Editor's Note: A week ago, on September 16, 2021, China applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP). The predecessor of this agreement is the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, which was negotiated by the United States, Japan, Australia, several ASEAN and Latin American countries on October 5, 2015. At that time, some people called it "Economic NATO". The United States withdrew in 2017. In the same year, Japan and Vietnam announced that they would continue to promote TPP without the United States, and renamed it "Comprehensive and Progressive TPP" (CPTPP). Wang Lei, a lawyer from Gaopeng Law Firm, wrote the following essay in his circle of friends six years ago on the day of the TPP negotiation, asserting that China had no choice in participating in the TPP. On the occasion of China's application to join the CPTPP, I will send you the old article again.

At the Ministerial Conference in Atlanta today, 12 countries, including the United States, Japan, and Australia, announced the end of negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) and the conclusion of a TPP trade agreement. In 2015, the WTO was established for 20 years, and China was naturalized for 14 years. In 2015, the TPP reached an agreement, excluding China. One of the loud slogans of negotiating accession to the WTO many years ago is that the World Trade Organization is incomplete without China, which has the largest population in the world. Today, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement has only one end of the ocean, but without the other end, it still spans and is agreed.

fantastic? Some people say that the TPP has brought China back overnight before joining the WTO in 2001. Did World Trade White join? Not playing in the WTO anymore? "While the joy and pride brought by China's accession to the World Trade Organization (which is all related to the artificial fervor and adoration of the whole country!) still persist, and when China's world trade volume in the WTO has been several consecutive championships, and the top position of the world's trading power has not yet taken off, there is an upgraded version of a country that is outside the WTO and has similar functions to the WTO, accounting for nearly half of global trade, but does not have a world trade leader.", The so-called TPP is known as the "Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement", which is a leap forward. Is it an agreement?!

Is China failing to keep pace with the times, or is this TPP, as Chinese media say, excluding China? Is TPP ahead of its leapfrog development level, or is China's current system incompatible with this upgraded version of the WTO? However, the TPP includes Mexico, Malaysia, and even Vietnam. Are these little Third World brothers, who have been unknown in the WTO trade list every year, inadvertently leapfrog and lead?

It seems that China is the world's largest trading country, but it cannot lead, or even co lead, the trading world. Why? At first glance, it seems that the ways are different and cannot be plotted. It can be seen only from some of the issues covered by the TPP, which covers higher labor standards and environmental standards, and also more disciplined competition at the same level between state-owned and private enterprises. In fact, these are the trade principles that Europe and the United States have long pursued in the WTO and its predecessor, GATT. As early as the Tokyo Round in the 1970s, they raised trade related labor issues. Later, in the Uruguay Round and the Doha Round after the WTO, they raised and argued with dissenters. The core of this issue is that low cost labor countries have gained competitive advantages in trade, leading to unfair trade. Low cost countries should increase labor remuneration and strengthen the bargaining rights of trade unions and employers. In this regard, there are many differences in the multilateral trading system. "State owned enterprises must not have privileges to compete on the basis of the market. Article 17 of the GATT, which was reached after World War II, already had rules. It is now emphasized that it is highly targeted at publicly owned trading partners.". On the internet, some Chinese media call these "super sovereign issues", which are very serious and frightening.

From the beginning of reform and opening up, China spent 8 years investigating and understanding the "rich club" of GATT, and then spent 15 years joining the WTO to replace the club. During this period, the reform of the system and opening up of the economy have been difficult and tortuous, but initial results have been achieved. The long process of becoming a member of the WTO undoubtedly introduces pressure and the track of convergence for reform and opening up. Naturalization has brought unprecedented development in trade. China has become the world's largest trading country, but has failed to become a leader or one of the leaders of the trading world. The rules of the game in the WTO, written in black and white, seem to be calm, with at most a few disputes and lawsuits each year. However, the undercurrent is surging. The trade principles advocated by established trading powers for decades have not changed in essence. To use today's fashionable rhetoric, it can be said that this is their "core interest" in the field of trade, and trading partners should "understand each other's concerns, Effectively manage differences "The WTO is the accumulation of trade figures, and more importantly, the observance, establishment, and development of the rule system. After more than a decade of naturalization, how does the trade leader speak out about the world trade rules? Interestingly, China submitted the year of restoring its seat in the GATT, and GATT launched the Uruguay Round negotiations. China was invited to participate in the negotiations as a full participant, but due to non naturalization, there was no voice in the negotiations. In the year of China's accession to the WTO, the WTO launched the Doha Round negotiations, "We had full voice, but the multilateral round, which suffered the worst defeat in history, could not be implemented.".

I clearly remember that 22 years ago, on the day of the agreement on the WTO Charter (on the evening of November 15, 1993), as the only representative of China who participated in the negotiations on the Charter, and as a young legal person who understood the tortuous process of the failure to establish the International Trade Organization after the war, I wrote in a rush that night when the mission drafted and sent a domestic telegram: "The agreement on the WTO Charter marks the imminent establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO).", The multilateral trading system will henceforth enter a new era. A certain leader who had been engaged in international organization affairs for more than ten years but whose business I believed to be mediocre in my heart, deleted the "multilateral trading system will enter a new era" that I thought was the best position to position this event in the review. In retrospect, it's still his old ways! The birth of the WTO has brought unprecedented global representativeness and universality as an international organization. However, the accompanying phenomenon is that bilateral regional free trade agreements are surging. Entering a new era, the WTO initiated multilateral negotiations for the first time and ended in failure in 2005. At the same time, TPP negotiations quietly started. With such a pattern of world trade, the WTO, at the age of 20, has to stand alone by the Lake Geneva, guarding its boudoir.

Originally, in international affairs, there were like-minded people, some who looked on coldly, and some who collaborated with gangs. For decades, Europe and the United States have been pushing their trade path, but they have taken great pains to avoid scheming. First, after several agreements were reached in the Tokyo Round, members were allowed to participate selectively, not forcibly, in a la carte manner. "There are more members of the post participating multilateral system, and more advocates of trade principles. The Uruguay Round has produced more agreements, all of which have been compiled into volumes. If we participate in the WTO on a la carte basis, the word" world "in the World Trade Organization will not be established. Therefore, it is still the European and American countries that have promoted and successfully achieved a" package participation ". For dozens of treaty sets, we must all participate, otherwise we will be excluded from the WTO.", The so-called "take it or leave it". In fact, dividing and ruling, ultimately achieving great harmony, starting with the minority and then the general public, is a tactic for promoting international treaties, especially multilateral treaties. "It is better to have an agreement than not. Those who share the same interests participate first, while those who differ from each other watch. However, when there is a conflict of interests one day, it is up to you to decide whether to do it or not, but you cannot help it.".

It is acknowledged that the current reform is at the stage of overcoming difficulties. To participate in and establish an international economic order is nothing but a process of opening up, reform, discarding the old and admitting the new to China. The process of joining the WTO is the same as that of participating in the TPP. In the field of trade, talk less about national sovereignty and more about national interests.

After all, TPP is not as complete as today's trade leader, and without this end on the other side of the ocean, where does T start and "cross" start? It's just not worthy of its name. "On the other side of the ocean, it is not in each other's core interests to exclude this side, or to oppose that side.". Therefore, I would like to presume that China has no choice but to participate, just as it did when it became a member of the WTO. （2015.10.5）

(This article is translated by software translator for reference only.)