The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was singed between the United States and 11 other states represents the most comprehensive trade agreement which was signed in the Asia-Pacific region. Given the fact that Asia-Pacific region accounts for 1/3 of global trade, the deal is of the particular significance with the United States. However, despite the importance of the deal, much of the content remains truly controversial, given that the deal was negotiated by both sides to make it more convenient. Thus, one shall look in the details of the Partnership to outline potential solutions.
As mentioned in the policy brief, one of the key impact faced by TPP would be regional integration. However, the controversy is that the Asia-Pacific region is rather inconsistent. Contrary to the democratic practices and common knowledge on trade integration in the United States, the Asia-Pacific region is based on a different cultural background, which may have negative implications on the conflicting areas. The regional integration is already taking place, as China-Japan-Korea initiative already takes place. Thus, the TPP shall not contradict the currently existing regional initiatives. No less important implication, which is implied in the TPP, is represented through isolation. In other words, if the regional integration will not work out with all of the partners, those who are more problematic shall not be excluded.
No less important is to be aware of the financial situation in the region. Despite the fact, that TPP envisages financial liberalization; there are many implications which may have an effect on the financial situation in the region. One of such implications previews the change of labor standards, which differ be lower than those which currently exist in the region. Each country may have their vision on the necessary standards, and fight for the values and standards which are incompatible with the culture. Respectfully, it may cause dissatisfaction from a large part of the population. Thus, one shall be aware of these aspects and before the final ratification procedure of both dimensions.
The aspect of globalization and global power should not be underestimated either. A lot of trade currently takes place online, and no TPPs are needed to reinforce trade from the perspective as it exists these days. A lot of operations which take place online are aimed to break the bureaucratic boundaries. However, those who created the TPP seem to aspire things to be the other way around. In defense, those who stand for TPP stand in for the certification of products which may be potentially insecure to consume. That way, the deal really aims to help people to get familiar with the potential consequences and prevent bad conditions.
Understanding regional patterns is probably the most important aspect for analyzing TPP. In particular, there are several countries that would want to join the TPP first. For instance, Korea would be the first one to sign the deal, as most of the factors correspond to its aspirations. However, despite the fact that joining the deal would consolidate the rules for the whole region, the risk of excluding less powerful actors is still high. Given the fact that there are currently over 11 countries involved in the deal, it is very probably that some of them would be more participatory than the others. Thus, certain imbalances are possible. These regional implications would also be visible on the global level, as WTO would sense the effects of them at the very first stages. On the one hand, a more powerful transatlantic actor can emerge, but on the other hand, there are possible outcomes for the other trade actors, as trade imbalances may spread even further.