The leaders of the 21 countries represented at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings concluded their annual talks with the following declaration concerning a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP):
We will take concrete steps toward realization of a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), which is a major instrument to further APEC’s regional economic integration agenda. An FTAAP should be pursued as a comprehensive free trade agreement by developing and building on ongoing regional undertakings, such as ASEAN+3 [Association of Southeast Asian Nations], ASEAN+6, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, among others.
According to the headlines, China won, and the U.S. lost. “China Wins Support for Asia-Pacific Trade Proposal,” “APEC Summit: Chinese Trade Pact Plan Backed by Leaders,” and “APEC Members Vow Support for China-Backed Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific” are some of the representative samples from around the world.
There is only one problem. The headlines are, indeed, reaction to an APEC decision this week to move forward on creating an FTAAP, a free trade area encompassing the 21 Pacific Rim economies represented at APEC.
The APEC statement on the FTAAP, however, is from 2010.
In fact, APEC first endorsed the idea in 2006. It was a U.S., Bush Administration initiative taken on advice of the APEC business community. It has appeared in every leaders’ declaration since. Until now, the lament was usually that China would block it.
Today, the Chinese are pushing the idea forward. For goodness sake, let’s take yes for an answer. All the nations in the region, the U.S. in particular and the Chinese as well, are too bogged down in other trade negotiations to take it up immediately. And APEC doesn’t suggest it do so. Nothing in APEC moves quickly. It has never produced something as big and concrete as a free trade agreement, let alone one encompassing more than half the world’s economic activity.
Free trade is good. This is as true today as it was during the Bush Administration. And it is no less true just because the Chinese have decided to endorse an idea that has been on APEC’s agenda for 8 years. Good for them. And good for us.
