To Japan and the US: Don’t Let Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations Slip Away
Published in Nihon Keizai Shinbun
(Japan) on 3 February 2014
by Editorial (link to original)
Negotiations over creating the next generation of rules for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) have hit a wall. As matters currently stand, the forward momentum for establishing a free market system is on the decline, and the opportunity for negotiating could be slipping away. I'm here to sound the alarm.
The major cause of this breakdown in negotiations is Japan and the U.S. Though these two economic powerhouses should be cooperating to press negotiations forward, they remain deadlocked concerning the handling of tariffs. Japan is opposing a free market for agricultural products, while the U.S. is trying to protect its tariff on automobiles.
Both the Japanese and American governments are championing TPP trade negotiations of the “21st century.” There's awareness that reducing trade barriers has advanced the state of the world and that so-called nontariff barriers need to be eliminated to further increase foreign trade and investment.
For that reason, we need to address the areas that were not adequately covered in the existing trade agreement, such as direct investment, free goods and services, and intellectual property rights. To adopt these measures in-country and continue the foreign trade and investment that are vital to East Asia, establishing common rules to govern trading is crucial. TPP is the third element of Abenomics; it will become a pillar of Japan's growth strategy.
The political administrations of Japan and the U.S. should be sharing these high ideals, but due to tariff protectionism within each country, they are pathetically stumbling over a “20th century” problem.
Current TPP negotiations are becoming bipolar. If Japan and the U.S., who sit at the core of the issue, can't reach an agreement, then the 12-country partnership will not be able to proceed with a consensus. Given the failure to reach a settlement at the end of last year and the fact that no date has been determined for the next deadline, there's no guarantee that each country will be willing to continue its involvement.
In Japan, the Liberal Democratic Party is strongly insisting that tariffs be maintained on five agricultural products, including rice and wheat. The Abe administration is currently negotiating with the U.S. regarding a policy to that effect. In the U.S., the Obama administration is weakened by setbacks, such as economic trouble, and is becoming unable to oppose protectionism from Congress and the automobile industry.
I want to see negotiations advanced with the leaders of Japan and the U.S. keeping their roles in perspective. They must not forget their pride and duty as superpowers who support the global economy. During negotiations it's natural for a country to pursue its own national interests, but the problem is determining what is in our national interests. Rather than looking at short-term profits and losses, we must consider the state of our country after 10 or 20 years. Shouldn't establishing free markets and structural reforms serve as the foundation for growth?
Prime Minister Abe should strongly and determinedly oppose domestic protectionism in favor of advancing agricultural reforms that support a free market. As for the Obama administration, I want to make this appeal: Change your position of conspicuously one-sided demands. Instead, please be flexible and build a consensus multilaterally.
The major cause of this breakdown in negotiations is Japan and the U.S. Though these two economic powerhouses should be cooperating to press negotiations forward, they remain deadlocked concerning the handling of tariffs. Japan is opposing a free market for agricultural products, while the U.S. is trying to protect its tariff on automobiles.
Both the Japanese and American governments are championing TPP trade negotiations of the “21st century.” There's awareness that reducing trade barriers has advanced the state of the world and that so-called nontariff barriers need to be eliminated to further increase foreign trade and investment.
For that reason, we need to address the areas that were not adequately covered in the existing trade agreement, such as direct investment, free goods and services, and intellectual property rights. To adopt these measures in-country and continue the foreign trade and investment that are vital to East Asia, establishing common rules to govern trading is crucial. TPP is the third element of Abenomics; it will become a pillar of Japan's growth strategy.
The political administrations of Japan and the U.S. should be sharing these high ideals, but due to tariff protectionism within each country, they are pathetically stumbling over a “20th century” problem.
Current TPP negotiations are becoming bipolar. If Japan and the U.S., who sit at the core of the issue, can't reach an agreement, then the 12-country partnership will not be able to proceed with a consensus. Given the failure to reach a settlement at the end of last year and the fact that no date has been determined for the next deadline, there's no guarantee that each country will be willing to continue its involvement.
In Japan, the Liberal Democratic Party is strongly insisting that tariffs be maintained on five agricultural products, including rice and wheat. The Abe administration is currently negotiating with the U.S. regarding a policy to that effect. In the U.S., the Obama administration is weakened by setbacks, such as economic trouble, and is becoming unable to oppose protectionism from Congress and the automobile industry.
I want to see negotiations advanced with the leaders of Japan and the U.S. keeping their roles in perspective. They must not forget their pride and duty as superpowers who support the global economy. During negotiations it's natural for a country to pursue its own national interests, but the problem is determining what is in our national interests. Rather than looking at short-term profits and losses, we must consider the state of our country after 10 or 20 years. Shouldn't establishing free markets and structural reforms serve as the foundation for growth?
Prime Minister Abe should strongly and determinedly oppose domestic protectionism in favor of advancing agricultural reforms that support a free market. As for the Obama administration, I want to make this appeal: Change your position of conspicuously one-sided demands. Instead, please be flexible and build a consensus multilaterally.