bilaterals.org logo
bilaterals.org logo

RCEP

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a “mega-regional” trade agreement that was signed in November 2020. It had been negotiated since 2012 between the 10 ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Nations) governments and their six FTA partners: Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. But in November 2019, India decided not to join the treaty. The eight years of RCEP negotiations were shrouded in secrecy. Social movements could only rely on leaks to analyse the proposed agreement.

RCEP is largely driven by ASEAN. Indeed, the project originated in, and expands upon, the stitching together of five existing ASEAN+1 trade agreements that ASEAN signed with Japan, South Korea, China, India, Australia and New Zealand. The stated goal of the negotiations was to “boost economic growth and equitable economic development, advance economic cooperation and broaden and deepen integration in the region through the RCEP,” according to the ASEAN website. RCEP covers almost every aspect of economy such as goods, services, investment, economic and technical cooperation, intellectual property rights (IPR), rules of origin, competition and dispute settlement.

Throughout the negotiations, concerns about the RCEP were voiced in a number of contexts and concern a range of issues. A 2015 leaked text on intellectual property rights proposed by Japan’s negotiators confirmed concerns that the deal could go beyond the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Various movements and organisations, including environmental groups, trade unions, domestic workers, farmers, hawkers, women groups, and people living with HIV have raised their concerns throughout the negotiations and the current ratification process. Thousands of people marched against the trade deal’s harmful provisions, demanding transparency from governments, in Hyderabad, India, in July 2017, and organised a People’s Convention on RCEP.

In 2019, public pressure forced India to pull out of the negotiations. Several harmful provisions were dropped too, such as the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows corporations to sue states before arbitration courts over lost expected profits, and mandatory UPOV91 membership. UPOV is a specialised system of seed patenting, which makes it illegal – in fact, a criminal offence — for farmers to save and reuse protected seeds.

The final text shows that there are no increases in patent monopolies for medicines above the WTO standard of 20 years, advocated by pharmaceutical companies and pushed by Japan and South Korea early in the negotiations, which could have delayed the availability of generic forms of medicines, especially in low income countries, and would have been very damaging in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The electronic commerce chapter left out some of the most dire rules pushed by Big Tech, and present in other trade deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and is not enforceable.

However the RCEP will worsen the balance of trade of almost all of its member countries, especially ‘developing’ and ‘less developed’ countries, according to a UNCTAD assessment. This can potentially increase the pressure to privatise essential public services, all the more so since such services are, under the deal, governed by international “trade rules” that suit corporations and limit states’ ability to regulate them in the public interest. The same rules that remove barriers to foreign investment can also apply to the agriculture sector, and increase the trend of land grabbing.

A joint statement by seven trade union federations in the Asia-Pacific said that the RCEP would result in the deterioration of working conditions in a race to the bottom under heightened competition, in which migrant workers face the worst consequences. They added that: “instead of furthering a free trade project, countries should be collaborating on reviving their economies and expanding public goods.”

China and Thailand were the first countries to ratify the agreement at the beginning of 2021. In order to enter into force, RCEP needs to be ratified by six ASEAN countries and three non-ASEAN countries.

See the full text here

Last update: March 2021 / Photo: bilaterals.org



China to greenlight RCEP in six months
China will complete the necessary domestic approval procedures for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement within six months, the Ministry of Commerce said.
RCEP: an unjust deal and added burden in the time of a pandemic
RCEP will only deepen inequalities that already exist and were exacerbated further by the pandemic. It will further undermine the livelihoods of farmers, fishers, indigenous peoples and rural women, and threaten jobs for workers.
Asia’s historic trade pact to open oil-supply route to China
South Korea and Japan look set to be the biggest winners in the Asian oil and chemicals marketplace as the world’s largest regional free-trade agreement paves the way for a gradual reduction in tariffs.
RCEP fails to promote a people-centred ASEAN
If indeed the RCEP is an ASEAN-led initiative, it fell short of supporting the ASEAN Community Vision 2025. The RCEP offers little in terms of shedding ASEAN’s elitist image and committing to the development of a highly inclusive, people-oriented and people-centred community.
India’s withdrawal From RCEP: is it better off?
India’s focus has shifted to the creation of a strong domestic agricultural and industrial base, and therefore, joining the RCEP no longer appears to be a priority.
Far from a change, RCEP agreement is more capitalism as usual
“It’s not as bad as the worst agreements out there” really shouldn’t be a cause for celebration.
RCEP has limited trade gains and ignores labour and human rights
Australia’s recent signature of the RCEP has attracted world attention for its significance in consolidating Asia-Pacific geopolitical relations. But in celebrating this agreement, we seem to have forgotten its unfinished business regarding labour and human rights.
RCEP trade deal: US should worry less about China’s role and more about being left out
The challenge is not that the world’s biggest trade deal is China-led or heralds a Sinocentric order – both of which are misrepresentations anyway – but that the Asia-Pacific region has shown no need of US leadership or even involvement.
Analysis | India has rightly shunned RCEP for now
India’s decision to stay out of the China-backed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP, Asia’s mega free-trade agreement (FTA), has been met both with a sense of approval and disappointment and divided economists on the issue.
RCEP - a wake up call to rethink the failed hyperglobalisation model
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) that was signed virtually yesterday is a wake up call for the cheerleaders of hyperglobalisation: countries and their peoples have become wary and weary of these mega-free trade deals