New trade agreement in Asia: liberalisation in times of geopolitical rivalry

With the signing of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) on 15 November 2020, the announcement of the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) on 30 December, and the prospects of enlarging the Compre­hensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), trade policy with and within Asia is gathering speed. In the greater East Asia region, consisting of Japan, South Korea, China and the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN), economic integration via trade, investment, supply chains and digital connectivity will accelerate. In contrast, regions that remain on the outside - i.e. North America, Europe and India - surely fear that trade flows will be diverted. At the same time, geo­politics have become a determining factor of trade policy. Any agreement also represents political positioning in the context of the Sino-American rivalry, or at least a reinsurance against the risks of economic or technological decoupling. What are the economic and political perspectives of these trade and investment agreements? What goals and strategies are the relevant actors pursuing? And what are the con­sequences for Europe's trade policy? (author's abstract

Asia-Pacific Free Trade Talks nearing the finish line: setting the agenda in the struggle for regional markets, multilateral rules and geopolitical leadership

"Asia is not only the world's most dynamic region in terms of trade, it is also an important pacesetter in trade policy. The US is currently negotiating with eleven partner countries over a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP); the members of the ASEAN+6 group are in talks over a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP); while Japan, China and Korea are conducting trilateral trade negotiations (CJK FTA). The multilateral structures emerging from all these initiatives could, in the long term, be combined into a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). What are the motives behind these agreements? What are their chances of being implemented? When it comes to the trade and geopolitical power struggle that encompasses these talks, does the US or China have the upper hand? And what role remains for Europe’s trade policy?" (Autorenreferat

The Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement: economic potentials and policy perspectives

At their summit on 6 July 2017, Japan and the EU reached an agreement in principle for bilateral free trade. The agreement should be ready for signing by the end of 2017. The intended liberalization of trade in goods, agriculture and services would create the world's largest free trade area - assuming the agreement is successfully concluded and ratified by parliament. Japan and Europe are sending out a strong signal against protectionism and in favour of free trade and modernizing global trade rules. While free trade in the transatlantic and trans-Pacific context may remain an illusion for some time to come, the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (JEEPA) is a realistic opportunity for trade partners at the western and eastern margins of the Eurasian continent to achieve trade-induced growth and increased prosperity. Given its prominence, JEEPA raises the following questions: What trade liberalization can be expected? Does a free trade agreement between Japan and Europe actually make sense? Who would be the winners and losers? What are the risks and limitations? What are the political implications of the European-Japanese alliance? (author's abstract

China's trade policy: dominance without the will to lead

"In less than thirty years China has gone from being a marginal player in world trade to become the largest trading nation of all. But despite its growing dominance China still lacks the will and ability to lead, and has yet to find its role in international trade politics. On the one hand, it sometimes breaks the rules, for example concerning its WTO accession obligations. On the other, it operates like an established actor, adhering to the status quo and placing greater importance on its own interests than on the survival and stability of the system as a whole. China remains reserved and passive in the multilateral Doha process, but pursues a vigorous bilateral trade policy. A survey of the actors, institutions, interests and debates reveals that the simplistic idea of a monolithic Chinese trade policy cannot be upheld. Any sweeping characterisation of China's trade politics as liberal or mercantilist, as compatible or incompatible with WTO rules, can easily be contradicted in the complexities of Chinese reality. Alongside the central government agencies, regional and business interest groups determine the course of negotiating and implementation processes. Despite numerous external economic controversies and conflicts, Germany and the European Union should not lose sight of the strategic objective of integrating China into the rule-based world trade system. Multilateral negotiations under the auspices of the WTO offer the best chances of opening Chinese markets and improving the enforcement of non-discrimination, transparency and rule of law. China, too, depends on an open world economy and a functioning WTO." (author's abstract

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement: increased pressure on European trade policy

After five years of intense negotiations, trade ministers of twelve Pacific Rim countries, including the United States, Canada, and Japan, have reached agreement on a comprehensive Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Whether and when this agreement will come into effect depends above all on the ratification process in the US Congress. If ratified, the TPP will create the largest free trade zone worldwide. It will not only eliminate virtually all tariffs on trade and open up domestic markets extensively in the areas of agriculture and services, but also set binding minimum standards for trade and investment. The biggest "losers" under the TPP are the countries that are not part of the negotiations - especially two of the world's economic heavyweights: the EU and China. They are finding themselves increasingly on the defensive in trade policy. (author's abstract

Sea change in EU trade policy: opportunities for diversification in the Indo-Pacific

Europe's trade policy is heading for a sea change. But it is not Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine that is the main reason for this development. Rather, there are long-term influencing factors at work here: the WTO-centred multilateral trade order is visibly eroding. Protectionism is on the rise around the globe. World trade is grow­ing only marginally or is even stagnating. Globalization is undergoing a transforma­tion whose outcome is uncertain. And international trade is increasingly being instrumentalized for political purposes. In February 2021, the European Commission responded to these structural upheavals by announcing an "open, sustainable and assertive trade policy". However, there has so far been uneven progress towards im­plementing the objectives included in the new trade policy strategy. While the EU's intention to strengthen both Europe's assertiveness and the sustainability of trade is being realized through numerous new instruments and measures, its promise of openness and liberalization remains unfulfilled for the time being. In particular, the Indo-Pacific region beyond China would offer the German and European economies significant opportunities to tap new sources of raw materials and access reliable sup­plier networks and growing sales markets. (author's abstract

Japan after two years of "Abenomics": monetary illusions, timid reforms

When Shinzo Abe became Prime Minister of Japan in December 2012, he raised great economic expectations. He promised a radical turnaround in monetary policy, long-term fiscal consolidation, and structural reforms to revive the economy. Two years on, the interim results of “Abenomics” are sobering. Despite unprecedented monetary expansion and vigorous fiscal stimulation, Japan has been unable to overcome deflation and weak growth. And although the consumption tax has been increased, the country is far from achieving sustainable budget consolidation. Abe has also failed to deliver on his promise to introduce groundbreaking structural reforms aimed at stimulating growth. Why have these goals not been achieved? In light of Japan’s large – and growing – national debt and its ageing population, what other economic policy options can be pursued? (Autorenreferat

Geoeconomics meets geopolitics: China's new economic and foreign policy initiatives

"China's new leadership has launched a series of foreign policy and economic initiatives whose implications reach far beyond their own region. Washington disapproves of Beijing's plans, regarding the proposed financial institutions in particular as a challenge to their established Western-dominated counterparts. China's response is that these are sensible and important additions to the existing architecture. European states failed to fall in line with the US stance, and many became founding members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). China's overarching vision of "new Silk Roads" integrating Asia and Europe by land and sea also demands a European response. In order to achieve better coordination than they managed over the AIIB question, the European Union and European states need to discuss and evaluate the economic and political dimensions of the Chinese initiatives in their overall context." (Autorenreferat

China - winning the pandemic... for now: the People's Republic is exuding strength, but can they keep it up?

Is it not ironic that the Coronavirus pandemic, which arguably began in a Wuhan ani­mal market in late 2019, has accelerated China's rise? Indeed, early interim assess­ments show that Beijing's draconian, sometimes inhumane, disease control measures have proven highly successful. China's containment of Covid-19 domestically has enabled a return to normality and laid the foundation for a strong economic up­swing. Party and state leaders are using these achievements for political advancement at home and abroad. China's effective crisis management - epidemiological, economic, and politi­cal - reveal that the country is winning this crisis in the end of 2020. Nonetheless, the sustainability of these economic and political successes is debatable. (author's abstract

Charting a new course on North Korea's nuclear programme? The options and the Non-Proliferation Treaty

"Should North Korea be recognised as a de facto nuclear power? Even after three nuclear tests the international discussion continues to tiptoe around this crucial question for the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The aftermath of the spring 2013 escalation only makes the problem more urgent. North Korea uses its nuclear weapons as a threat in diplomatic and security talks, has declared itself a nuclear-weapon state by constitutional amendment, and most recently openly threatened a nuclear strike against the United States and South Korea. Nonetheless, the international community adheres doggedly to the legal stance that North Korea is a non-nuclear-weapon state under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and must renounce nuclear arms. Given Pyongyang’s repeated violations of the treaty this position is well founded. But in view of the power of the factual, it is legitimate to ask how long this position can and should be upheld. Why should the international community not treat North Korea like other nuclear powers outside the NPT?" (author's abstract