Trump pulling out of the TPP was the greatest strategic blunder in a generation. This tepid agreement doesn't remotely address the failing, China has now far surpassed the US in trade and thus influence for increasing numbers of Asian economies.
Biden has blundered through Afghanistan, made inflation far worse than it need to be, even AUKUS was initiated by the British, while he does get points for his handling of Ukraine. i hope he doesn't stand again.
2
Alliances Mattering Again! Thanks President Biden.
Just as Biden enlisted the support of Oil Producing states in the Arab World, this is perfunctory at best. Just pathetic.
1
Made in China is a problem. So is Made in America — depending on who you hire. Last week, a Chinese chemist stealing secrets from her employer at Eastman Chemical and Coca-cola got 14 years in Federal Court. This immigrant was not only welcomed to USA but made a citizen. She was working for the Chinese government. Chinese use your openness as their weapon.
3
I wonder about the New York Times sometimes. In the article there was a photo of helmeted students that were described as protesting Biden’s visit. But there was zero mention of them in the media here and what is more the purple sign behind says there are marching again an “invasion” quite obviously the Russian one. I often feel the NYT puts too many resources into Korea and China reporting to the detriment of Japanese related news. And it often shows.
From what I've heard there is really not much substance here, just a lot of grandstanding. The USA won't re-join TPP, which has specific policies, because, it has "specific policies". However, those policies are contrary to the Build in America goals. It seems POTUS wants to have his cake and eat it too.
1
Turns out 98% of American infant formula is made in the USA. That is the reality of trade with the US. Lots of talk but the market is closed to competition from outside.
The withdrawal from TPP shows the US is not willing to allow access to their closed markets. Don't expect much enthusiasm from allies for this initiative when they expected to be in a much more equitable trading bloc.
2
A lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on; Biden confirmed existing US/Taiwan agreement.
3
What a powerful bloc of nations, allied to the U.S., to provide a balanced play in negotiations with China. A heahthy competition worldwide, however welcome, seems to be ahead of U.S. own tendency to tolerate the oligo-monopolies...responsible to rise prices undeservedly...and to our loss ('street light, darkness of the house').
1
It’s about time we put our foot down to these totalitarian regimes and tell them we’re not afraid to speak up about their oppressive regimes.
2
We are fighting with Russians using Ukrainian soldiers and American weapons. Do we really want a war with China as well? How is it going to help Americans?
2
Unity and diplomacy will be the best way to counter China’s “power” in the world. Whether we like it or not, we live in a global economy and are tied together by working together. The less reliance we have on one entity, the better off we’ll be. Let’s hope the dialogue continues.
3
Clearly, Biden has restored America to the center of the new world order. After disentangling with Afghanistan, his policies have reinstated American power and prestige in Europe, Asia, and the Americas. What is unclear is whether this is a good thing or not for our future? The isolationist argument has some points of merit - though not in the way of the ultra-magaist. After the chaos of pandemic and war, the world could benefit from a time of stable management - and the U.S. can help provide it.
6
It's a disastrous policy move at the faster growth of US-economy and step to fragmentation of smooth flow of goods and services upon the force of demand and supply, pricing, productivity, cost, quality! and purchasing power of the people! Trade relation does not or never serve the political objectives; nor play one's trump card to the political victory. The United states and China are the two largest economy globally in both nominal and PPP method. As of 2021 both countries together shared 41.89% and 34.75% of the entire world's GDP in nominal and PPP terms respectively. The GDP of both countries is higher than the third ranked countries in nominal and PPP terms by huge margin . These countries are regarded as growth engine of the global economy. Capacity, volume, price, skill, nature, environment and tradition play a pivot of competitiveness in the outputs of goods and services. I've seen the same fruits, same shirt differ widely in quality and price depending upon the country of origin. In 2017, 189-nation IMF and the World Bank officials told the finance officials that it was important to strive to promote faster global growth. World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said, "It often feels like our increasingly interconnected world is in fact falling apart and countries and people are pulling away from each other." Elsewhere Fed Chair Jerome H. Powell said "Turbulent Trade war with China drag and slowed the economy's momentum."
1
Trump wasted 4 years acting like a fool and did absolutely nothing to deter the Chinese Dictatorship or further our relationship to countries in the region threatened by China,
8
@Darren
Obama wasted 8 years increasing China's power.
W Bush wasted 8 years increasing China's power.
Clinton wasted 8 years increasing China's power and granting them Permanent Normal Trade Relations Status...
HW Bush wasted 4 years increasing China's power
Reagan wasted 8 years increasing China's power
Carter wasted 4 years increasing China's power
Ford was only there for a brief time...
NIXON OPENED THE DOOR TO CHINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1
Biden is the greatest!
10
Of course Biden would support Taiwan from China. Taiwan is a Democracy. China is a communist country. China and Russia are Americas enemies. Duh?
3
All who think that Biden is too old, well, the TPP which so many said was too long but would have made China adhere to more environmental standards can see that Biden's policy may be a way to keep smaller nations not feeling like they are small potatoes.
4
China wanted to be part of it which points out its value just as USSR wanted to join NATO.
Pressure on Asian countries to stand up to China is not enough. Before getting to Taiwan, US troops will have to cross the Pacific in some ways and it may be quite tough if Chinese military blocks this area. Having lived in New Zealand for a few years, I have seen a surge in Chinese influence here. NZ left-wing gov't led by Jacinda Ardern uses anti-Chinese rhethoric in domestic interviews to appease voters, but the actual policies favor Chinese expansion in the Pacific region and restric US influence. If the US does not want to wake up one day having the Pacific be renamed into the Red Dragon Ocean, they better put pressure on countries like NZ as well as smaller island nations. These countries may be led by left-wing darlings (like Ardern), making it seemingly antithetical for DEMs and Biden to criticize, but the reality of what left-wing or republican is in Pacific countries is different from what we are accustomed to in the US. Left-wing for int'l policy here is isolationistic, pro-China, neutral to Russia and focused on agriculture-led economy. Leftist here may be progressive in some ways, but on the international front, it is dangerous.
4
I'm wondering if China and Russia, along with supporting countries (e.g. Turkey) are scheming to dilute the strength of the USA military by creating tensions at opposite parts of the world?
3
Counter dominance?
Guess it is time to sell out those nations just like Ukraine.
Could be those nations fear being bullied. You do know Korea was once maybe three times as big as it is now? And Tibet was its own land? Like yesterday. And so on and so forth. But no. Counter dominance. Apparently some talking points have been issued for another round of both sides do us don’t bother us with facts in anything to do with China.
2
I think the other countries in Taiwan's hemisphere suspect they're next if China isn't held in check. Biden recognized the moment and capitalized on an opportunity to strengthen alliances and promote a non-military approach to restraining an adversary. He's also demonstrating his commitment by backing it up with a credible threat. That's my president!
11
I am unclear about the aim of this new bloc. It is not a free trade block. It is not defined, as the EU is trying to define itself, by a shared common core (human rights, press freedom, independent judiciary, peaceful transfer of power) of governance. It is not a defence pact. What is it?
4
@Curious
It means we are friends and always interested in hearing the others' side and finding ways to work through problems and always with the understanding that no one seeks economic or military advantage.
It's exactly what we hoped to achieve by letting China into the WTO but China went along for the ride and at every opportunity shot out some wheels of her overly naive benefactors.
Now, with this alliance, we are showing a willingness to engage in peacemaking and prosperity instead of the aggression practiced militarily by Russia or the aggression practiced economically by Russia's friend, China.
At least that's what I see.
2
@Blanche White So the formation of the bloc is a declaration of friendship? Does it rule out criticising a bloc member if a government in a member country happens to execute alleged criminals without trial and behave in manners otherwise considered deplorable in liberal democracies?
It’s mostly to shore up our supply chain for semiconductors and other things. Biden’s first stop in Korea was one of their huge semiconductor plants.
No semiconductor, no economy.
Another, ancillary goal is improving governance. It’s easier doing business with a more transparent government.
2
Now that Biden for at least the second time strongly affirmed that he committed the USA to fight China to protect Taiwan.
What a “Big Guy” as Hunter said already.
Hey Mr. President how about protecting the USA from the invasion across the Southern border.
5
If you really think that a few Mexicans heading north to pick Essential agricultural crops is an invasion on the level of the disruption an invasion of Taiwan by China would be to the world— well, to quote the president… “come on man….”
12
Who was that man behind the teleprompter who promised Tawain protection (or didn't)? Is this any way to run a country?
1
A quick comparison of the volume of vaccine exports from China and from the US will make it clear to Asia and the rest of the world which country is more serious about treating the international community as partners instead of tools.
4
@Phil The free ones that worked, or the ones that cost money and sorta-work?
2
I like everything about Joe Biden and hope to be voting for him again in 2024.
Historians of the future will be saying of him that he was one of the greatest Presidents America ever had, who did everything he could do to strengthen America's partnerships in the world, while preserving constitutional democracy here in this country -- but who ultimately failed because Republican darkness had spread through the land.
9
Historians of the future, actually, will note that too many people who thought they were some variety of leftists used the same imagery of darkness and carnage and collapse that could be found in the speeches of Trump, Tucks Carlson, and Chuck Norris.
2
@A. Stanton you know the Chinese vaccines don’t work, right? Hence the huge lock ups in China.
1
I travel extensively in Asia.
Unfortunately, in most Indo-Pacific countries the abrupt withdrawal by America from the TPP (after years of planning, pushing by the US, and years of leaders spending their political capital domestically to pass the required legislation) has changed their calculus forever (or, at least for several decades).
They are convinced it would be foolish to take any American administration seriously when the next guy who comes along can do a 180-degree turn.
We just don't have an answer to that. Unless we fix our own divisions and re-establish the twin doctrines that served us well, we won't win this competition with China.
The twin doctrines were:
"politics stop at the water's edge", and
"new administrations respect the old administration's foreign commitments"
18
Sounds like an agreement that requires cooperation; therefore, given the U.S. is one of the parties to cooperate, it is an agreement that will unravel. Don't know how. I just know the U.S. isn't going to establish a foothold equivalent or comparable to China's in Asia. If the new alliance were an NBA team, how do you think it would do in the playoffs with Japan, India, New Zealand, South Korea, and Vietnam as its starting players? Japan would shoot 1-point shots; India wouldn't have energy to finish the game; Vietnam would do nothing but launch 3-pointers from beyond half-court; South Korea would insist on playing pointless guard; and the U.S. would tie it altogether at center, who insists on being Chris Paul.
4
Withdrawing from TPP conceded Asia to China. A historic blunder. Which is no doubt why Trump did it—to strengthen China. Smaller Asian countries will hesitate to enter into treaties with the US since they can’t depend on any consistency from one administration to the next. This is a non-starter.
4
This is necessary, but it is also necessary to remove all our manufacturing from China, even if it goes back to Taiwan or to South Korea, but it really must come home. To think that we can be left without necessary medical items because they are made in China is horrendous. Who agreed to purchase there in the first place?
4
Too much influence and power for a county (ours) on the brink of being a failing democracy.
4
Biden is so weak and his administration has no China foreign policy at all, so the best he can do is get other nations around him. Today what the U.S. has is what GOP DT implemented. Right or wrong, at least he did something. It would really nice if WAPO had the fortitude to ask Biden or someone at the next press conference just what is accomplished by continuing the tariffs on Chinese imports. And at that time remind Biden there is the highest inflation going on now. Try helping Americans, Biden, it might win you some votes come Nov.
4
“It is going to be difficult to convince Asian governments to change rules in ways that may be disruptive to their political economies without the promise of increased access to the American market,”
Good luck with that market after Joe bankrupts it. After Ukraine it’s never too early to start sending money to Taiwan for defense or relocation expenses for Central America.
2
All these moves to contain China are at best cosmetic. Their educational emphasis has led to a new group of highly educated Chinese who can compete or beat best in the world. The laser like focus of China on emerging technologies will lead to huge dividends in the next few decades. By comparison, the educational prowess of students in the US is rapidly declining. If it were not for the new Chinese and Indian students filling our universities, there would be a dramatic shortage of qualified personnel in tech and medical sectors. The Republican anti-immigration policies will soon dry up this well too. Under these conditions, constantly playing the Chinese card for the ills plaguing America is a futile exercise. Shouldn’t we be focusing on developing our own educational system to compete with China? Forget all this equity, diversity that has ruined education and instead focus on developing the best, no matter what color, sex, pronoun etc. It is only when this education system improves can we hope to compete on a level playing field with China or any other country.
9
@CBE The decline in educational achievement, at least here in Michigan can be traced back to two almost simultaneous events. The first is the disinvestment by the State in our State University level schools to cut taxes. The second was the passage of tax supported private charter schools that Betsy DeVoss insisted have no achievement standards at all before receiving our tax dollars as direct payments for tuition costs. The Republican controlled State Legislature beholden to her financial contributions, passed this travesty of no achievement necessary policy and it is siphoning gross amounts of money out of our educational system. Now, as a consequence Tuition to get a teaching degree in any field of study, is too expensive for students to be able to afford, so we are experiencing a horrible teacher shortage in our state!
1
I thought what we want is to bring the jobs back to USA, not switching the job outsourcing from one country - China to other foreign countries ?
1
I just love how biden is putting all this work into establishing and strengthening multilateral alliances with the US all over the world. Maybe this time these countries will even trust us a little before we throw them under the bus again.
Symbolic move at best. Our congress will never approve to let southeast and east Asian agricultural products entering U.S. with minimum or no taxes.
Without a concrete signed agreement, the next president will cancel it at will.
Oh well, Teddy Roosevelt and Taft had their go at it over a century ago. Let’s see if the nations of Asia-Pacific as well as India learned anything from that experience. China is a real threat of course but US imperialism is hardly any better than the British, Dutch and French imperialism (just read the Haiti story for the latter, Caroline Elkins for the first and Daron Acemoglu et al. for the middle one!).
7
OK, I'm no military expert but.... let's see here... we have Russia (Putin) thinking he can do whatever he pleases. China (Xi Jinping) has for the most part been supportive of Putin (by way of their silence). Do we really want people like that, feeling like so much of the world is against them?
3
I noticed that Laos, Cambodia and Burma are not on the list. I wonder why? Perhaps it's because Laos is in deep with china, just recently opening China-sponsored high speed rail link They too are supposedly communist country. Cambodia, governed by a Putin-like ruler who has shut down democracy and liberties that existed before his ascension to the "throne". Burma, i think was barred from attending, but even so, a country wholeheartedly supported both economically and militarily by both China and Russia.
I just economic values. Valuing the all mighty profit vs freedom, liberty and democracy
1
If only there was some kind of Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement in place, so that we could counter China's trade practices.
Oh wait.......
Just one more example of Trump's "genius" biting us in the you know what.
And what exactly have the tariffs accomplished? Keep them in place if they are working, otherwise it's time to try something different. The latter seems to be the case.
1
In making this union to stand up to China’s existential threat, Biden has cemented his legacy as one of our very greatest presidents!
2
Considering Biden’s latest low poll ratings, my hope for U.S. worldly resurgence is just as low, unfortunately.
The worst decision Hillary Clinton ever made, if you ask me, was to attack TPP.
Bernie was bad enough. But she knew better, and attacked for political gain.
2
Many of the countries are what NYT’s Thomas Friedman politely calls “low trust” societies. I’ve lived in them. He’s being very polite. What will the result be? Instead of being scammed by China, USA will be scammed by many others too
3
@ABC "“low trust” societies!?"
3
@ABC
“Low trust societies”? And USA is always to be trusted? Everyone is trying to do what benefits their economy and their people.
2
@P
Thanks for proving my point for me. You contort my point into the extreme and absurd “US is always to be trusted” (a straw man argument) because you know there are countries where someone trying to scam you is almost a daily experience. China Brazil Mexico are some examples.
Great idea to start over and hopefully getting to "fair" rather than just "free" trade. Leave the thorny issues of the costs of labor and environmental degradation to Sec. Raimondo and the Trade Adviser before agreeing to lower or eliminate tariffs. Ms. Raimondo was a highly-regarded governor here and has great expertise in finance plus she's exceptionally smart.
1
I wish Biden well. But get serious.
True, the 13 countries named are aware of China's desire to dominate and create vassal states (see Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Australia). But, what US is imagining is a partnership of grossly unequals (per capita GDP ranges from over $60k of Singapore to less than $2K of India).
There is no evidence to suggest that US foreign policy is informed by the reality on the ground, or its objectives and plans are implementable. We can destroy a lot, but we have rarely built anything outside of the Marshall plan.
The reality? India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam - are authoritarian, immensely corrupt. No one will do anything, but insist on getting paid first. There goes another trillion. Then multiple trillions after that (see Afghanistan, where easily a trillion in cash was plain stolen, or paid to bad guys not to shoot at us).
Given our track record, and theirs, I have zero faith in anyone's ability to implement a true alliance that works for everyone, corrupts no one, does not trigger undue anti-American sentiments (or did we forget Subic Bay?), and drains the US treasury. Neither us, nor any of them, have the brainpower followed by the political skills to pull this off. China will easily spend money to deep six any of our initiatives (all they have to do is pay off the communist insurgents in each of these countries they already finance) - and trouble will start and eventually escalate.
We sit this one out. Please.
18
@Kalidan - nonsense, China is going broke too, they have just about depleted their reserves and are reliant on the consumers from the West to maintain their status in the world. Their status is shrinking fast.
1
@Kalidan Well said. I only wished we had some people in power that could think like that.
2
We’re 5 yrs behind and we should carefully leverage our political capital which has increased enormously.
1
I support working with our allies in an economic fashion to counter the influence of China. As long as this deal doesn't mirror the TPP in attempting to outsource our "service economy" which was ludicrous beyond belief, and one of Obama's greatest blunders that he pushed so hard for it. It seems that Biden has taken the lesson and hopefully won't seek to push a new NAFTA on a middle class that's already in economic hospice.
I am proud of President Biden's efforts to rebuild America's credibility in the world. He has helped to strengthen NATO and now the Trans-Pacific coalition, undoing Trump's weakening of America on the world stage.
Conservatives should be applauding his efforts.
28
Rebuilding credibility or imperial hegemony?
Just asking :-).
6
@Joe Barnett So you think America's credibility was poor before Biden? Trump may not have been liked because he was a tough negotiator, but the world can see that Biden is a doddering old politician , who says whatever pops into his mind, but forgets it ten minutes later.
2
@Gerald Gould
trump was a tough negotiator?
I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. Cheap. Don't miss it.
American internationalism is back. Putin's brutal invasion has galvanized the West and the United States to restore the liberal internationalist orientation that the U.S. presented to the world prior to the Trump administration. That long continuity for building a liberal democratic order now energized by containment against both Russia and China, has refashioned the traditional mission of the United States in the world. It looks like a permanent shift. It is also essential for global order. The alternative to this policy is pretty hard to stomach. The nationalist neo-isolationist solution pushed by Trump and his far right allies was an unimaginative and deeply flawed response to the great power system.
With a restored NATO and restored American globalism we can cope with Putin and with the Chinese communist party. Both are dangerous and both must be contained.
16
Trumps approach wasn’t flawed- if one wanted to spread totalitarianism. That’s the scariest part.
2
Biden is the leader of our times in bringing people and countries together. As one President, he cannot atone for America’s historical blunders of wars of aggression in earlier times.
Biden tries to be fairer to countries that are democracies or fledgling ones, while forcing the world to deliberate on the havoc that can be and are being created by tyrannical autocrats with nuclear weapons.
A good student of history knows the lessons to be learned so that resultant catastrophes do not befall a nation. Biden is one such student. Age has its virtue. TG for that.
19
It’s like they draw this stuff up in the dirt with a stick. So glad “The Adults” are back in charge.
11
It is unfortunate Biden and other moderate Democrats will not fight for TPP and lifting the ineffective Trump tariffs. Doing so will help reduce prices and decrease inflation by opening up more low cost producers to American producers. We need to retrain our workforce for 21st century jobs and restore essential industries here (electrifying our transit grid, biotech and healthcare, military and high tech) while leaving the consumer goods to the developing nations that can become part of Team America instead of Team China. Trump was correct that the competition with China is zero sum, but ripping up TPP was a massive own goal that only helped the Chinese consolidate their economic control over the Indo Pacific region.
3
One of the things that we should keep in mind is that most of these countries are also members of the China led trade bloc. With the possible exceptions of Japan, Australia, and maybe India, most of these countries are swing states following their own interests (or those of their elites) and keeping their options open.
4
This has got to be the most confusing trade agreement I have ever seen. And I have been dealing with free trade agreements rules for 25 years.
I do not see any economic goals, no new markets, no reduced tariffs. I do not see how any of it is supposed to help the economies of the signatories. Yet the WH says this: “It is by any account the most significant international economic engagement that the United States has ever had in this region”
I am sorry but the GSP trade agreement already was the biggest, except your president never re-signed it into law, which means all countries pay duty now on products that have not paid duty since the 70’s. Right now all imports are more expensive because Biden forgot to sign GSP into law since he took office. Now that cargo from developing countries pays duty, he wants a new trade agreement that does not help any one economically?
The goals seems to be: ‘harmonizing efforts to secure supply chains, expanding clean energy, fighting corruption and paving the way for greater digital trade’
And the rules: ‘Each of the 13 participating countries will be allowed to choose in which of the four areas to pursue deals without having to commit to all of them’
So pick and choose what you wish to do and how? For no economic benefit?
The mental calisthenics needed to understand Biden’s plans. Sorry but I do not see how this is going to work out at all.
14
Yet, despite all of the confusing aspects, all of those nations have signed on. There is more hope for future progress than there was before that.
6
Autumn, GSP is a system of lowered tariffs designed to encourage trade with poor countries and help them out some. Yeah now, there’s a real right-wing oriority.
It expired on Dec. 31, 2020, when Trump was President. He had previously attacked it, and threw India off the list.
The Senate passed a renewal last year; the House version is sitting in Ways&Means.
Joe Biden cannot aign he doesn’t have.
Honestly, do you people even TRY to get the facts straight?
@Robert
'It expired on Dec. 31, 2020, when Trump was President'
'The Senate passed a renewal last year'
No sir. It did not 'expire with Trump', it has to be resigned into law by the US President every year. So far Biden has been the only president who forgot to sign it back into law.
If he ever resigns it into law, he will owe millions upon millions on duty refunds. If he never does then he will do away with a free trade agreement designed to help poor economies (think Africa and most of Asia) by opening our market to them.
But he has not. And there are no signs that he will either.
1
Why would these countries engage if in no time at all Democrats will be blocked or worse, the President ousted?
7
Trump pulled us out of an important partnership. Biden is forming a new one. It's the right move, the smart move.
5
Pers. Biden's new "framework" to counter China that included ASEAN members among others, in Asia. But some of them are so indebted and or already in bed with China that it would be a crisis within a crisis later not if but when US V China erupts. Laos, Cambodia and recently Myanmar are but in name only already well in China's orbit. Philippines under Duterte "divorced" the US and tilted towards China on most aspects but what the newly elected (manipulated) Marcos would do remains cloudy given his campaign and eventual presidency even though that is being challenged, would be managed by hangers on and corrupt advisers which may include China. The only ones surely to follow US are Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia maybe Brunei and Vietnam.
Good. China, under Xi, has foisted a catastrophic pandemic on the world, stolen intellectual property indiscriminately, manipulated its currency, saber-rattled in the Pacific, and played nice with Putin as he invaded a sovereign a country.
Nations should align in opposition until it acts like a mature, sophisticated member of the world community not some deceitful country whose word is about as reliable as Donald Trump's.
10
Umm, wasn't there already an Asia-Pacifc economic, NAFTA-like plan several years agho? That got killed?
Now, we're "reviving" it?
I certainly hope that the people promoting this have learned lessons from NAFTA (and its riduculous successor, USMCA).
It seems a little late, however.
1
@Wesley Struebing NAFTA built up our neighbor's economies to the point where our biggest customers in the world are always Mexico and Canada. Both clock in consistently at about 15% each of our total exports
NAFTA worked. Very well.
4
This is discussed in the article. The prior agreement is not being revived.
This so-called new frame work is almost comical because it is so devoid of any real substance. This follows the nuclear submarine deals for Australia that may never materialize but severely antagonized France. The people running Biden's foreign policy may be more incompetent than those served DJT.
9
In 2016 both HRC and Trump ran against the TPP - of course HRC may have been not stressing the truth. Nonetheless, both major party candidates were against the TPP.
And as the article does say, the Congress would not have signed on to the TPP, especially if it were a treaty.
Do we now have a Biden-treaty that will require Senate ratification?
1
You’re correct. I was disappointed in HRC because she only said that to counter Bernie. I thought that was the turning point in the election. There were more protections in that agreement than NAFTA and WTO. Many possibilities with the countries working together.
The US and Japan created an assertive China, they (China) are sick and tired of being exploited and brutalized .. all moves now against trying to contain China look like reactive only .. anything to try to made democracy look like dominant..
8
@Robert Exploited and brutalized?...rather an alarmist statement...at the end of the day, I prefer the US leading international economic policy rather than China (or Russia)...
5
I wonder where I could find a serious analysis that explains the pros and cons of globalism.
Like any complex system it has its flaws but, without able to prove it, I believe globalism is the way to go. Do we make sure that American workers are protected and retrained? Of course.
The idea that every complex piece of machinery (airplanes, ships, car, etc..) must be assembled in one place does not hold water.
In this era where information is sweeping the world, the last thing we need to do is pull back in. One can choose to retreat from everything and hope that the rest of the world will continue into mediocrity but I would suggest that any opponent to globalism get out of this country and attempt to see what is going on.
The only destabilizing force so far is that our standard of living is higher than the rest of the world. I believe it is best to extend a hand to the rest of the world and bring them to our level as opposed to go at it alone.
Nobody is going to wait for us and we will wither on the vine spending time arguing about identity theories, notion of great replacement and other such ideological stances pushed by corrupt politicians and biased commentators who talk too much.
1
@BG
Nationalism is stupid it is saying saying you will only go to your local grocery store you won’t shop in a different city in your state or you won’t shop in a different state
It is the global marketplace and there is no turning back now
Employers need to do manufacturing in multiple locations whether in the state are globally. If you have all of your plants in one state and that state has a horrible tornado they are without product for months
3
“Do we make sure American workers are retrained? Of course.”
No, historically we have not. There are zero indications that would change in the future.
Our standard of living has deteriorated for decades all so the ruling class can hoover up more profit and claim they’re boosting the economy.
What good is a robust economy if it only benefits a handful of elites at the expense of everyone else?
8
@Sam Butter In addition to the Elite, the robust economy benefits the new Americans who improve their standard of living by coming here.
What about a robust economy that benefits the Elite and newly arrived immigrants? Is that good enough to justify the dismantling of America?
I applaud President Biden for his initiative to enhance our trading partnerships with Indo-Pacific nations. In the midst of so many dire events that call upon his energy both here and abroad, he is taking time to focus his diplomatic leadership skills on forming a framework of 15 participating and cooperating nations because he knows how important it is. Since 2016, U.S. isolationists dropped the ball and stalled any momentum we had going at the time to improve economic cooperation in the region. The Biden initiative has four commendable goals: to harmonize efforts to secure supply chains (much needed), expand clean energy (the world is experiencing climate crisis), fight corruption (stop the culture of bribes), pave the way for greater digital trade (it IS the digital age, why not facilitate and secure trading in this way?).
6
I like Joe. He is past his prime, but still an amazing caring man. He can tell right from wrong, and he listens. Two things that were missing from his arrogant horrible cowardly predecessor.
Joe came into office trying to unite America. But now, after all of his efforts, realizes, the other party is beyond redemption.
Joe shouldn't run again. For his own sake, and for America's
sake.
The Republican Party is busy building the next anti-democracy autocrat.
The Democratic Party needs to identify someone who will call it out, while maintaining charisma... Because, like it or not, that is what sells in our largely uninformed country.
I have a few choices on my list... But I will not mention any names yet. Because I don't want to detract from the point.
2
@Jeff While I don't disagree, I don't see your solution becoming anything but a political debacle in actual practice.
The last time a president decided not to run for re-election - LBJ - because he knew he couldn't win, the candidate chosen to replace him - the unremarkable Hubert Humphrey - lost disastrously to Nixon.
While your reasoning makes sense, a president bowing out puts his party on the back foot, having to start from scratch, with a new damaging primary and an unknown new candidate lacking the lift of incumbency.
While Trump very well could beat Biden in 2024, changing candidates like that would almost certainly lead to a rout.
This vague proposition is just noise. There is no formal agreement or countries voting to approve. It's just another half baked Biden distraction for woes at home.
12
Somewhat hilariously, a Canadian think tank analyzed the final result of Trump's NAFTA 2.0 (USMCA) to find that TPP members Canada and Mexico had negotiated about 80% of the TPP into Trump's Triumph. So the US currently has favpirable "TPP" trade relations with only two of the Pacific economiies it would have had by simply staying in Obama's inteolerable-to-Trump treaty. We'll see what Biden can possibly comes up with with given his pending loss of Congress.
4
WHY should SE Asian nations "unite against China" at the behest of a foreign superpower hellbent on fomenting conflict across the world?
Just look at how the Solomon Islands is now being threatened by the US and Australia for not bending the knee to American interests. Suddenly the US has become extremely interested in "promoting democracy" there until the current government is overthrown.
Odd, though, that the US never seems interested in promoting democracy in Saudi Arabia, say. A search for National Endowment for Democracy grants in Saudi Arabia turns up completely empty.
40
Because China has been trying to steal territory from these countries anyways.
Have you followed any news where China keeps claiming islands in international waters as part of it’s territory? Where they are building military establishments on such islands? Where they have attacked Eastern states of India and their soldiers beat the Indian soldiers to death with clubs with nails in them? Of course, the countries are scared of Chinese might and want to unite in an effort to delay the Chinese invasion which is going to come someday.
2
Biden is the master of foreign policy affairs. Now he has to fix the damage done by his predecessor Trump who preferred isolationism and dominance. China is dominating and colonizing all over Asia and Africa. They are investing so much money that now those borrowers can not pay back. Debt is the biggest problem in so many third world countries. Siri Lanka is bankrupt now and the country is facing huge turmoil. Pakistan is facing blackouts threatening for inability to pay the debt for the power plants. Now the developing and poor nations are in big trouble. The world bank warned them that the crisis would be very severe. America can intervene and help these nations from bankruptcy.
13
@ASHRAF CHOWDHURY
US should not bail out either Sri Lanka or Pakistan. China supported both nations and added to their woes. Now they have to pay the price of being suckered by China.
We should instead stand up against Chinese threats in Asia and offer support to the Pacific nations being bullied by China. Alliances with Japan, Taiwan and SKorea make a lot of sense as does the inclusion of India - the other big country in SE Asia.
4
A "loosely-defined" economic "framework" that will "avoid market access provisions".
China must surely be trembling.
Patently absurd.
10
@TB
Do you think China wants the U. S. in any alliance in Asia?
4
One cannot help but recall what President Eisenhower said before he stepped down in 1960. He said, "This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist......
....Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight."
Only God knows who is pulling Biden's strings as he sets his sight on seeking WAR with China.
24
“The framework will focus on four main goals: harmonizing efforts to secure supply chains, expanding clean energy, fighting corruption and paving the way for greater digital trade.”
The pandemic, Russian invasion of Ukraine, internal politics and climate change are illustrating the weaknesses of the “supply chain” concept, in which each link is vulnerable to failure in multiple ways.
At the end of the Trump era, we were begging China to buy our fossil fuel and agricultural exports in return for tariff moderation (they didn’t). At that time, in August 2020, we reached a monthly record trade deficit with China (Trump had promised “zero trade deficit”), illustrating our dependency on what has been shown to be an unreliable “supply chain”.
Perhaps this partnership can focus on reducing dependency for all participating nations, while fostering beneficial trade flows in all directions. Maybe we should retire the term “supply chain” in favor of “supply mesh”.
8
Does the opening comment in this reporting sound suspicious and slightly antagonistic when describing another leader of a leading country?
"President Biden has enlisted a dozen Asia-Pacific nations to join a new loosely defined economic bloc meant to counter China’s dominance and reassert American influence in the region five years after his predecessor withdrew the United States from a sweeping trade accord that it had negotiated itself."
Does this sound a bit pressured, instead of diplomatic?
"The United States together with such regional powerhouses as Japan, South Korea and India to establish new rules of commerce in the fastest-growing part of the world and offer an alternative to Beijing’s leadership. But wary of liberal opposition at home, Mr. Biden’s new partnership will avoid the market access provisions of traditional trade deals, raising questions about how meaningful it will be."
Is the "alternative to Beijing’s leadership", cooperation, or only confrontation and domination?
Does Biden even know that Xi Jinping three years ago at the Party Congress committed to "socialism with Chinese characteristics", and that one year ago he committed in his 'Xi thoughts' to "socialist democracy with Chinese-characteristics"?
Why wouldn't Biden 'call Xi's hand' with an offer of 'democratic socialism with American characteristics"? Which would narrow the diplomacy to just addressing "what the meaning of 'characteristics' is"?
Why is Biden "wary of liberal opposition"?
3
@Alan MacDonald
He's not wary. He's accepting that it's not going to be business as usual with regard to labor and environment which all the trade deals seem to laugh at.
Does it make sense for us to make those changes at home with all the costs to business and not require it of others in trade agreements? That would allow those with the least concern about those issues to profit and would then become a race to the bottom.
All of our trade pacts should be to lift up protections for people and their environment.
Accepting this may be the result of demands of liberals but it ought to be just common sense policy that no one in their right mind should have a problem with. If traditional Democratic concerns like this could be the focus instead of the extreme left culture warriors, perhaps we could make progress for our country and the world at large.
I hope the President's sincerity and desire for cooperation in all these areas will help to encourage countries of their worth and the need to join the alliance as a mechanism for working on solutions with the aim of protecting people and the planet which, by extension, protects business.
5
@Blanche White
Blanche, since you employed the terms; "extreme left culture warriors" -- your concluding concerns for "protects business" --- would seem to punctuate our conversation regarding our different hopes of democratic socialism v. Empire.
1
@Alan MacDonald He's "wary" beause it was "liberal opposition" that shot down the previousd incarnation of this potential agreement. Becuase it sounds great on paper, but then, so did NAFTA. And NAFTA turned out to be terrible (and its successor, the USMCA isn't really any better).
1
No president in the history of the United States has aided, abetted and increased the power of adversaries, in this case Russia and China over the US... OVER the US than Donald Trump.
President Biden has a very long way to go in repairing all of the damage directly caused to this nation, and indeed this world, by four years of Donald Trump. We can only hope this is just the beginning of that journey, and that we have enough time.
69
@JaySquared -
Every US administration - GOP & Dems cooperating or not - has since no later than 2013 tolerated worldwide expansion of Chinese hegemony via Belt & Road Initiatives while offering no constructive or competitive alternative of even remotely equal efficacy.
3
@JaySquared
Exactly. And I would like to mention especially the debacle of Trump negotiating with the Taliban without the Afghanistan government in which he rolled over and created the misery we see now.
12
@JaySquared While Trumps' foreign policy was abysmal, his admin did sign an $8 billion arms deal with Taiwan that enraged the CCP. If you want to point fingers, start with the Clinton admin who let China into the WTO. Despite all of the warnings from Pelosi (which turned out to be true).
2
Is this different from the gold standard agreement touted by Hillary Clinton and scuttled by Trump… is it a return to sound diplomacy… or a retread?
1
@Pottree That's the $64,000 question, isn't it?
Biden’s success at reuniting America’s allies is stunning. After Trump berated and belittled our partners overseas, preferring to cozy up to dictators like Putin, Biden United our NATO and other European countries.
This latest move to bring India, Japan, South Korea and other partners into a powerful trading bloc after it had been ripped apart by his predecessor shows how much Biden takes care of America’s national security interests.
75
A powerful trading bloc with no commitment with lowering barriers? The report makes clear the US is not prepared to make concessions so why would foreign leaders take this seriously?
Sure, when the US President makes a speech everyone will agree as you don't want to upset someone with that much power. However not a single foreign leader is quoted as expressing support. They know the goal of this initiative is to look good for American voters, not accomplish anything.
7
@xinxilanren
I was listening yesterday to Fareed Zakaria make the point that Biden inexplicably kept several of Trump’s worst policies, including sanctions on China.
Today, I heard that when President Biden returns he will sit down with Janet Yellin, the Treasury Secretary, to discuss this point.
Biden seems to be making what often fails in diplomacy but succeeds when consensus can be found. In this case, finding common ground and moving forward in mutual interests.
8
@JT FLORIDA Some would say America's actual national security interests are not opposing Chinese expansion in the Pacific.
Our actual security interests are in preventing perma-drought and further warming and excluding further ethnic bickering and strife.
The bill promotes profit over security, population growth over reality. It is a national in-security bill.
1
The T.P.P. should all along have been framed as a security agreement. Dropping out was a major mistake.
7
@MB
Dropping out was a mistake but it needed an overhaul.
2
Trans Pacific Partnership was one of the most important treaties the U.S. ever negotiated. Its opposition was from labor groups and the hard right's cynical knee-jerk reaction to anything Barack Obama did. Hillary Clinton turning in opposition to it didn't convince very many labor groups to support her as strongly as they might have.
In any case, one of Donald Trump's very first decisions was to summarily withdraw from the partnership with little consideration other than being anti-Obama. It was Trump's first of many bad decisions.
The purpose was always to contain China's aggressive moves to be the world's leading trader. As strategy, TPP was virtually indispensable.
Now, any step to restore even a small remnant of TPP is the right step. However, working out the details will take more time than President Biden has.
11
I'm a lifelong Democrat and I believe that the Republicans are leading the US towards right-wing autocracy.
I will NOT vote for Biden in 2024. I have lived through Vietnam, our secret war in Laos, the Bay of Pigs, the 1953 CIA led coup in Iran that upended their democracy, the flattening of Iraq based on lies, and dozens of other US acts of aggression.
In its 250 years of existence, the US has committed far more unjustified acts of aggression than China has committed in the past 2000 years. China HAS had conflicts with its neighbors, but China does not go all over the world overturning governments as does the US.
China has made it clear that they are not planning a military takeover of Taiwan. 1.4 billion Chinese DO believe that Taiwan is a province of China. When the Nationalists lost in 1949, they fled to that province. Since that time, there has been a tacit understanding that Taiwan would not push for independence and China would not attack. Biden now seeks to upend that policy in the name of 'freedom'.
This isn't about freedom, it's about semiconductors. Instead of building its own plants, the US wants to secure Taiwanese production. Semiconductors are the new oil.
After a lifetime, I have finally reached my limit on US aggression. Democrats can count me out.
61
@justgimmesometruth
Biden's statement on Taiwan was carefully worded to state that the US, while it agrees with the one China concept, it has a long-standing obligation to intervene to support Taiwan militarily if, and only if, mainland China sought to take Taiwan by force.
This is consistent with the blunt wording of the Taiwan Relations Act, which previous politicians pretended to be ambiguous.
This is not the same as the dishonorable acts of aggression by the U.S. in the past, where the U.S. initiated hostile military offensive action or overthrew legitimate governments.
75
@Mark: I'm a frequent visitor to China, including Taiwan.
China is flying into Taiwanese airspace as a warning that Taiwan should not accept military aid from the US and that Taiwan should not try to assert independence. China is willing to live with the ambiguity of the current situation. The US, however, doesn't want to accept this ambiguity. The US is cheerleading for Taiwanese independence. If Taiwan follows this US lead, on this, Taiwan will certainly be destroyed.
From China's point of view, Chinese aircraft are flying over Chinese airspace. You may not believe this, but 1.4 billion Chinese do. The Nationalists lost the Chinese civil war. The US has no business provoking war in this part of the world. (Not to mention that democracy in our own country is collapsing).
Neither the Chinese government nor the Chinese people want a war with Taiwan. A large part of the population of Taiwan have family in Eastern China. Everyone in China, however, is aware of the US history of aggression. I find that people are particularly aware of Iraq. The Chinese people aren't particularly happy about Xi Jinping ending term limits or 'Xi Jinping Think', but they believe it's essential to have strong defenses against what they see as a reckless US government. Their goal is economic success. They support Xi's policies.
22
@justgimmesometruth -
Thus the GOP can count you IN?!
The logic seems illusive if not simply missing here.
63
Too many blocs exist and yet the trade is shrinking.
It is curious the existing blocs are not made to function
for the good of average person and new blocs and
pacts are created. WTO should be strengthened
rather than work around it. Anyway, without knowing
the details of labor and environmental standards it is
premature to get excited.
Biden is turning out to be an excellent foreign policy/alliance building president. He now needs to turn over some of the domestic agenda to VP Harris. His first step should be to make her the Inflation Czar to head up a task force to aggressively tackle our inflation issues.
I trust Biden with our very existence when it comes to foreign threats, both economic and aggression. He however seems to be much more limited in his domestic policy vision and needs to turn more and more of it over to Harris.
18
@Bryan
I agree Biden is excellent at foreign policy and weak in domestic issues. But is Kamala the answer? She is good in legal issues; our Commerce and Transportation Cabinet Secretaries may be better equipped. But Yellen is a disaster - claiming inflation threat was overblown instead of reacting quicker.
@Bryan
Agree with your assessment of President Biden and am thankful he ran.
But, I don't believe there is any way to involve V.P. Harris on the stage to polish her image enough to help the ticket as VP or as anointed presidential candidate in '24.
If Biden decides not to run again, the DNC will be committing suicide if the VP leads the ticket. I hope they are considering other options and I hope Harris recognizes the risk and finds another position she prefers.
1
Agreed, but I don't see how either one can break the extremists grip on congress especially with two fake democratic senators.
1
If people think economic protectionism will help the economy they are in fools errand and don’t understand economics, free trade and economic cooperation is still best way to go. And yes, every worker has to face international competition.
8
@Navneet
Anybody who understands the fraudulent and intellectually bankrupt theories of economics and free trade as practiced for the past thirty years is part of the problem, and one of the root causes of the perilous state of the world.
5
@TB World always had war and conflicts, infact 1990-2020 has been period of more calm than earlier decades and billions are driven out of poverty in this period.
@Navneet
Economics in man made; there are winner and losers over time in every deal. Cooperation is a two way street; China does not cooperate; they take and steal and there is no give. Yes weaning ourselves from China will create some issues but the benefits long term are immense for us and for the world.
Foolishness is being suckered time and again by China.
2
USA was completely bamboozled by China. Since China joined WTO we have seen the greatest transfer of wealth since 1492. What technology Chinese didn’t steal, your CEOs/politicians gave away to China — knowing they’d bail out with a golden parachute before anyone was wiser.
11
Why is Taiwan conspicuously absent from the list of participant states?
Also, sadly for any positive communal intentions, any advocacy by current administration may last no longer than November 2022 election cycle - US already proven a strange unstable beast in transnational accords.
3
Because American doesn’t officially recognize Taiwan as a country. In deference to China, sort of.
No market access but we want these countries to change their labor and environmental laws when we got rich by playing loose with the environment. China is a bully, but they don’t require countries to make untenable political choices.
3
Great to see president Biden with our Indian, South Korean Australian and Japanese allies in Tokyo this weekend. Time for America to pivot to Asia after dealing with Russia's egregious invasion of Ukraine for the past 3 months. Also on Biden's plate now, climate change up the yingyang, America as divided as it was 90 years ago, and elections in November. We will see immense changes in Europe's and America's economies and democracies this year.
1
Unfortunately for the US, it ceded economic leadership to China long ago. China is already the world's largest exporter, producer and manufacturing nation. US trade with the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations was $362 billion in 2020. China's trade with the bloc stood at $878 billion (2021 figure) - roughly 2.4 times higher.
How did it reach this stage?
Basically, the US was too consumed with never-ending wars of attrition in the Middle East and Afghanistan since the time of the Bush administration in 2001. Gross complacency meant it overlooked the colossal economic inroads China was making in the Asia-Pacific region. The US also had a very old-fashioned approach of focussing solely on military power while failing to appreciate China's rising economic clout.
The TPP floated by the Obama administration was a belated attempt to counteract China's growing economic heft and revitalise non-China trade with the region. However, populist sentiment led to its abandonment by the Trump administration. This latest Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) is a modest attempt to patch together a non-China economic alliance in the wake of the TPP's failure.
I am not sure how many Asian countries are willing (or able) to place their bets on the US, whose policies and commitment towards the region have been inconsistent thus far. Also, the more economically dependent countries are on China, the less able they are to resist it. It has won without firing a bullet.
26
@Jack
You raise excellent points. As has been the case for decades, the U.S. focus on endless war, deregulation, corporate giveaways, has resulted in a hollowed out manufacturing base and a crumbling U.S.
8
Before President Biden says that
the US will militarily intervene to
defend Taiwan against invasion by China
he should:
Sit down and talk to the Pentagon.
As I understand it the Pentagon has
War-Gamed such an intervention by the
US in China's back yard and the U.S. was
defeated every time.
It is not 1942 where the US and Japan sent out
long range scout planes to search for the opposing fleet.
The Chinese will know the exact position of all
the American Forces.
Given the Chinese have the most modern Navy in the World, are in the process of updating their Air Force and have developed the most modern anti-ship missiles, and have ground bases for their aircraft - which cannot be sunk like US Air Craft Carriers - what is President Biden thinking.
It will be a short war - two week and the US Navy will be massively defeated.
7
@Red Deer LOL. The pundits all said the same thing about Ukraine. Amphibious campaigns are the most complex of military operations, and China has no real world experience in combat, unlike the US. Trying to support combat operations across the Taiwan strait will be taxing for an inexperienced, autocratic military such as the PLA.
@EzPz
No, you are incorrect.
I predicted, and you can look it up on the comments section of the NY Times
that Russia wanted the Eastern Province of the Ukraine and the Province right above the Crimea.
They are finishing their mopping up exercises and soon the war will come to an end.
China does not need to invade Taiwan, they just have to place an economic and military blockade around her and Taiwan will be forced to accede to China's demands.
Should the US Navy attempt to break that Blockade it will be soundly and quickly defeated, much like how the Japanese defeated Russia in 1905.
That you wrote
"LOL'
only demonstrates how little you know about wars for their in nothing funny about any War.
1
The root of the economic problems US is facing, is due to the greediness of the Wall Street, and Corporation shareholders. Since early 1990’s, to maximize the corp profitability, those people pushed globalization at the cost of US workers. The Wallstreet has not been interested in investing “real” economy in US that would benefit the US economy. Without solving this problem, any framework is useless, and US will not benefit from it.
35
@Jim If I can compete with international competition so can every American. Government protecting your job just because you are born in America is socialism.
There are more high skilled jobs than ever in America with world’s best universities. People need to up their skill if they want to compete in 31st century economy.
2
@Jim
Yes. And they built China's military in the process.
2
@Navneet
What a joke. China has zero environmental protections, and less than zero protections for workers.
If the US forced "competitors" to safety standards we enforce here, it is China and India that could not compete.
3
The trip of President Biden is an effort to regain the US military prominence in the Asia-Pacific Basin. As far as trade and investment, Chiná's dominant presence is irreversible.
US and Asia's economies became linked by intensive market forces since the end of WWII. The system functioned fine for the US until the rise of China in the 80s. The market approach benefited American consumers with cheap Asian goods offset by manufacturing jobs lost to China. Unsustainable politically.
The momentum of further consolidation of Asia's economic integration lies with China. The Biden administration's ad-hoc effort to strengthen ties with the Asia-Pacific Basin is politically motivated.
As far as deeper economic integration, China is well ahead in the curve with the global Silk Road infrastructure initiative
9
People in this country do not support sleepwalking into a (potentially world-ending) conflict with China/Russia. After his bellicose guarantees in Taiwan, President Biden has deeply embarrassed and shamed this country. It is impossible to deny that this President and the congress are subverting the will of the people in order to enrich arms manufacturers at the expense of American security & reputation in Ukraine. Now our president threatens to send the treasure of this nation to go die for an island of little strategic importance and for a people who don't have the will to fight for their "autonomy". I will not be voting in 2024 for this man or anyone involved in his decision-making.
19
@Mike Most polls suggest Americans support sending arms and help to Ukraine. Like 65% of Americans. Do most Americans support President’s policy. Like it or not, most Americans don’t support dictators invading sovereign countries only to expand their borders and empire.
So you are against will of American people, not the president. But your opinion still matters.
3
@Navneet American people support "sending aid" and in some polls, a plurality supported "sending weapons" to Ukraine. What is not supported by any poll is the de facto proxy war which is on-going with Russia. Do you deny that there are serious issues at home with infrastructure, supply chain, healthcare, regulatory chaos, etc. And you are saying that the American people would rather send hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Ukraine, rather than use those funds to improve our country? Sorry, but you are against the will of the American people. The poorest among us, the middle class, have not stopped struggling economically since the pandemic first hit. But who wants to talk about that anymore?
5
@Mike
Americans have been struggling since long before the pandemic. The wholesale giveaway of our manufacturing base hollowed out main streets across our land and removed so many decent, family supporting jobs. The Great Recession didn't help. But endless war seems to be what America "does", to its ultimate peril.
3
Whatever this new Bloc is (other than making the rich bankers who have richer), it will be immediately unblocked by the next Republican President for the sole reason that it was built by a Democrat.
17
Missing from the article is an explanation of the opposition within his own party to supporting a more robust economic bloc, not to mention Canada not being a partner. No question Biden has done a great job of pulling NATO allies together, and, in this instance, most of the major players in the Asian region, but it seems his skills or effort is missing at home, and with our good neighbors to the north and south.
3
Good pact, not perfect. Yet, anything designed to weaken Beijing and offer countries alternatives to authoritarianism is a positive. This should garner bipartisan support, but we all know where the GOP is at these days….
20
@Matt P.
‘Good pact’
Ok – how?
How is this a good pact?
Please explain what benefit can we all have from this Good pact, what benefits do Asians get from this Good pact, what economic advantage does any one get from this Good pact, what military advantage, or simply how is this a Good pact?
Please explain?
The goals are these: harmonizing efforts to secure supply chains, expanding clean energy, fighting corruption and paving the way for greater digital trade.
The economic benefit for countries who change their laws to fit Biden’s agenda is nil.
So once again – how is this a Good pact?
1
However fledgling and imperfect, this economic bloc is a good start to not only replace the TPP, but also create a regional framework to counter China's increasing aggression and dominance in the Asia-Pacific region.
14
@David What does the USA care about Asia? Instead of building a common world, the USA divides! That's right, Mr. MUSK said in a recent tweet!
@Еdgar
The US does care about Asia. Our west coast is Asia-focused, where as our east coast tends to be Europe focused. The bigger issue is why isn't Europe more interested in Asia. It directly competes with the EU economically.
1
Europe focuses on the quality of life of their people. Europe does not hemorrhage tax payer dollars just to prove they are better, wealthier, or stronger than other countries. Perhaps the US could learn a thing or two from Europe about what’s truly important.
Missing from the so-called “framework” for the agreement or at least in the NYT coverage of it is any mention of an enforcement provision against countries which violate its rules. One of the most controversial provisions of the TPP which Trump seized on was the implicit loss of national sovereignty to an international judicial tribunal composed of a revolving number of international corporations which would hear complaints against a member nation which had adopted any policy which would unduly interfere with corporate profits. Trump was right in objecting to this provision. Why should private corporations accountable to no one but their shareholders be able to have final say over national policy? Even environmental laws and policies could be in jeopardy if they interfered with corporate profits. Biden’s proposal steers clear of this provision entirely, but in so doing he also renders his own proposal toothless. So why even bother?
16
@Edward Trump "seized on?" You mean, I think, was told to say. Perhaps we should wait to see the body of the proposal before making such generalizations.
@Edward
Yes, there was incredible secrecy about the fine print of the TPP - for good reasons that you explain in your comment. Obama was fine with it. Big Pharma was thrilled, etc. There's a reason so many Americans rose up against it. Things are bad enough for the "average citizen" as it is.
2
Maybe it's the idealism I absorbed as a child during the Cold War, but yes: the U.S. populace needs to come up to speed on these complex issues and start getting used to the sacrifices and controversies we'll be facing as we defend liberal democracy across the globe. (Although economic advantages to the old military-industrial complex were not lacking.)
My "recent" (2019) travel experiences in Korea, Japan and Taiwan, along with grief over Hong Kong, which I visited in 2006 while it was still free, convince me that supporting these countries is well worth it. The sheer energy and enthusiasm of the people, along with their systemic competence for building robust social, industrial and economic infrastructure, is beyond awesome.
The challenge will be teaching freedom and long-term thinking to our own increasingly insular fellow citizens.
149
@Flâneuse
It would be nice to see the U.S. "building robust social, industrial and economic infrastructure." Instead, we support an endless war machine - to the detriment of our citizens. We lack universal healthcare, modern trains, social cohesion - for what goal? Having a vast military industrial complex and fighting endless wars in the name of democracy has been our loss, it seems to me.
18
@Flâneuse Does that sacrifice include offshoring American jobs? Because that seems to be a sacrifice too many. The rise of violent White nationalist terrorism and Trumpism is a direct result of America making that sacrifice to China at the start the century. The country will self destruct long before any geopolitical advantage of a renewed TPP sacrificing American blue collar jobs begins to manifest itself.
6
@EB
Though I tend to somewhat agree, this present moment is showing us just where we would be without that military.
There are a lot of Putins and Trumps in the world.
2
I rather like the principle underpinning this move: Rather than wanting more and more, we can learn to solve problems by cooperating and coordinating what we have.
39
This seems to be a smart move. An unusual example of Biden using creative means to achieve a critical goal. It needs to play out to demonstrate effectiveness.
90
@Steve C An "unusual example of Biden using creative means?" We must not be reading the same news reports.
11
@Steve C
Biden "is" savvy and realizes that there is no "one size fits all".
If he finds something is not working to plan, he seems open to a fix, if policy shows it's worth fixing.
And, if there is anything that shows the need to have allies, it is the unprovoked War on Ukraine. How much less clout would we have if we only had the UK and Poland standing with us and no NATO?
I just hope we can hang tough and project a United front to this aggression by Russia and, at the same time, forge a movement worldwide for peace that will forever prevent wars or be ready to face similar consequences.
Even if it is hard to watch the terrible cost for Ukraine, Biden has shown the merit of starting small and ratcheting up. Only a madman like Putin would have persisted.
...but, now, that other Countries have seen the effects of a nuclear economic bomb, perhaps they will resist their worst instincts to try the same bloody thing.
I would say, therefore, that Biden has been savvy. ...if we're all still left to tell the tale, that is. And, if we're not, well who wants to live in the world that would have remained?
5
@Blanche White:
It pained me to recommend and embrace your comment. But the truth is not pretty. It is also painful (and not pretty) that President Biden does not get credit where it is due.
Best wishes,
Peggy in NH, an Independent voter for 40 years.
4
To be fair, Pres. Trump's action to remove the U.S. from the TPP was consistent with concerns in the Congress about the pact, and even Hilary Clinton spoke several times about concerns with it. This seems to have been a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. The pull-out widened the opportunities for China, though,
11
@enfolDMH problem is... congress wanted it retooled, repurposed. trump just said bail.. no replacement. no new ideas.. no effort. lack of effort was a staple of the trump presidency.
7