In his annual State of the Union address, US President Barack Obama on Tuesday stressed the necessity for the US to write the rules in the fast developing Asia-Pacific region. "Why would we let that happen? We should write those rules. We should level the playing field."
The president is definitely not the only one in his administration to harbor such beliefs. US Trade Representative Michael Froman sent a warning in a 2013 interview that Asian economies, including China, have to adhere to trading standards that the US is in a strong position to set.
As some observers have pointed out before, security is rooted in trade. This makes the US particularly concerned about who sets the rules in a region that is recovering its place on the global stage. China's interest in establishing a new set of institutions in Asia, such as the Silk Road economic belt and the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, seems to the US more like a menace aimed at challenging its supremacy. At the same time, the US has spared no efforts in pushing forward the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which bears close scrutiny from regional stakeholders.
The Asian trade environment is full of contention as well as opportunities. China has been engaged in regional development that suits the interests of all countries involved. A pragmatic approach of the US is to evolve with China in a way that maximizes these interests, including its own. Nonetheless, no matter how the US wants to write the rules for the Asia-Pacific region, it should acknowledge the trend that developing countries are driving the world economy currently and they have the right to choose the trade practices that better suit their own interests.
Even its allies have their own political calculation when it comes to trade agreements. Take the TPP. Although the US and Japanese governments aim to enhance their alliance through such a treaty, thousands of Japanese farmers still protested against it because they believed the treaty would hurt their interests.
The common wish of Asia-Pacific countries is to develop the economy rather than getting involved in disputes over rules based on different ideologies.
Obama may have spoken boldly on trade because he hopes to quickly advance TPP negotiations and also because time is short to improve US economic performance. If Obama and his followers hope for a positive-sum future for their country, they should drop their competitive mentality, and focus more on cooperation. If the US only considers its own interests but not those of other countries, it can hardly be a rule-maker.