America's policy "pivot" to Asia involves intensified diplomacy and shifting U.S. military forces into places where, in cooperation
with regional allies and friends, they can more effectively counterbalance the increasingly assertive rise of China.
The diplomatic and military pivot to Asia is only one dimension of the strategic jostling between the United States and China.
The other is a competition for regional economic influence as the world's two top economies support different visions of trade,
investment and business growth.
One plan is centered on Asia and backed by China to enhance its position. The other spans the Pacific Ocean to link the Americas
and Asia, and is championed by the U.S. to increase its leverage.
Foreshadowed by heads of government of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations a year ago, this plan for closer economic
integration is known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
The 10 ASEAN member states already have free trade agreements in place with the six regional economies — Australia, China,
India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. The 16 partners aim to conclude negotiations to consolidate RCEP into a compatible
framework by the end of 2015.
The plan could transform the region, containing around 3.5 billion people, or about half the world's population, into an integrated
market. It would account for over 27 percent of international trade by value and have a combined economic output of $23 trillion,
one-third of current annual global GDP.
However, the U.S. is not part of the RCEP.
Instead, it is promoting an alternative economic arrangement to integrate markets and business practices around the Pacific rim by
linking the Americas to Asia. Known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, it involves the U.S. and 10 other countries.
Four of the 10 — Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam — are ASEAN members. Two — Australia and New Zealand — are
Asia-Pacific nations. The remaining four — Canada, Chile, Mexico and Peru — are from the Western Hemisphere.
Both the RCEP and the TPP, when concluded, will be open to new members that accept the rules. But they are in competition.
Japan and Thailand are not the only countries hedging their bets by taking part in both sets of negotiations. So, too, are Brunei,
Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Singapore.
None of them wants to appear to be aligning economically with either China or the U.S. in case they choose the wrong side and
undermine its future growth prospects.
The stakes in the competition between the U.S.-led TPP, and the RCEP with China as its leading economy, are high. Whichever bloc
emerges with the most weight and credibility will be in the best position to attract new members and enmesh them in its network.
Michael Richardson is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of South East Asian Studies in Singapore.
with regional allies and friends, they can more effectively counterbalance the increasingly assertive rise of China.
The diplomatic and military pivot to Asia is only one dimension of the strategic jostling between the United States and China.
The other is a competition for regional economic influence as the world's two top economies support different visions of trade,
investment and business growth.
One plan is centered on Asia and backed by China to enhance its position. The other spans the Pacific Ocean to link the Americas
and Asia, and is championed by the U.S. to increase its leverage.
Foreshadowed by heads of government of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations a year ago, this plan for closer economic
integration is known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
The 10 ASEAN member states already have free trade agreements in place with the six regional economies — Australia, China,
India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. The 16 partners aim to conclude negotiations to consolidate RCEP into a compatible
framework by the end of 2015.
The plan could transform the region, containing around 3.5 billion people, or about half the world's population, into an integrated
market. It would account for over 27 percent of international trade by value and have a combined economic output of $23 trillion,
one-third of current annual global GDP.
However, the U.S. is not part of the RCEP.
Instead, it is promoting an alternative economic arrangement to integrate markets and business practices around the Pacific rim by
linking the Americas to Asia. Known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, it involves the U.S. and 10 other countries.
Four of the 10 — Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam — are ASEAN members. Two — Australia and New Zealand — are
Asia-Pacific nations. The remaining four — Canada, Chile, Mexico and Peru — are from the Western Hemisphere.
Both the RCEP and the TPP, when concluded, will be open to new members that accept the rules. But they are in competition.
Japan and Thailand are not the only countries hedging their bets by taking part in both sets of negotiations. So, too, are Brunei,
Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Singapore.
None of them wants to appear to be aligning economically with either China or the U.S. in case they choose the wrong side and
undermine its future growth prospects.
The stakes in the competition between the U.S.-led TPP, and the RCEP with China as its leading economy, are high. Whichever bloc
emerges with the most weight and credibility will be in the best position to attract new members and enmesh them in its network.
Michael Richardson is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of South East Asian Studies in Singapore.
