RCEP vs. TPP: The Pursuit of Eastern Dominance

  • Young-Chan KimEmail author
Part of the Understanding China book series (UNCHI)


ASEAN, when defined as a single regional bloc, can be perceived as being one of the most prominent battlefields between two new economic powerhouses: the USA and China. When compared to efforts in the prior half-century, the USA’s regional integration efforts were derided politically and economically since the 2007 Western financial crisis. This was predominantly due to a plethora of reasons similar to the fact that post the impasse, the ASEAN nations’ credence of the USA as a political and trading partner greatly eroded. As a late runner, China exemplifies her regional prowess via an influx of Chinese emigration in those targeted regions. This enables the ASEAN nations to centre their trade around the Chinese economy in lieu of that of the USA. This is galvanised by the wealth of the ethnic minority that efficiently entwine the ASEAN nations with China as the nucleus. Through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement, two subsequent agreements were penned, and these concepts are examined from the Chinese perspective, and the effects that are encompassed are further amplified throughout the course of this paper.


Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Asian regional integration USA–China regional strategy 


  1. Abe S (2013) ‘Japan is Back’ speech to the centre for strategic and international studies, 22 Feb 2013. Transcript available at
  2. ASEAN (2012) ASEAN summit meeting in Phnom Penh, November 2012. ASEAN Secretariat NewsGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergstern CF (1997) Open regionalism. Working Paper Series WP97-3. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Das SB (2013) RCEP and TPP: comparisons and concerns. ISEAS Perspective, 7 Jan 2013Google Scholar
  5. Fitriani E (2010) ASEAN and contemporary US diplomacy in East Asia. Jakarta Post, 13 Aug 2010Google Scholar
  6. Hettne B (2005) Beyond the ‘new’ regionalism. New Polit Econ 10(4):543–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Li C, Jing W, Whalley J (2014) China’s regional and bilateral trade agreement. NBER Working Paper no. 19853Google Scholar
  8. Petri PA, Abdul-Raheem A (2014) Can RCEP and the TPP be pathways to FTAAP? From State of the Region published by Pacific Economic Cooperation CouncilGoogle Scholar
  9. Perti PA, Plummer MG (2012) The trans-Pacific partnership and Asia-Pacific integration: policy implication. Peterson Institute for International Economic Policy Brief, 15 June 2012Google Scholar
  10. Song G (2011) How will TPP affect China. Schenzhen Shangbao, 13 Nov 2011Google Scholar
  11. US Trade Representative (2011) Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) from Office of the US Trade Representative ( Scholar
  12. Wang X (2009) China still believes in ASEAN partnership. Straits Times, 21 Apr 2009, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  13. Wilson JD (2015) Mega-regional trade deals in the Asia-Pacific: choosing between the TPP and RCEP? J Contemp Asia 45(2):345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GreenwichLondonUK

Personalised recommendations