The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) was signed by 15 countries yesterday (15 Nov), which provides progressively lower tariffs across many areas in the coming years.

It’s the world’s biggest trade agreement involving 10 ASEAN countries along with China, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia. Together, the 15 countries make up nearly a third of the world’s population and account for 29 per cent of global GDP.

PM Lee hailed the signing of the RCEP as a major milestone. He said yesterday, “The RCEP is a major step forward for the world, at a time when multilateralism is losing ground and global growth is slowing… I have no doubt that the RCEP is a plus for all of us.”

However, 6 ASEAN and 3 non-ASEAN countries have yet to officially ratify the mega agreement. RCEP will only come into force when these countries have ratified the agreement through their respective parliamentary process of their countries.

India pulls out of RECP

The only country which pulled out of RECP during negotiation was India. It pulled out of RECP talks officially last Nov. When India decided to pull out, its industry leaders lauded the move (‘Exporters, industry laud India’s decision to pull out of RCEP‘, 5 Nov).

The elated chairman of Engineering Export Promotion Council of India, Ravi Sehgal, told the media then, “We welcome the decision in opting out of RCEP… Our MSME unit members were concerned about the possible opening up to Chinese imports; and hence it is a wise decision (to pull out).”

Federation of Indian Export Organisations president Sharad Kumar Saraf said, “Duty-free imports from China, which has economy of scale, and sitting on huge inventory and capacity could have jolted the (India’s) manufacturing beyond recovery and thus crippling exports.”

Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) president Sandip Somany told the media also, “Serious apprehensions and reservations on RCEP have been expressed by a large number of sectors including steel, plastics, copper, aluminum, machine tools, paper, automobiles, chemicals, petrol-chemicals and others.”

And added, “Further, there were not enough positive developments in the area of trade in services, including easier mobility for our professionals and service-providers.”

India wants “movement of professionals” but was rebuffed

Indeed, the “movement of workers” clause was a major contention between India and other member countries in the RECP talks. In 2016, India started to pose veiled threats in pulling out of RECP if it couldn’t get concessions in “exporting” its workers out of India.

It was slowly abandoning any further negotiations on trade in goods till there was progress in the area of liberalizing trade in services, including movement of professionals. India informed the other RECP member countries that further negotiations on trade in goods would depend on the progress of negotiations in services trade, especially in the area of “movement of workers”.

At the time, some of the member countries were already resisting India’s push for a deal in services trade. An Indian official told the media in India that no country had offered anything worthwhile in Mode 4 of services (“movement of workers”) in the first round of offers exchanged between the members. “On the other hand, most members are aggressive in goods, and intensive discussions on give and take are happening in the area,” he added.

As talks progressed to 2017, India expressively showed its disappointment over the inadequate progress in talks on services trade liberalization especially for facilitating easier movement of professionals across countries (‘RCEP: India upset over slow progress on services talks‘, 23 May 2017).

India’s Commerce Minister Nirmala Sitharaman told the media at the time, “Progress in negotiations on services is not keeping pace with the kind of progress seen in goods negotiations.” In return for eliminating or reducing tariffs on goods, India wanted the other RCEP member countries to work toward liberalization across all modes of services, including movement of professionals.

India is, of course, always keen that any free trade agreements should also ensure easier “movement of professionals”, since it is a “leading services supplier” in the world with a large pool of “skilled workers”.

Finally, with the “movement of professionals” stalled at RECP talks as well as fear of China, India finally pulled out of RECP last year.

Nevertheless, PM Lee said he hopes that India will be able to come on board at some point so that “the participation in the RCEP will fully reflect the emerging patterns of integration and regional cooperation in Asia”.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
19 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

ST report "sensational": NLB

The National Library Board (NLB) has withdrawn only three books “as a…

A letter from Jack

By Jack Sim – The following is a letter from Jack Sim…

Beeline – Singapore's first crowdsourced bus services

Local bus sharing app, Beeline SG, has slowly been gaining momentum in Singapore since…

讽刺视频风波:网红“美丽求求你”与其兄二度道歉

网红“美丽求求你”于上周五(2日)公开道歉,但因道歉内容与前创意公司Havas和新传媒的联合道歉声明相似,内政部斥责其道歉没诚意和虚伪。兄妹俩于周六(3日)下午在社交媒体再度帖文表示,“对具争议性说唱视频当中的侵犯、恶俗语调和动作,无条件道歉。” 内文表示,“该视频冒犯了诸位,在此我们向被冒犯的人士致以歉意。如若有再一次的机会,我们在处理该课题上会更谨慎,三思而后行。” 原名普丽蒂的网红“美丽求求你”解释,视频的动机是来自于媒体在描绘少数民族时,经常“未能提供足够的保障”,故其生活环境中充斥愤怒与痛苦,而他们也会透过自身的创意来疗愈伤口。 “我们只想透过视频引起警觉,希望能透过视频,呼吁(节目广告)都可邀请印度人进行拍摄,而不是随便找人来涂啡色脸假扮少数民族,那是很冒犯他人的。” 文内也表示,身为一名艺术工作者,在不伤害任何人底下,将种族课题带出,也会持续参与未来该课题的讨论。 最后,他们也表示自己一向来以揭示新加坡非主流叙述为宗旨,同时亦指出,尽管他们的作品带来了非议,但他们仍然坚信自己并未制造分裂,而是将敏感的种族课题搬上台面,但文中也说明希望讨论不仅仅是在种族课题,而是种种课题的交错影响。 另一方面,兄妹俩也各自澄清。普丽蒂表示,自己一向以模仿,讽刺和非传统的方式,探讨各项社会议题,包含种族课题,并以曾拍摄华人新年的视频,指她透过喜剧片引发民众对各个敏感议题如少数民族等的讨论。 而苏巴什则谈到最近为新传媒创作的歌曲,针对外籍客工的讨论,重申自己的立场。 周日(4日)尚穆根出席马西岭坡的西法克萨那庙的扩建工程时则针对视频承认,新加坡确实存在种族歧视,但歧视情况比起以往“已有改善“。 他指,目前新加坡对种族课题是可透过媒体“公开讨论”、研究以及报道。 尚穆根认为,普丽蒂与其兄有权针对种族歧视的问题提出看法,但他们选择错误的方式表达,并表示如果任何人以他们的方式向社会表达种族歧视的看法,只会得来更多的歧视与分裂。 网红兄妹的再次道歉公开后,引起网民的议论,许多网民仍表示无法谅解,但仍有部分网民则站在少数群体的位置为兄妹澄清。…