then conduct ministerial level negotiations around each specific area. In other words, the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" is still in the stage of determining the principle direction and jointly building the framework.
Katherine Tai, the US trade representative, was outspoken about the strategic intention of promoting the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework". She said that the framework was designed to "effectively counter China's growing influence". U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo also said that the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" provides Asian countries with alternatives other than China. At present, the business community is actively looking for alternative options other than China, and American enterprises are confident that they will benefit from it.
Indeed, some countries in the Asia Pacific region have great expectations for the United States to participate in regional economic and trade cooperation, of which Singapore's position is the most representative. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore believes that the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" has strategic significance and economic interests. "It can become a valuable platform for the United States to carry out economic diplomacy in the Indo Pacific region, clearly indicating that the United States will continue to be committed to engaging with its Asian partner countries and deepening its ties in the Pacific region.". The above statement can be interpreted into two meanings: first, the Asia Pacific economies represented by Singapore believe that the United States' participation in regional economic and trade cooperation is essential, which is also the necessary support for the United States' long-term commitment to the region; Second, since the United States has set up a cooperation platform, there is room for imagination about the depth and breadth of its participation in cooperation in the future. Although the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" is not a free trade agreement at present, it does not rule out that it may include this content in the future. In fact, many Asia Pacific countries have high expectations for the United States to rejoin the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans Pacific Partnership. Japan's appeal in this regard is particularly strong. In recent years, it has persistently persuaded the United States to reconsider its decisions from a strategic perspective.
Countries in the region generally do not support the creation of small groups for China
As a region with high acceptance of globalization and free trade and remarkable achievements, the Asia Pacific region has a high degree of consensus in promoting economic and trade integration, has formed a unique cooperation path, built an interrelated regional cooperation platform, and continuously improved the level of trade and investment liberalization and facilitation in the region.
At a critical moment when the world is facing multiple crises such as energy, food and supply chain, and at a critical juncture when many countries are facing high inflation and a serious decline in people's living standards, what the Asia Pacific region is more looking forward to is that the United States sincerely promotes the upgrading of regional cooperation to achieve economic recovery, rather than any attempt to force all parties to "choose sides and stand in line", create separatist confrontation, openly and secretly advocate economic decoupling, technological blockade, break the industrial chain. In other words, the Asia Pacific countries generally do not support the United States to start a new campaign to impact the existing regional cooperation framework, to build the "India Pacific Economic Framework" into a strategic competitive tool that excludes China, to politicize and even ideologize economic and trade issues as a "new cold war", and to upgrade the arena of trade war.
The attitude of South Korea, which recently upgraded its comprehensive strategic alliance with the United States, is the most typical. The South Korean government stressed that the so-called supply chain alliance created by the United States and South Korea has no intention of excluding China from the global industrial chain supply chain cooperation. The ROK will also strengthen close communication with China to avoid China feeling neglected and excluded. In addition, the ROK will not only continue to cooperate with China on building a more resilient supply chain, but also actively promote the negotiation on the upgraded version of the China ROK free trade agreement.
In fact, the United States is well aware of the concerns of countries in the Asia Pacific region, and is well aware of the obvious drawback that the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" at this stage is not attractive enough. Due to domestic political resistance, when the United States launched the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework", it excluded tariff concessions, market access and other contents that might be the most encouraging for other members to join the framework. At the same time, it also hoped that all participants would abide by fairly high implementation standards in terms of digital trade, energy and environmental protection, climate reduction, labor rights and interests, etc. Under such circumstances, many Asian countries are hesitant to join the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework", and even do not know what mechanism they want to join and why. The Associated Press commented that the "Indian Pacific Economic Framework" lacked practical content in terms of market access, which called into question its attractiveness. The Nikkei Asia also pointed out that if the United States wants countries to comply with its proposed trade rules, it needs to reduce tariffs to encourage Member States to comply with the remaining provisions, otherwise emerging economies will not be easily moved by "ideals and strategies".
In order to ensure the smooth launch of the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" and its acceptance by most countries in the region, the Biden government had to restrain the pertinence of its strategic direction. However, since the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" is in the early stage of its establishment, its future destiny is unknown, and it is impossible to completely rule out the possibility of China's future accession. At the same time, under the continuous strong diplomatic warnings and military deterrence of the Chinese government, even if the US Congress exerted great pressure on it, the Taiwan Democratic Progressive Party authorities also lobbied repeatedly. The Biden administration finally failed to break through the red line of the "One China principle” and refused to include Taiwan in the "Indian Pacific economic framework".
In short, the "Indo Pacific Economic Framework" has started with expectations and doubts. If it can take promoting economic recovery and industrial chain cooperation as its main purpose, adhere to the idea of opening up and win-win results, act in accordance with free trade rules, sincerely seek unity, stability and prosperity in the region, remove geopolitical selfishness, and do not seek to isolate and exclude China, then this framework will be constructive and sustainable, It is expected to bring the United States a rich return worthy of the political courage and decision-making wisdom of its policymakers.
Zhang Xudong, researcher, Institute of global governance and development, Tongji University, doctor of international relations, Tsinghua University
“印太经济框架”不该也无法成为排他性“小圈子”
2022-05-25 16:40:00来源:今日中国作者:本刊特约评论员 张旭东
继2022年初出台“印太战略”之后,美国拜登政府终于在5月宣布启动“犹抱琵琶半遮面”的“印太经济框架”。虽然这一框架旨在创立数字贸易、清洁能源、供应链安全和税收反腐败等方面合作的高标准,有利于维护美国在该地区的经贸合作主导地位,但面对美国国内政治阻力和域内国家的顾虑,其存在诸多先天不足,不仅缺少关税减让和市场准入等关键激励举措,且孤立排斥中国的战略指向令众多域内国家踟蹰不前。要想化解“印太经济框架”的一系列疑问,打消域内国家的顾虑,美国就必须在“印太战略”的根本指向这一问题上做出明智的回答,否则任何新战略新框架都会不得人心,难逃困局。
拜登政府补上“印太战略”重要短板
2022年2月,美国拜登政府正式出台“印太战略”文件。在美国政府的战略设计中,经济安全是国家安全的重要组成部分,而与印太地区的经贸合作,关系到美国在该地区的竞争力和吸引力。然而,自特朗普政府上任伊始就退出《跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》以来,美国已多年未能参与到亚太地区的多边经贸协定谈判中。在此期间,不仅缺少美国的《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》已经正式生效,而且被美国视为主要竞争对手的中国还积极争取加入美国退出后反而有所升级的《全面与进步跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》,以及被视为数字贸易协定模板的《数字经济伙伴关系协定》。这使美国的“印太战略”在经贸领域的短板愈发凸显。
当地时间2022年5月23日下午,日本东京,美国总统拜登正式宣布启动“印太经济框架”,美国、韩国、日本、印度、澳大利亚、新西兰、印度尼西亚、泰国、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡、越南、文莱13个国家成为初始成员。
美国无法接受一个“后美国时代”的亚太经贸合作体系,也不愿错失全球数字贸易规则制定的主导权。鉴于《跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》在美国国内已被判定为“政治性死亡”,而确立了“美国工人优先”方针的拜登政府不愿也无力与亚太国家谈判新的综合经贸协议。在此情况下,对美国而言可行的策略便是争取与亚太国家构建一个既突出美国优先关切又不触碰国内敏感话题,最好无需国会批准的松散性经贸合作框架。美国贸易代表戴琦就曾表示:“我认为在此有一个极其深刻的教训,即《跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》正如预想中一样最终是相当脆弱的”,“贸易是这个框架的一个重要组成部分,但不是唯一的组成部分”。
基于上述情况,在上任近一年半后,美国总统拜登开始了任内首次东亚访问行程,前期已同盟友和伙伴国家磋商数月的“印太经济框架”也正式浮出水面。5月23日,拜登在日本东京宣布,美国与日本、韩国、澳大利亚、新西兰、印度、新加坡、印尼、泰国、菲律宾、越南、马来西亚、文莱共13个国家成为“印太经济框架”的创始成员国。据测算,“框架”所覆盖的人口达25亿人,各成员国的经济总量占全球的比重为40%。值得注意的是,“印太经济框架”包含了美日印澳四国机制全部成员和美国在亚太地区的所有军事盟国,也涵盖了除缅甸、老挝、柬埔寨之外的全部东盟国家。
按照美国的设想,“印太经济框架”将包含四大支柱:一是在数字贸易、劳工和环境等领域制订所谓公平、高标准和有约束力的规则;二是提高芯片、大容量电池、医疗产品、关键矿物等重要产业供应链的韧性和安全性;三是推动高标准基础设施建设、脱碳和绿色技术发展;四是推动税收、反洗钱和反腐败监管合作。为了提高“印太经济框架”的整体包容性,美国不强求各成员国参与所有领域的谈判,各成员国在6月中旬前需确定希望展开磋商的支柱领域,随后将围绕每个具体领域进行部长级别的谈判。换言之,“印太经济框架”目前尚处于确定原则方向、共同搭建框架的阶段。
对于推动“印太经济框架”的战略意图,美国贸易代表戴琦可谓直言不讳,她表示,有关框架旨在“有效反制中国不断增长的影响力”。美国商务部长雷蒙多也称,“印太经济框架”为亚洲国家提供了中国之外的替代方案。当前企业界正积极寻找中国以外的替代选项,美国企业相信会从中受益。
亚太地区确有一些国家对美国参与本地区经贸合作抱有比较大的期待,这其中以新加坡的立场最具代表性。新加坡总理李显龙认为,“印太经济框架”具有战略意义和经济利益,“它可以成为美国在印太地区开展经济外交的宝贵平台,清楚表明美国将继续致力于与亚洲伙伴国家接触和深化美国在太平洋地区的联系”。上述表态可以解读出两重含义:其一,以新加坡为代表的亚太经济体认为美国参与本地区的经贸合作必不可少,这也是美国对该地区长期承诺的必要支撑;其二,美国既然搭建了合作平台,未来其参与合作的深度和广度就存在想象空间,尽管“印太经济框架”目前并非一项自贸协定,但不排除未来可能会包含这方面的内容。实际上,许多亚太国家都对美国重新加入《全面与进步跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》抱有期待。日本在这方面的诉求尤为强烈,近年来锲而不舍地劝说美国从战略的角度出发,重新考虑已经做出的决定。
域内国家普遍不支持打造针对中国的小集团
作为全球化和自由贸易接受度高且成绩斐然的地区,亚太在推进经贸一体化方面具有高度共识,并已形成了独具特色的合作路径,搭建了相互关联的区域化合作平台,不断提升本地区贸易投资自由化便利化水平。
在当前世界处于能源、粮食、供应链等多重危机叠加的关键时刻,在众多国家面临通胀高企、民众生活水平严重下滑的紧要关头,亚太地区更加期待的是美国真诚推动区域合作升级以实现经济复苏,而不愿看到任何旨在迫使各方“选边站队”,制造分裂对抗,明里暗里鼓吹经济脱钩、技术封锁、产业断链的图谋。换言之,亚太各国普遍不支持美国另起炉灶冲击现有地区合作架构,将“印太经济框架”打造成排斥中国的战略竞争工具、将经贸问题政治化甚至意识形态化的“新冷战”抓手,以及升级贸易战的角斗场。
对这一点,最近与美国升级为全面战略同盟关系的韩国的态度最为典型。韩国政府强调,美韩双方打造的所谓供应链同盟,绝无将中国排除在全球产业链供应链合作之外的意图。韩方还将加强与中方的密切沟通,以避免中方感到被忽视和排斥,而且韩方不仅要继续与中国就打造更具韧性的供应链进行合作,还在积极推动中韩自贸协定升级版谈判。
实际上,对于亚太地区国家的顾虑,美国心知肚明,且深知目前阶段的“印太经济框架”存在吸引力不足这一明显弊端。迫于国内政治阻力,美国在推出“印太经济框架”时排除了关税减让和市场准入等对其他成员加入该框架可能最具激励性的内容,同时还希望各参与方在数字贸易、能源环保、气候减排、劳工权益等方面遵守相当高的执行标准。在这种情况下,亚洲许多国家都对加入“印太经济框架”表现出迟疑态度,甚至不清楚要加入的到底是什么机制,为什么要加入。美联社评论称,“印太经济框架”缺乏市场准入等方面的实际内容,令其吸引力受到质疑。《日经亚洲》也指出,如果美国希望各国切实遵守其提出的贸易规则,那就需要降低关税,以激励成员国遵守其余条款,否则新兴经济体不会轻易地被“理想和战略”打动。
为了能保证“印太经济框架”顺利启动并被域内多数国家接受,拜登政府不得不收敛其战略指向的针对性,而由于“印太经济框架”正处于创立的初期,其未来命运如何尚不可知,实际上也就不可能完全排除中国未来加入的可能性。与此同时,在中国政府连续强有力的外交警告和军事震慑下,即使美国国会对其施加了巨大压力,台湾民进党当局也一再游说,拜登政府最终没有突破“一个中国”政策的红线,拒绝将台湾纳入“印太经济框架”。
总之,“印太经济框架”已经在期待和质疑声中起步,如果它能以推动经济复苏和产业链合作为主旨,坚持开放共赢的思路,按自由贸易规则办事,真诚谋求本地区的团结、稳定与繁荣,而去除地缘政治的私心,不图谋孤立、排斥中国,那么这一框架就具有建设性和可持续性,就有望为美国带来配得上其决策者政治勇气与决策智慧的丰厚回报。
张旭东 同济大学全球治理与发展研究院研究员、清华大学国际关系学博士