Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:45:18.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From great power politics to a strategic vacuum: Origins and consequences of the TPP and TTIP

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2017

Melissa K. Griffith ,
Richard H. Steinberg  and
John Zysman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we place the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) into broader geo-political and economic context given the current Trump Administration's withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the loss of momentum for TTIP. Both TPP and TTIP sought to provide key tactical solutions to the particular trade/investment problems participating states faced. For the U.S. government, these free trade agreements also represented a geo-political undertaking, an attempt to once again set trade rules in light of deadlock in the WTO. Ultimately, the inability of the Obama Administration to successfully complete negotiations for and ratification of these two deals does not alter the underlying motivations that led to them in the first place. The stagnation of these deals, however, has intensified geo-economic and geo-strategic concerns: opening the door to rival articulations of trade governance and undermining U.S. credibility with its partners.

Keywords

tradeTTPTTIPU.S. foreign policyeconomic strategy
Type
Research Article
Information
Business and Politics , Volume 19 , Special Issue 4: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) , December 2017 , pp. 573 - 592
Copyright
Copyright © V.K. Aggarwal 2017 and published under exclusive license to Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aggarwal, Vinod K. 1998. Institutional Designs for a Complex World: Bargaining, Linkages, and Nesting. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggarwal, Vinod K. 2013. “U.S. Free Trade Agreements and Linkages.” International Negotiation 18: 89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggarwal, Vinod K. and Evenett, S. J.. 2013. “A Fragmenting Global Economy: A Weakened WTO, Mega FTAs, and Murky Protectionism.” Swiss Political Science Review 19(4): 550–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggarwal, Vinod K. and Govella, Kristi (ed.). 2013. Linking Trade and Security: Evolving Institutions and Strategies in Asia, Europe, and the United States (The Political Economy of the Asia Pacific) New York: Springer Science Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggarwal, Vinod K. and Weber, Steve. 2012. “The New New International Economic Order” Harvard Business Review April(18).Google Scholar
Ahearn, Raymond J. 2011. “Europe's Preferential Trade Agreements: Status, Content, and Implications,” Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. “Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.” (Accessed 31 January 2017) http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/rcep/Pages/regional-comprehensive-economic-partnership.aspx.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, Jagdish. 1995. “U.S. Trade Policy: The Infatuation with Free Trade Agreements.” Discussion paper no. 726. New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, Jagdish. 2008. Termites in the Trading System. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capling, A. and Ravenhill, J.. 2011. “Multilateralising regionalism: what role for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement?” The Pacific Review 24(5): 553–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chin, Gregory, 2010. “China's Rising Institutional Influence.” In Rising State, Rising Institutions: Challenges for Global Governance, edited by Alexandroff, Alan S and Cooper, Andrew F.. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Chin, Gregory and Thakur, Ramesh. 2010. “Will China Change the Rules of Global Order?” Washington Quarterly 33(4): 119–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission. 2013. “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: The Economic Analysis Explained.” http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/september/tradoc_151787.pdf.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2014. “Trade: Countries and Regions—United States.” (Accessed 5 October 2015) http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/united-states/.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015. “E.U. negotiating texts in TTIP.” (Accessed 31 Janaury 2017) http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1230.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Daniel S. 2014. “TTIPs Geostrategic Implications.” In The Geopolitics of TTIP: Repositioning the Transatlantic Relationship for a Changing World, edited by Hamilton, Daniel S.. Washington, D.C.: Center for Transatlantic Relations.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John. 2011. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikenberry, John G. and Wright, Thomas. 2007. Rising Powers and Global Institutions. New York: Century Foundation Working Papers.Google Scholar
Jackson, James K. 2016. “The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Analysis of Economic Studies.” Congressional Research Service, 30 June 2016.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 2011. Power & Interdependence (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Mastanduno, Michael. 2009. “System Maker and Privilege Taker U.S. Power and the International Political Economy.” World Politics 61(1): 121–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novotná, Tereza, Morin, Jean-Frédéric, Ponjaert, Frederik, and Telò, Mario. 2015. The Politics of Transatlantic Trade Negotiations: TTIP in a Globalized World. Farnham, U.K: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Paul, Joel R, 2015. “The Cost of Free Trade.” XXII Brown Journal of World Affairs xxii(1): 1–19.Google Scholar
Peterson Institute for International Economics. 2015. “National Economic Interests.”Google Scholar
Petri, Peter, Plummer, Michael, and Zhai, Fan. 2012. “The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Asia-Pacific Integration: A Quantitative Assessment.” In Policy Analyses in International Economics Book 98 (Kindle Edition). Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics and East-West Center.Google Scholar
Petri, Peter and Plummer, Michael. 2016. “The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates.” Working Paper 16–2. Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powers, Kathy L. 2010. “Regional Trade Agreements as Military Alliances.” Empirical and Theoretical Research in International Relations 30(4): 373–95.Google Scholar
Ravenhill, J. (2010). “The ‘new East Asian regionalism’: a political domino effect.” Review of International Political Economy 17(2): 178–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raza, Werner, Grumiller, Jan, Taylor, Lance, Troster, Bernhard, von Arnim, Rudi. 2014 “ASSESS_TTIP: Assessing the Claimed Benefits of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).” Vienna: Austrian Foundation for Development Research. (Accessed 31 January, 2017) http://www.guengl.eu/uploads/plenary-focus-pdf/ASSESS_TTIP.pdf.Google Scholar
Reddie, Andrew. 2015. “An International Model of the Future or Politics as Usual: TTIP, Regulatory Harmonization, and ISDS.” Presented at Unpacking the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Negotiation, October, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Rodrik, Dani, 2011. “The Future of Economic Convergence.” Working Paper Series no. RWP 11-033. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Steinberg, Richard. 2002. “In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO.” International Organization 56(2): 339–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinberg, Richard. 2009. “Future of the WTO.” The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog. (Accessed 31 January 2017) http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2009/02/future-of-the-wto.html.Google Scholar
The Executive Office of the President of the United States. 2015. “The Economic Benefits of U.S. Trade.” (Accessed on 31 January 2017) https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/cea_trade_report_final_non-embargoed_v2.pdf.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yuan, Wen Jin. 2012. “The Trans-Pacific Partnership and China's Corresponding Strategies” A Freeman Briefing Report. (Accessed on 31 January 2017) https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/publication/120620_Freeman_Brief.pdf.Google Scholar
Zysman, John. 2016. “Marketplace Rules and International Deal Making: Some thoughts about the implications of the TPP.” Presented at the Munk School Conference, January, Toronto.Google Scholar