ASEAN at the Crossroads: Trap and Track between CPTPP and RCEP

Chien-Huei Wu

Journal of International Economic Law, 2020, vol. 23, issue 1, 97-117

Abstract: In the wake of the mega-free trade agreements, all of the 10 member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations are determined to participate in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and to maintain the centrality of the Association of South East Asian Nations whereas Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam have also opted for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. In view of divergent positions of member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations, this paper asks two questions: empirically, what drives individual member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations toward the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership or Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership; normatively, do the different positions embraced by member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations weaken the coherence of external relations of the Association of South East Asian Nations and undermine its centrality in Asian regionalism. I argued that Singapore’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership is mainly motivated by its wish to set the rules of free trade agreements in the Asian Pacific. Brunel aims to diversify its domestic economy and to undergo economic reform through international commitments. Vietnam and Malaysia joined the Trans-Pacific Partnership with a view to accessing American market, but Vietnam’s Trans-Pacific Partnership participation should also be understood in the context of its aggressive free trade agreements strategy. This paper argues that solidarity within member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations does not prevent economically advanced member countries from participating in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership for market access; nonetheless, the need of Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar should be taken into account through special and differential treatment in Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership negotiations.

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgz032 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:23:y:2020:i:1:p:97-117.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of International Economic Law is currently edited by Kathleen Claussen, Sergio Puig and Michael Waibel

More articles in Journal of International Economic Law from Oxford University Press Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().