Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    December 31, 2021 8:30pm-9:01pm AST

8:30 pm
ah there is always liked only we're brave enough to see it, only we're brave enough. mm. ah, you're watching out there at these the top stories. the while there's something bidding farewell to 20. 21. in the shadow of the pandemic, the surgeon army con variant. sidney was one of the 1st to greet the new year. the spectacle included a thank you trump, on workers health officials in britain, a warning people against traveling to england from scotland and wales for new year events due to the high number of cases. u. k. prime minister bras johnson has called on those celebration to get test it. u. k has just reported another record
8:31 pm
number of infections with more than 189000 cases. or a challenge has more from london another day, another record number of new infections. the most recent data for the united kingdom shows that the new infection rate is at a $189.00 thousands. now that is twice the peak of the last wave in january, and there's no sign at the moment that the armstrong wave has reached its peak. yet the number of hospitalizations at the moment in england is 11400. the french government has introduced new measures aimed at reducing the spread of the con variant residents and visitors in paris and are required to wear face mosques outdoors. the capitals also canceled the annual new year's eve fireworks display on the shop. cities in south africa says it will ease restrictions after covered 19 infections dropped by almost 30 percent last week. the government believes it's
8:32 pm
past the peak of the 3rd caused by the on the con variant. but it's a different story in india with danny infections have more than doubled of the past week. and they're in the us state of colorado says he saw houses exploding before his eyes after wildfire, driven by high winds and gulf to towns. no denver. hundreds of homes have been destroyed, and president joe biden has cleared the way for a major disaster to be declared. more than $100.00 rang refugees to spend almost a month to drift at c and a damaged boat. and now in quarantine in indonesia, i'll be moved into temporary housing. once health checks have been completed, indonesia initially pan turn the bows away, but help it land after international pressure. those are the headlines, so i'll be back with another wrap of the world news here on al jazeera right after the latest installment of inside story sees him ah
8:33 pm
a new year and a new trade deal. the world's largest free trading glock opens for business in asia, covering a 3rd of global economic outfit. so who will benefit? and why did india pull out of the agreement at the last minute? this is inside story. ah. hello and welcome to the program. i'm hammer, jim jerome, after 10 years of work, the world's largest free trade zone is opening for business on january 1st, 2020, to the regional comprehensive economic partnership covers 15 countries across the
8:34 pm
asia pacific region and promises to improve business for 2200000000 people are sap, as it will be known, was conceived in 2011 and ratified in november 2020. it'll be the 1st free trade deal between china, south korea and japan. the u. s. is not part of the agreement, even though it is in the asia pacific region. and india pulled out at the last minute. china, by far the biggest economy in the block says the trade pact will help the country promote growth as the region tries to recover from the pandemic. she didn't show you whole c on c p takes effect over 9, keep the scenes of merchandise trade between the members will be subject to 0. tariffs, on january 1st, 2022 more than 65 percent of china's trade with a young australia and new zealand are expected to immediately achieve 0 tariffs. are they be turning all over all the r, c, e p. mid. the countries have committed to opening up more than $100.00 service
8:35 pm
trade sixes covering finance, telecommunications transport, tourism research and development. low r sep, is made up of 10 south east asian countries, as well as south korea, china, japan, australia, and new zealand. the agreement will provide a simpler training framework, meaning businesses won't have to navigate separate requirements to export to different countries. around 90 percent of trade, tariffs was that within the block will eventually be eliminated. it will also cover nearly 30 percent of global economic output and a 3rd of the world's population. india decided against joining the trade block in 2019 out of concerned that it would be flooded with cheap imports from china. all right, let's bring in our guess from pin on pin cambodia giant men on a visiting senior fellow at the i. c. s. use of shock institute joining us from aging. ein our tank in a china political and economic analyst. and in washington,
8:36 pm
d. c. niel's graham, an assistant director with the atlanta counsels geo economic center, a warm welcome to you all, and thanks for joining us today on inside story shout. let me start with you 1st to day who benefits the most with this are sep agreement. the large countries or the smaller ones. ok, thank you. i think that's a good question to start off that. and let me start by saying, i think everyone benefits both the large and the small. but i think the smaller countries, the newest members of the, and in particular like cambodia where i am. but also me and my allows vietnam has the greatest potential to gain the most. this is because they're the ones that have to go through the greatest amount of change in terms of reforms that ross, it provides them the opportunity to do. but that's the key point i think about
8:37 pm
this agreement is designed really in such a way that it's up to the members to take advantage or to go as far as they want to in making those changes. so these countries can potentially be the biggest beneficiaries, but they have to grab that opportunity. i know that a lot of people think that china will be the main sort of beneficiary and has been driving the whole process. china is already a big player, the incremental gains and unlikely to be that big. of course they will gain and that's why they're in it, but nothing like the percentage increases that we can expect to see from the new s smallest members. on our, let me ask you to pick up on a point that giant was making there about how much china has to gain in all of this . of course, we know that the u. s. and india aren't included in this deal. so does that mean
8:38 pm
that going forward? china dictates the rules when it comes to trade in asia. does not at all check with the recept rules. it's very simple. it's, it's, it's all about collaboration. people have to agree. it's not something where one country can dictate this is not like the world bank or the i am out for something like that where there are special rights reserved. 2 particular members who can control who's president and kind of move things around as they see fit news. i saw you nodding along to some of what i was saying there. did you want to jump in? yeah, i agree with what i was saying. i would say though it does, but china, more in the driver's seat of the future of asian trade and economic rules. i would say one really important part of research is sort of, it's for looking at gender and the fact that the negotiators want to be kind of a platform discuss kind of future rules within asian trade and economics. and i
8:39 pm
just think us and in you're not at the table we're china is so we could see if they come to a consensus on issues like they don't enterprises on like digital trade that may want to counter to overall us interests meals when it comes to the u. s. not being at the table as you put it. what does this mean when it comes to china's increasing role and growing influence? even as the u. s. influence wayne's? yeah, i think by agreeing to this trade a deal, i think it's a mess. those outside the tent, namely the u. s. that east asia and south east asia are willing to move on trade with or without the support of the u. s. and i think it's very important for you to reflect upon itself and figure out what its policy is going for on economics and on trade. more generally speaking, jan, how is this our step deal different from the trans pacific partnership deal or t p. p. as it's knowing which involved the u. s. in which they tried to get off the ground, but then they pulled out of right. so i think that's
8:40 pm
a good starting point. the t p p is no longer what it was. it's now the c p t, v p, which is se significantly watered down version of what the u. s. had initially proposed now after it pulled out. and so, but still, even in this watered down form, it is a much more ambitious agreement than that. we have with us the, the membership of asset is so diverse. you have very rich countries like singapore, you have very poor countries like lauzon, cambodia, the populace nations. so you cannot, you have to cancel that diversity by allowing flexibility. and flexibility translates into generally lack of prescribed depth. so that's the key difference in the level that mission,
8:41 pm
the level of depth. but countries can go as far as they able to or willing to, but the minimum set is quite low to accommodate that huge diversity. that's the key difference i know from your vantage point there in beijing, do you think that there's any possibility we could see the c p t p p and this are sep, deal possibly merging in the future? absolutely. i mean both of them. well, t c p a t p basically starts out very strong as my colleague pointed out, our sap starts out a little bit weaker and give us nations a lot more leeway in terms of protecting a certain percentage of their industries. and also there is a much looser form of in terms of labor and safety standards and subsidies. so that's where it starts out. but every year that is decreasing. so at some point he
8:42 pm
gets to a level where would be very acceptable to t. c. t p, p and it would be imaginable that they would in fact where she gather. now china is obviously, you know, said that they want to embrace t c t p, p, and brace, join. and that's causing some consternation, but it shows that, you know, china is moving forward on trade. it is not trying to solve lots of weapons and things like that. it's really talking about the sustenance of life, how we can all get along together. so from the aging point of view, they see this is a sharp, sharp contrast to american strategies, which seem to be much more around security and selling military hardware without really any kind of clear comprehensive plan. economically, there's a lot of talk with very little action. neil's, how do you foresee, at least in the short term, all of this impacting global trade? i'm in the short term. i don't think it will have a very sizable impact on global treat. again,
8:43 pm
this agreement builds on pre existing trade deals between member countries around 82 percent of the trade flows covered by reset are actually covered by preexisting agreements. i think we'll see the most immediate impact is going to be in the northeast asia. we see is the 1st trade deal to cover the bilateral trade relationship of china and japan and south korea in japan. these are both very sizable and very important trading relationships in east asia, which up to now have been failed to cover it by any trading arrangements. i think that's we will see the most immediate impact, but overall again, this is a trade agreement with a 20 year time horizon. so as other collectors are pointed out, you know, over time it will definitely make a sizable impact of the global economy. but immediately i don't think we'll see very many large changes chance i know you touched upon this a little bit in an earlier answer. but when do you think that people in the region are really going to start seeing the benefits of i think there will be some immediate benefits. i mean, this comes into force tomorrow, and there are some goods that will get a duty free access starting tomorrow. but as you previous commentator mentioned,
8:44 pm
this is a long term project, right? 20 years. and in fact, all the significant reforms are contained within this agreement, dealing with difficult and challenging issues will be back lower. they will be left to the end as these things naturally work. out and so those things will not happen for another decade. oh so, so we will see some effect immediately and there will be this, you know, demonstration effect, feel good fact. but i think overall though, what we will actually witness is this, what we don't actually observe, which is a rise and protectionism. so this is why it's difficult to actually measure the impact sometimes. because the greatest benefit is what doesn't happen. there's a tendency now for protection sentiments to increase, and hopefully we'll put
8:45 pm
a lid on that and stop countries looking in word at a time where they're feeling insecure about jobs and growth prospects. so a lot of these effects will be what doesn't happen as much as what does happen in the short run. i know what do you say, how long is all this going to take to have a real impact on trade in asia? well actually i think it'll be, have a much more immediate impact. i mean you have to start weighing what happened over since 2019. it was small. busy medium sized enterprises that were hit very, very hard. and every single one of the countries involved regardless of where they are. it's the small medium size enterprises, which are the ones who create jobs opportunities and a lot of the g d p. so this idea of always trying to measure things in terms of large corporations, i think is wrong. i mean, if i'm a small business in any one of these countries, and now the same rules apply to what are their markets there, it gives me
8:46 pm
a lot of leeway. i don't have to learn about different markets. i can simply go out there, do it. plus they, you know, these countries, especially at the lower end. and i agree, cambodia and mom are stand to have a tangible benefits. they have a labor dividend. and as you can see with wages rising in the us and other places, i inflation rearing its other ugly head. companies are going to be looking to cut costs. and there's real possibility that they'll start looking at these countries because they are in a recognizable trade zone. that's enforceable, and it makes things a lot easier, especially if they're within that zone. neils, it looked to me like you may have wanted to add to what i was saying there. please go ahead. if you add a point you want it to make. yeah, i think one of the largest and mediate impacts of a recent will be on the changes to sort of non care bears. i think one thing it does that's very important is really unify as issue into much more of a singular trading block. as i mentioned before, we built on 5 preexisting trade deals. and previously, you know,
8:47 pm
companies operating in asia had to qualify each for each individual trading arrangement for their goods to qualify for that specific deal. and what we see does is unify all these into one singular agreement. so things like rules of origin, for example, you know, you know, fight across asia, making it much easier for companies to view a she's a singular trading blog rather that no 5 disparate agreements. neil's, let me also ask you, i mean, how concerned is the us about this agreement and also what can the u. s. do to ensure that its strategic interests are still relevant to east asian economies? yeah, i think the u. s. is still very much trying to figure out it's a isn't economic policy. i think since we withdrew from p p back at the start of the trumpet ministration. we really haven't had a cohesive economic asian policy. so i think 1st and foremost, it's very important to us to kind of figure out what their perspective is going forward and how to implement it within asia. i think one very easy way to do this is rejoining c p p. although i don't think that's politically testable within the u . s. so instead i do believe it should begin focusing much more and sort of
8:48 pm
summarize industries as well as more will sitting within the international training space in your building to few that done sort of the digital space right now with the e commerce secretary mondo going on her se, asia to discussing the sort of digital trade arrangement. so i think it's very important to watch and see what develops in that front. i know i saw you just now nodding to some what neils were saying, did you want to jump in? yeah, i did, i mean i don't think the u. s. has any choice politically, it can't join our c p because that would be capitulating to china. can't join t c t p p because it wouldn't get the 23 provisions that were struck down which were in favor of the us and especially the larger corporations. i think where they should be looking at as the w t o u. s. is holding the keys, they're, they're refusing to allow any appellate judges in there and therefore there's no enforcement mechanism. w t o needs reform. i think it's, it's a better venue for the us. it would actually be supported by the rest of the world
8:49 pm
because no one is doing all these, you know, regional trade agreements because, you know, they didn't like the w t o, it's just, it's a non functional body, you know, giant, can this agreement really work when if there are a lot of countries involved that have trade or geo political issues with each other, i'm talking about china and australia, for example, or china and japan, or japan and south korea. i mean, how is this effectively going to work when you have countries that make up this block? the do have quite serious issues with one another. i think that's a good point. well, the short answer is that, you know, they'll have to use this as a vehicle to try and deal with those problems that they have with each other. and this is the best way to go forward in addressing those sorts and preventing those sorts of non trade issues interfering with what is mutually beneficial
8:50 pm
exchange. so i think this is how we can slowly work towards, you know, dealing with those difficulties in the longer term. but we know that, you know, trade can occur even when, you know, relationships are not at the best whole history of that happening. and i think, you know, stuff is one way in which perhaps some of those concerns can actually find resolution over time. they won't interfere with tracy can actually help deal with the underlying sources of friction. i think over time as trade is a way of actually dealing with it using trade policy as a means of dealing with those non trade issues we know doesn't work. and in fact, it vanishes both countries and the us china trade boards. the best example of that, i know, let me get your take on this to, i mean,
8:51 pm
the fact that these countries have issues with one another. is that going to complicate the deal going forward, or is that going to smooth things out going forward? no, i believe i agree with my colleague here, what you have is you have to have an open door, a platform, and a cost for imposing either security or political oars in the, in the water on these particular issues. trading is always good. you know, it's mutually beneficial hopefully as, as my colleague said, this will be the basis by which countries can come to some sort of terms. right now if you know, in, within the international press and other places, you know, there's a lot of beautification of different countries depending on different ideas. you have to start somewhere and, you know, obviously looking at, you know, political ideas is not the way to go. so let's, let's try tre, j on let me ask you, why did india pull out of our set?
8:52 pm
is it just that india is concerned about opening up to china? was that the main bone of contention here, or was there more to it? ok, so i can really speak for india, but i think what you just said is probably the most likely reason. i think there was concerns about chinese goods flooding the indian market. but i think more generally the curren mowdy administration is not yet fully convinced. of the benefits of liberalization. india has a tendency to judge every free trade agreement, in terms of its bilateral surplus or deficit. that is a wrong way to go about it. that is a very old ma, capitalistic view of trade policy. and it's still hanging onto that idea and i think unfortunate li,
8:53 pm
the movie and ministration is starting to reverse some of the good works that have been done over the last couple of decades in moving india forward towards more liberal and open economy. so i think this fear of china, but it's part of a broader distrust of liberalization. and judging every free trade agreement as to whether it adds to trade surplus as being good. and if it doesn't, it's bad is also something it needs to overcome, but underlies the current hesitancy to engage in these sorts of make regional meals . it could we see our play a role in easing us, trying to tensions or even resolving us trying to trade war i'm not sure or simple play director role in using either of these tensions, i think or so doesn't really address the core issues brought up by the us china treat a sort of trade worth and i think again, it really is up to the us trying to figure out what is east asian trade policy
8:54 pm
looks like. and more generally speaking, what issues are tight, sorry? chinese economic policy looks like i think for the u. s. figures these things out. it really just cannot help our address any of these core issues. jay, on our sep, was 1st imagine 10 years ago. so what i'm curious about is if it actually addresses these trade and economic issues that we're facing today, especially those highlighted by the pandemic, like supply chain issues, for example. oh yes, i think, you know, at the core of law set is this promotion and support for supply chains. of course the, the difficulties the observing now the supply chains will go away once the unevenness of the demand response after huge period of lockdown and adjustment. that we have had to go through, but it is all about strengthening the supply chains in this region,
8:55 pm
increasing the resilience and also facilitating environment when mortgage size ation can take place so that they're more responsive to the kinds of shocks they're going through now. so even though it's been a long time in the making, i think the fact that it took so long also indicates how it needed to address different consent to different countries. and you know, the agenda had to evolve the changing circumstances that we find ourselves in. and i think there's enough sort of flexibility built in to respond to the changing needs. the question now is whether countries will take advantage of these flexibility to move the reform agenda forward. oh, just use it as a way of actually backing off from doing some real changes. that's the real question. i know our will,
8:56 pm
our step provisions on transparency and on adoption of international standards mean that going forward we'll see members utilizing or incorporating best practices more into their procedures. well, yes, and that that's, that's the theory. the question is how it is enforced and who's gonna do that? i mean, this is in the end, these are sovereign nations. they've agreed to do to join this entity. there are enforced mechanisms, but it's going to be very hard to do that. it really has to be a situation where, you know, if you, if you're not obeying these rules, especially as it goes to safety and things like this, that there will be peer pressure from the rest of the group saying listen, you signed on to this, please adhere to it, but in the end it's about peer to peer. this is not, as i said, it's not a corporate where you're 51 percent makes the rule is really, you know, countries have to come together and agree where they want to go. i know we have
8:57 pm
less than a minute left. let me just follow up with you about the point you were making. are we going to be seeing agreements going forward between countries in this block to ensure that best practices are implemented? i. the agreements already there that the, the issue is, are they going to react on it? and my, as my colleague said, you know, you can either run with the ball or you can sit on it and that is up to each nation . what will be interesting is if this r c e p starts expanding, south america, decides that they want to get involved. and in you start to seeing a snowball effect. but then there could be more pressure to actually do these types of agreements. all right, well we have run out of time, we're gonna have to leave the conversation there. thanks so much. all of our guest, joe young men on, on our tank and, and neil's gram and thank you for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website al jazeera dot com, and for further discussion, go to our facebook page. that's facebook dot com, forward slash ha,
8:58 pm
inside story. you can also join the conversation on twitter. our handle is at ha, inside story from the management room and a whole team here inside story. we wish all our he was around the world. very happy . see you next? ah a, it's the political debate. so that's challenging the way you think is a military advancement. going to stop the family, take it i use, i'm that a company here united now people out of value kinda not very up front with me. markham on hill on out 0. americans are increasingly saying authoritarianism. might
8:59 pm
not be so bad. there were several steps along the way. where does that chain of command? it's like kind of covered up. what's your take on why they've gotten this so wrong? that to me is political malpractice, the bottom line on us politics and policy, and the impact on the world on al jazeera ah, with
9:00 pm
mm. pool news. ah, this is al jazeera. ah hi, there, i'm given our, this is the news. our live from doha. coming up in the next 60 minutes, new year celebrations in the shadow of coven 19 thailand rings in 2022. and this is the scene in reveal fireworks lighting up the sky and the kurdish region of northern iraq.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on