The TPP Deal’s Effect on U.S. and China

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/the-tpp-deals-effect-on-us-and-china.html

Version 0 of 1.

To the Editor:

Re “The TPP Deal Won’t Stop China” (Op-Ed, Aug. 23):

Clyde Prestowitz underestimates the damage to American security interests in East Asia that would occur if the Trans-Pacific Partnership is not ratified. Through TPP, our allies have sought to bolster American engagement in the region as a counterweight to growing Chinese political and economic influence.

TPP countries accepted American standards for trade and investment and agreed to a bargain that requires substantial reforms in their economic policies but requires little change in existing American policies. At a time of provocations from North Korea and increasingly dangerous disputes over islands in the South China Sea, turning our backs on the TPP, a deal the United States has led from the start, would raise serious questions among our allies about American reliability when times get tough.

TPP is a valuable component of American soft power, and dropping it would harm our security interests in the region.

JEFFREY J. SCHOTT

Washington

The writer is a senior fellow at Peterson Institute for International Economics and co-author and co-editor of “Trans-Pacific Partnership: An Assessment.”

To the Editor:

Clyde Prestowitz makes a compelling case why the Trans-Pacific Partnership follows the path of old-fashioned trade agreements ill suited to today’s fast-moving economic and political developments.

Perhaps this is an opportune time for Mr. Prestowitz and his think-tank colleagues to provide some out-of-the-box thinking as to how the United States can meet the challenges of China and other countries in the arena of increasingly fierce international competition in trade and investment.

Clearly, taking many years to formulate a TPP-type agreement and many more years to implement its 5,000-plus pages is seriously out of step in today’s world.

EDWARD S. FLORKOSKI

Old Saybrook, Conn.

The writer is the founder of an international trade consulting company operating in Asia.

To the Editor:

Although Clyde Prestowitz is correct that the TPP alone won’t stop China, passing it is still in America’s national interest. Not only does the deal have strong environmental and worker protection requirements, but it also builds links with two Muslim nations, Brunei and Malaysia, and Vietnam, an emerging market with a historically complicated relationship with the United States. Amid nativist campaign rhetoric, this agreement shows that America remains engaged with the world.

The deal also includes Japan, where there have recently been protests over American military bases in Okinawa. Expanding trade links through this deal can keep public opinion of the United States high in Asia.

Mr. Prestowitz points out that the more effective solution to counter China is competing with its international infrastructure financing. But it is difficult for Congress to pass a domestic infrastructure bill, so it seems very unlikely that anyone would use significant political capital for infrastructure spending abroad.

Congress should pass the TPP and continue to support the Export-Import Bank.

BEN RICHMOND

Portland, Ore.

To the Editor:

As Clyde Prestowitz convincingly argues, the TPP deal will not make trade noticeably freer than it already is, and will not set back Chinese economic ambitions either. Then what is its real point?

That can be found in its provisions to allow companies to sue governments in arbitration courts independent of national jurisdictions.

In other words, that means a surrender of national sovereignty by the participants (including the United States) in matters of industry regulation, implying, above all, a strong check on future environmental or climate legislation.

ADAM KORANYI

Tenafly, N.J.