Connect with us

News

‘Indo-Pacific Economic Framework’ not a blessing to Asia

MNN

Published

on

Aurthor: Xin Ping

The U.S. has been trumpeting that its “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” (IPEF) will bring prosperity to the region. But its sole purpose is to advance the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” and key interests of the U.S. instead of driving post-pandemic recovery, development and prosperity of the region. Asian countries need to brace themselves for the negative impact brought on by the framework which could be summed up as “four Ds.”

Division

IPEF is created to encourage regional economies to “decouple” from the Chinese market by leading them to alternative supply chains, a step that Washington believes will help exclude China from the regional trading and supply systems.

This would essentially install a closed, exclusive and confrontational arrangement within this region designed with clear geopolitical and ideological intentions, which runs counter to the principles of multilateralism.The U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai has openly described the IPEF as an “arrangement independent of China.”

Given China’s economic size and influence in the region and the possible consequences of artificially splitting the trading system and cutting off supply chains, such an arrangement would not be conducive to the unity and regional economic integration of the Asia-Pacific.

There are speculations that as far as ASEAN countries are concerned, the U.S. is trying to recruit Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam to join IPEF, while leaving out Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Brunei, which will undoubtedly affect the development of the ASEAN Community and undermine the unity of ASEAN.

Deprivation

The U.S. claims to support the centrality of ASEAN, yet IPEF apparently takes little heed of ASEAN’s preferred way of inclusive regional cooperation. A framework like this would only weaken and damage ASEAN’s centrality in the regional architecture.

IPEF’s proclaimed high standards in the fields of digital economy, labor, market supervision, environmental protection and anti-corruption are way higher than the standards set by domestic laws in some ASEAN countries and even by international conventions.

The Lane Xang EMU train arrives at the northern Laos’ border town of Boten, after passing by the China-Laos borderline, October 15, 2021. /Xinhua

In a sense, the U.S. could be forcing these countries to adopt certain domestic economic policies to serve U.S. interests. The exclusive and even punitive provisions contained in IPEF may contradict the commitments made in regional free trade agreements such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Deviation

Putting forward IPEF is one of the 10 core tasks of the U.S. “Indo-Pacific Strategy.” The U.S. potentially aims to use IPEF to supplement its “Indo-Pacific Strategy” and establish a unilaterally dominant economic cooperation arrangement, rather than a true free trade agreement with mutual open market access and tariff exemption as desired by the regional countries.

It is, therefore, a deviation from the principles of openness, inclusiveness, equality and reciprocity that multilateral mechanisms and arrangements in the region have long followed.

Disappointment

The U.S. might hope to use IPEF to get regional allies and ASEAN countries on board to encircle China, but this is unlikely to materialize.

China and ASEAN are each other’s largest trading partners. Japan’s exports to China are roughly the same as those to the U.S., and imports twice as much from China as from the U.S. South Korea’s trade with the U.S. is only half of its trade with China. With RCEP having entered into effect early this year, the cooperation potential among regional countries will only be further unleashed.

The U.S. has repeatedly reneged on its words about Asia-Pacific economic and trade cooperation: the Obama administration had pushed forward the concept of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) before the Trump administration exited from it after taking office. Now the Biden administration has come up with IPEF. Inconsistency in Washington’s policy-making will only make regional countries question U.S. credibility and policy continuity.

As Mary Lafley, a senior researcher at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, pointed out, “Asian allies, still reeling from the unpredictable and destabilizing policies of the Trump administration, may be reluctant to invest much in new structures that can be as easily blown away as houses of straw.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

World

Under professed ideals lies Washington’s pursuit of hegemony

FI

Published

on

By

Anyone familiar with U.S. history knows that Washington’s foreign and economic policies are often crafted to serve its own interests at the expense of others.

BEIJING, April 19 (Xinhua) — Beneath Washington’s veneer of lofty ideals and grandiose phrases championing economic globalization and free market principles lies a stark truth: These professed ideals serve merely as a convenient cover for its relentless pursuit of hegemony.

While concerns mount over U.S. government intrusions in business, such as the attempted forced sale of TikTok and the blocking of a Japanese firm’s takeover bid for U.S. Steel, anyone familiar with U.S. history knows that Washington’s foreign and economic policies are often crafted to serve its own interests at the expense of others.

Washington’s political elites denounced Donald Trump’s four years in office as a departure from the United States’ self-proclaimed role of “leading the world.” Though they spurned his “America First” banner like a pestilence, it embodies Washington’s approach to conducting business.

One such example is the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which aimed to prevent European powers from interfering in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere. While framed as a policy to protect the sovereignty of newly independent Latin American nations, it only served to advance U.S. hegemony in the region.

Regarding trade, protectionist measures such as tariffs and trade barriers have been utilized throughout U.S. history to shield domestic industries and promote economic growth. For instance, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 increased U.S. tariffs on agricultural imports and more than 20,000 imported goods and stifled global trade.

While the Trump administration was unabashed on its protectionist stance, the current U.S. administration has adopted a more covert but essentially similar approach, leveraging the concept of national security for its agenda.

The Biden administration’s relentless pursuit of weaponizing technology and economic matters against China, coupled with the U.S. campaigns of “de-risking” and “de-coupling” from China, also exposes Washington’s glaring hypocrisy in maintaining its hegemony.

Despite its longstanding rhetoric of advocating “free trade” in sectors where the U.S. holds dominance, Washington conveniently wields protectionist measures under the guise of national security in areas where its supremacy is challenged.

From using coercive tactics such as the Plaza Accord to counter Japan’s economic influence to implementing measures like extraterritorial jurisdiction to dismantle iconic French manufacturing company Alstom and continually finding pretexts to hurt competitive Chinese high-tech enterprises, Washington has long indulged in “dressed-up protectionism,” quickly abandoning the very free market principles it has professed to uphold.

These U.S. maneuvers reveal Washington’s adeptness at exploiting the so-called rules-based global order, which it helped establish, to serve its interests while brazenly advocating the law of the jungle wherein actions like plunder, deceit, coercion, extortion or even violent conquest are condoned.

By employing tactics reminiscent of a bygone era of colonialism and unchecked imperialism, the United States undermines the very foundations of the global order it claims to champion. The world cannot afford to ignore this ugly truth about Washington.

Source(s): Xinhua

Continue Reading

News

Maldives disheartened after US blocks Palestine’s UN membership

FI

Published

on

By

Maldives has expressed disheartenment after the United States blocked Palestine’s second attempt to become a full member of the United Nations (UN).

US vetoed the widely supported Palestine’s UN membership resolution at the UN Security Council during a vote on Thursday.

Maldivian Foreign Minister Moosa Zameer, in a post on X, said Maldives stands with more than 140 UN member states to support the Palestinian cause and their application to become admitted to the UN as a full member.

“It is imperative that the UN upholds its principles of justice and equality for all,” he stressed.

Minister Zameer also reaffirmed Maldives’ call for a just and lasting solution based on the establishment of an independent and sovereign State of Palestine based on the pre-1967 border.

Mohamed Naseer, the Principal Secretary at the President’s Office on Foreign Affairs, delivered Maldives’ statement at the UN Security Council meeting on Thursday.

Maldives, in the statement, called on the members of the United Nations; especially the permanent members of the UN Security Council to give their full and unconditional support for the admission of Palestine to the UN as a full member state.

Maldives also called on the UN Security Council to impose sanctions, including an arms embargo on Israel for violating the Charter of the Council on multiple occasions.

Thursday’s vote came more than six months into Israel’s military invasion in the besieged Palestinian territory that has left nearly 34,000 Palestinians dead — mostly babies, women and children — and wounded over 76,770.

Source(s): sun.mv

Continue Reading

News

President: In actuality, opposition wishes to overthrow the government

FI

Published

on

By

President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu states despite the opposition in actuality wishes to overthrow the government despite showcasing they want to hold the government accountable.

Speaking at the PPM-PNC campaign rally for the parliamentary election held in Fuvahmulah City on Thursday night – President Muizzu said although the opposition preaches about holding the government accountable, their inner desires are coming out now.

“The opposition talked about accountability before. Now, they are expressing what was in their hearts with respect to it. To change the government. To overthrow. To impeach. These kinds of terms,” he said.

Underscoring that everyone is aware this is a violation of the rules of democracy, President Muizzu appealed to the public to not allow for the nation to fall into this instability.

Refuting the opposition’s remarks regarding holding the government accountable, the President, described pro-government candidates as responsible and honest individuals. Therewith, he stressed that they would hold the government accountable for the sake of their constituents.

He added that it was PPM lawmakers who played the most crucial role in holding him accountable when he was housing minister during the PPM administration.

Similarly, he said pro-government candidates will undertake all efforts necessary within the parliament to defend the rights of their constituents, adding they would also cooperate with the government in matters concerning the rights of the constituents.

Speaking further, President Muizzu said the development desired by the people cannot be achieved if there is a parliament where the opposition MDP holds the majority.

On this note, he said there is no development that MDP can bring by having the parliament’s majority as the opposition which they failed to bring during the past five years when the party was ruling and held the parliament’s majority.

Source(s): sun.mv

Continue Reading

Trending