Preview

Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law

Advanced search

Transcontinental Partnerships at the Crossroads: Factors, Risks, Consequences

https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2017-10-4-54-69

Abstract

Transcontinental partnerships – Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TATIP) – have been analyzed in view of the new challenges in polycentric world, US foreign economic policy changes, risks for the national economies of the block’s participants, as well as for the other countries. The TPP and the TATIP are in focus as the new stage of the world integration process. The TATIP can deepen the already substantial economic ties between the US and the European Union. But what will be included in the chapters of the agreement on financial services, agricultural products, some other sectors is still subject to debate. Particular concerns arise about the role for the TATIP in harmonizing financial regulation. The practical implementation of president Donald Trump plans to «promote American industry, protect American workers» began with the US withdrawal from the TPP, with negotiating new bilateral trade deals in mind. Since that decision, the leaders of Japan, Singapore, Australia, and other TPP participants emphasized the strategic importance of this agreement for their countries and for US leadership in the region. Withdrawing from the TPP raises concerns among US trade partners and allies in the region and put many questions before them. Besides, US withdrawal from the TPP effectively gives green light to assert a more pronounced leadership role in the region for China, which is already a major trade and investment partner for TPP countries. Furthermore, Donald Trump turned attention to certain imports as a threat to national security and thus potentially subject to steep tariffs. The US steps in this way may undermine the rules-based trading system, and put many questions before TPP partners and other countries. Whether import restrictions for national security reasons be implemented, they may damage not only China as the main U.S. imports driver; but other countries as well, and lead to new barriers against US exports by trading partners. The Trump administration initiatives not only represents a challenge for countries that linked closely to the American economy due to the trade-economic agreements, but leads to new opportunities and choices in international economic relations.

About the Author

Liudmila F. Lebedeva
Center for Social and Economic Research and Projects of the Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation

Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of Center for Social and Economic Research and Projects of Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Khlebny per. 2/3, Moscow, Russian Federation, 123995



References

1. Antipin S.A., Lebedeva L.F., Zhang D. Yoon. (2015). Foreign Direct Investment in US Manufacturing. Mezhdunarodnaya torgovlya i torgovaya politika, 3(3). 52 -65.

2. Biryukova O.V. (2015). Asian-Pacific Regionalism gets reolves. Mezhdunarodnaya ekonomika, (1). 9–13.

3. Emel’yanov S.V., Chudinova K.O. (2016). The role of US and Japan in Trans Pacific Partnership. Mezhdunarodnaya torgovlya i torgovaya politika, 1 (5). 46–54.

4. Fergusson I.F. (2015). The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress. Washington: Congressional Research Service. 56.

5. Kadochnikov P.A., Flegontova T.A. (2014). Prospects and contradictions in the Trans Pacific Partnership Negotiations. Rossiiskii vneshneekonomicheskii vestnik, (9). 21–30.

6. Khasbulatov R.I. (ed.). (2015). The position of Russia at the new stage of international integration. Moskva: Vash format. 209.

7. Lebedeva L.F. (2015). US International Trade Position at the New Stage оf Global Competition. Mezhdunarodnaya torgovlya i torgovaya politika, 1(1). 6–18.

8. Morrison W.M., Labonte M. (2013). China’s Holdings of US Securities.Washington: CRS. 22. URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34314.pdf (Accessed: 18.08.2007)

9. Petri P., Plummer M. (2016). The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics. 33.

10. Republican Platform 2016. (2016). 66 p. URL: https://prod-cdn-static.gop.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf

11. Shishkin A.V. (ed.). (2017). International Trade: yesterday, today, tomorrow. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo RUSAINS. 234.

12. World Investment Report 2016. Investor Nationality: Policy Challenges. (2016). Geneva: UNCTAD. 232.

13. Zvonova E.A., Kuznetsov A.V. (2016). Trans Pacific Partnership and the security of Russia. SShA-Kanada:EPK, (3). 19–34.


Review

For citations:


Lebedeva L.F. Transcontinental Partnerships at the Crossroads: Factors, Risks, Consequences. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2017;10(4):54-69. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2017-10-4-54-69

Views: 1122


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2542-0240 (Print)
ISSN 2587-9324 (Online)