Will Indo-Pacific Economic Framework bring benefits or chaos?

US President Joe Biden recently finished his first trip to Asia since taking office. One big move was to announce the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) in Tokyo. According to an official US statement, the IPEF will focus on trade, supply chains, clean energy, decarbonization, infrastructure, tax and anti-corruption efforts. If the purpose of this framework, as the US official claims, is to promote regional cooperation and prosperity and contribute to development and peace, then all regional countries, including China, will sincerely welcome it. But if we take off its bright and shining coat, another version of the IPEF can be seen. The IPEF is a direct interference with the current properly functioning structure of Asia-Pacific economic cooperation. Over the years, It has become obvious that multilateral mechanisms, including the WTO, G20, APEC, ASEAN+ and RCEP, have greatly promoted economic development in the Asia-Pacific region and globally, making Asia a region with high acceptance of globalization and free trade and outstanding economic achievements. In sharp contrast, the US does not follow the free trade rules but promotes trade protectionism. It does not participate in Asia-Pacific economic cooperation (such as the CPTPP and RCEP) and even withdrew from the TPP that it started. Now, Washington chooses to go its own way. The real purpose is to facilitate the dominance of American rules without opening its market or lowering tariffs, and ultimately to serve the updated version of "America First." Most countries in the world pursue a win-win economic exchange result and the rules followed are to give and take. But the US wants to pay less and get more. 

Read More: 

Share This Article

Related Articles

India targets net-zero carbon emissions by 2070, says Modi

India’s economy will become carbon neutral by the year 2070, the country’s prime minster has announced at the COP26 climate crisis summit in Glasgow. The target date is two decades beyond what scientists say is needed to avert catastrophic climate impacts. India is the last of the world’s major carbon polluters to announce a net-zero target, with China saying it would reach that goal in 2060, and the United States and the European Union aiming for 2050.

COP26: What climate summit means for one woman in Bangladesh

China's carbon emissions are vast and growing, dwarfing those of other countries. Experts agree that without big reductions in China's emissions, the world cannot win the fight against climate change. In 2020, China's President Xi Jinping said his country would aim for its emissions to reach their highest point before 2030 and for carbon neutrality before 2060. His statement has now been confirmed as China's official position ahead of the COP26 global climate summit in Glasgow. But China has not said exactly how these goals will be achieved.

Why China's climate policy matters to us all

China's carbon emissions are vast and growing, dwarfing those of other countries. Experts agree that without big reductions in China's emissions, the world cannot win the fight against climate change. In 2020, China's President Xi Jinping said his country would aim for its emissions to reach their highest point before 2030 and for carbon neutrality before 2060. His statement has now been confirmed as China's official position ahead of the COP26 global climate summit in Glasgow. But China has not said exactly how these goals will be achieved.

Deliver on promises, developing world tells rich at climate talks

A crucial U.N. conference heard calls on its first day for the world's major economies to keep their promises of financial help to address the climate crisis, while big polluters India and Brazil made new commitments to cut emissions. World leaders, environmental experts and activists all pleaded for decisive action to halt the global warming which threatens the future of the planet at the start of the two-week COP26 summit in the Scottish city of Glasgow on Monday. The task facing negotiators was made even more daunting by the failure of the Group of 20 major industrial nations to agree ambitious new commitments at the weekend.