Today's quote is from the opinion piece by President Obama that The Washington Post published at the beginning of this month. The President's piece was a no-nonsense, right-to-the-point argument for Congressional approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, though it doesn't actually mention Congress. The TPP agreement was signed by all 12 participating countries last February. 

As it happened, the article was published in the wake of the 12th round of negotiations aimed at establishing another agreement in the Asia-Pacific region, namely the China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership or RCEP. The 12th RCEP round was held in Perth, Australia, from April 17 to 29. The next round will be held in Auckland, New Zealand from June 12 - 18, and, if things go according to plan, the concluding round will take place in Laos in September. 

 
In his article, the President talked about the differences between TPP and RCEP. After noting, among other things, TPP's rules on state-owned enterprises and its protections for intellectual property rights, the President wrote:

If you care about trade policy, Politico's Morning Trade is one of those things you need at the start of the day. It's right up there with caffeine. (Orange juice is optional.) Probably none of the readers of that publication were surprised by yesterday's grim headline "TPP Death Watch." In the United States, TPP is in trouble, a lot of trouble. We mention that here, however, not to pile on but only to note that all big projects face big obstacles, and RCEP too has its challenges. 

 
Our guess, however, is that ultimately both agreements will go into effect. In other words, the different rules that each of them represents will co-exist for some period. Yes, the different structures matter, and with luck both companies and countries will come to appreciate the benefits of TPP's disciplines. That said, these agreements aren't just about rules. 

 
They are also about market. The Farm Weekly in Western Australia ran an article recently that underscored that point. It included these comments from Cheryl Kalish Gordon of Australia's GrainGrowers: 

***

And, of course, there is more than a little overlap between the two agreements. With a little help from Google, you can quickly discover a world of Venn diagrams that show the new, or rather, anticipated trade architecture of Asia. Here is one of them: 

On May 20, 2016 - The Global Business Dialogue will host a half-day conference on "Pacific Arrangements," including a keynote address from Ambassador Joe Hockey of Australia. Click the title link above for full details of this event, including registration options.

The President on TPP takes you to the article by President Obama on TPP, wich was published by The Washington Post on May 2. This was the source for today quote. 

TPP Death Watch is a link to Politico Morning Trade for May 12, 2016.

Asian Partnership Critical is a story from Australia's Farm Weekly on the importance of RCEP to Australia's wheat farmers. 

RCEP Rounds is a link to the Wikipedia entry for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, including a list of the transpired and anticipated negotiating rounds. 

The New Regionalism is an article on trade agreements in Asia published by the Asia Pathways, a blog of the Asia Development Bank Institute, and including the Venn Diagram above.