The Tale of Three Cities—Da Nang, Nanjing, and Washington: Titanic Economic Shifts Across Asia-Pacific Economies

The 25th Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum held in Vietnam is a road map for the future direction of Asia-Pacific economies overall, but in particular, the internal dynamics of an economic future and road map for both the two leading global economies: the United States, with an estimated $17 trillion gross domestic product (GDP), and China, with a GDP of $11 trillion. Economic nationalism and protectionism were clearly emphasized by the two leading economies as well as Japan. The words of Chinese leader Xi Jinping clearly pointed to a new economic framework for the Chinese economy: Economic development and transformation with a clearly Chinese character were words that echoed throughout the conference. Relying on the history of modern China and his predecessors, starting with Mao, Xi Jinping staked out a framework of economic positioning that indicates that internal Chinese economic reforms will propel China to become a global power and a source of economic innovation. The Chinese president softly indicated that China is an arrival power in the global economy. Not to be outdone, U.S. President Donald J. Trump was equally assertive and clear in his desire to allow America to continue to be first in a global economy and in his emphasis for bilateral trade and economic links. Fortress America, the “America First” trade policy, dictating its own preferences for its external economic trade and investment linkages, would allow the United States to keep its status as the foremost world economic power. Moreover, President Trump used the term Indio-Pacific to irritate China and to indirectly challenge the growing power of the Chinese economy. What’s in a name does not completely define the United States’ position; however, the U.S. president uses metaphors to convey his own interests and to test future formulated policy options. The U.S. president still believes in global trade and investment linkages across the Pacific as well as elsewhere; however, he believes that the new global road map should be written as it always has been for the last few decades, from the American “can-do” perspective. Mr. Trump has been true to his words, taking the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and has indicated that the United States will continue to deepen its trade and business linkages across Asia but restructure them in a bilateral framework. The TPP, orchestrated by the former U.S. administration, included 12 members. President Trump walking away from that partnership left the 11 remaining members to work out a new framework for what they labeled the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau requested the name change. In addition, there was a desire to emphasize changes for the protection of intellectual property as well as protections for biologics and pharmaceuticals; moreover, an investment dispute settlement system was altered. The earlier emphasis on reducing tariffs built into the TPP was upheld as was as a framework for the new global digital economy. Less emphasis was given to state-owned enterprises. The leading economies of the TPP, particularly, Japan, South Korea, and Canada played a dominant role, and within that JOURNAL OF ASIA-PACIFIC BUSINESS 2018, VOL. 19, NO. 1, 1–3 https://doi.org/10.1080/10599231.2018. 1419041