Podcasts about indo pacific economic framework ipef

US trade policy and US-China competition concerns are high on the minds of South-east Asia observers. Synopsis: The Straits Times' global contributor Nirmal Ghosh shines a light on Asian perspectives of global and Asian issues with expert guests. Hardening strategic competition with China will remain front and centre of the foreign policy focus of the next US Administration in Washington DC. But while Asian countries have a mixed response to this superpower competition, most seek to stay on the right side of the United States and off the wrong side of China.  Ahead of the US presidential elections on Nov 5, South-east Asia would foresee more continuity under a Kamala Harris Administration, with the Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF, launched in 2022 by the Joe Biden Administration) continuing - while a second Donald Trump regime's approach would be more bilateral, with Washington's relations with individual countries shaped by factors such as trade deficits.  Within the broader context of US-China competition though, South-east Asian countries would be looking for more clarity from Washington on distinctions between trade and investment and economic issues, and national security concerns, as host Nirmal Ghosh finds out in this episode. His guests are: Dr Satu Limaye, director of the East West Centre in Washington DC, creator of the Asia Matters for America initiative, and founding editor of the Asia Pacific Bulletin. Singapore-based APAC Advisors CEO Steven Okun served in the Clinton administration and is a veteran of numerous Democratic presidential campaigns. Highlights (click/tap above):  4:57 Directionally, the US-China relationship is going to be more tense… regardless of who wins on Nov 5 9:12 More fundamental understanding of the fragmented multi-polar and deconstructing international order  13:14 South-east Asia has been masterful at internationalising the search for autonomy; what could happen if there were to be a Trump 2.0 Administration?  16:02 How will Singapore fare? Why it will be very difficult for businesses and investors to do business or to invest if what's allowed today is not allowed tomorrow - for national security concerns 21:48 US-Asia relations: Why the threads of continuity are likely to overcome the threads of discontinuity Follow Nirmal Ghosh on X: https://str.sg/JD7r Read Nirmal Ghosh's articles: https://str.sg/JbxG Register for Asian Insider newsletter: https://str.sg/stnewsletters Host: Nirmal Ghosh (nirmal@sph.com.sg) Produced and edited by: Fa'izah Sani Executive producer: Ernest Luis Follow Asian Insider on Fridays here: Channel: https://str.sg/JWa7 Apple Podcasts: https://str.sg/JWa8 Spotify: https://str.sg/JWaX Feedback to: podcast@sph.com.sg --- Follow more ST podcast channels: All-in-one ST Podcasts channel: https://str.sg/wvz7   ST Podcast website: http://str.sg/stpodcasts   ST Podcasts YouTube: https://str.sg/4Vwsa  --- Get The Straits Times' app, which has a dedicated podcast player section: The App Store: https://str.sg/icyB   Google Play: https://str.sg/icyX   --- #STAsianInsiderSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

US trade policy and US-China competition concerns are high on the minds of South-east Asia observers. Synopsis: The Straits Times' global contributor Nirmal Ghosh shines a light on Asian perspectives of global and Asian issues with expert guests. Hardening strategic competition with China will remain front and centre of the foreign policy focus of the next US Administration in Washington DC. But while Asian countries have a mixed response to this superpower competition, most seek to stay on the right side of the United States and off the wrong side of China.  Ahead of the US presidential elections on Nov 5, South-east Asia would foresee more continuity under a Kamala Harris Administration, with the Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF, launched in 2022 by the Joe Biden Administration) continuing - while a second Donald Trump regime's approach would be more bilateral, with Washington's relations with individual countries shaped by factors such as trade deficits.  Within the broader context of US-China competition though, South-east Asian countries would be looking for more clarity from Washington on distinctions between trade and investment and economic issues, and national security concerns, as host Nirmal Ghosh finds out in this episode. His guests are: Dr Satu Limaye, director of the East West Centre in Washington DC, creator of the Asia Matters for America initiative, and founding editor of the Asia Pacific Bulletin. Singapore-based APAC Advisors CEO Steven Okun served in the Clinton administration and is a veteran of numerous Democratic presidential campaigns. Highlights (click/tap above):  4:57 Directionally, the US-China relationship is going to be more tense… regardless of who wins on Nov 5 9:12 More fundamental understanding of the fragmented multi-polar and deconstructing international order  13:14 South-east Asia has been masterful at internationalising the search for autonomy; what could happen if there were to be a Trump 2.0 Administration?  16:02 How will Singapore fare? Why it will be very difficult for businesses and investors to do business or to invest if what's allowed today is not allowed tomorrow - for national security concerns 21:48 US-Asia relations: Why the threads of continuity are likely to overcome the threads of discontinuity Follow Nirmal Ghosh on X: https://str.sg/JD7r Read Nirmal Ghosh's articles: https://str.sg/JbxG Register for Asian Insider newsletter: https://str.sg/stnewsletters Host: Nirmal Ghosh (nirmal@sph.com.sg) Produced and edited by: Fa'izah Sani Executive producer: Ernest Luis Follow Asian Insider on Fridays here: Channel: https://str.sg/JWa7 Apple Podcasts: https://str.sg/JWa8 Spotify: https://str.sg/JWaX Feedback to: podcast@sph.com.sg --- Follow more ST podcast channels: All-in-one ST Podcasts channel: https://str.sg/wvz7   ST Podcast website: http://str.sg/stpodcasts   ST Podcasts YouTube: https://str.sg/4Vwsa  --- Get The Straits Times' app, which has a dedicated podcast player section: The App Store: https://str.sg/icyB   Google Play: https://str.sg/icyX   --- #STAsianInsiderSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From Nov. 11-17, leaders from 20 nations across the Pacific Rim gathered in San Francisco for the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit. An activist coalition known as No to APEC greeted the visiting world leaders with a countersummit decrying APEC as a forum to advance the interests of transnational corporations at the expense of workers and the environment. While the Biden administration worked to construct a new free trade regime in the Pacific exclusive of China, known as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), grassroots organizations in the No to APEC Coalition advanced an alternate vision of international cooperation and development in opposition to the corporate, pro-war agenda pushed by the US and allied governments at APEC. The Real News speaks with Nina Macapinlac of the No to APEC Coalition Steering Committee. Nina Macapinlac is the Secretary General of BAYAN USA (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan). They also serve on the Steering Committee of the US Country Chapter of the International League of Peoples' Struggle (ILPS), an alliance of over 300 organizations around the world fighting imperialism. Help us continue producing radically independent news and in-depth analysis by following us and becoming a monthly sustainer:Donate: https://therealnews.com/donate-podSign up for our newsletter: https://therealnews.com/newsletter-podLike us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/therealnewsFollow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/therealnews

In the latest, Scott talks with Will Wiltschko, director of the California Trade Justice Coalition (@catradejustice) about the upcoming Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in San Francisco. They discuss the history of free trade, resistance to corporate globalization and the large diverse coalition coming together to protest the APEC meetings. They also talk about the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), currently being negotiated by the APEC nations, and its impact on workers, communities and the climate crisis. Bio// Will is a graduate of UCLA with a B.A. and an M.A. in Political Science. At UCLA, studied and engaged with the theory and philosophy behind nonviolence. Will also was a staffer on Bernie Sanders' 2016 Presidential campaign, where he was the lead field organizer in Southwest Virginia. Prior to serving as director of the California Trade Justice Coalition, Will was the Lead Organizer and was in charge of the Coalition's efforts to defeat the TPP. --------------------------- Outro- "Ya Basta” by Evan Greer and Anne Feeney Links// + https://www.bayclimateaction.com + https://linktr.ee/no2apec Follow Green and Red// +G&R Linktree: ⁠https://linktr.ee/greenandredpodcast⁠ +Our rad website: ⁠https://greenandredpodcast.org/⁠ +We're part of the Labor Podcast Network: ⁠https://www.laborradionetwork.org/ Support the Green and Red Podcast// +Become a Patron at ⁠ / greenredpodcast⁠ +Or make a one time donation here: ⁠https://bit.ly/DonateGandR⁠ This is a Green and Red Podcast (@PodcastGreenRed) production. Produced by Bob (@bobbuzzanco) and Scott (@sparki1969). “Green and Red Blues" by Moody. Editing by Scott.

India Policy Watch #1: Silly Season Is Upon UsInsights on issues relevant to India— RSJLate on Friday this week, the RBI issued a circular withdrawing the circulation of ₹2000 denomination banknotes. The RBI clarified that these notes would continue to serve as legal tender, so this isn't another demonetisation. Here's the Indian Express reporting:THE RESERVE Bank of India (RBI) Friday announced the withdrawal of its highest value currency note, Rs 2,000, from circulation, adding that the notes will continue to be legal tender. It said the existing Rs 2,000 notes can be deposited or exchanged in banks until September 30, but set a limit of “Rs 20,000 at a time”.“In order to ensure operational convenience and to avoid disruption of regular activities of bank branches, exchange of Rs 2,000 banknotes can be made up to a limit of Rs 20,000 at a time, at any bank starting from May 23,” it said.“To complete the exercise in a time-bound manner and to provide adequate time to the members of the public, all banks shall provide deposit and/ or exchange facility for Rs 2,000 banknotes until September 30, 2023,” the RBI said.The RBI circular and the press note also attempt to make a convincing, logical case for this decision. There appear to be three reasons for doing this.Thanks for reading Anticipating the Unintended! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.One, the ₹2000 denomination notes seem to have served their useful purpose. They were introduced in November 2016 when the legal tender status of existing ₹500 and ₹1000 banknotes in circulation were withdrawn. Looking back, it appears these were introduced to help re-monetise the economy really quickly, which was under the stress of not having adequate new legal tender banknotes. According to the RBI, after this task of re-monetising was completed, the printing of new ₹2000 banknotes was stopped in 2018-19. Therefore, after 5 years of not printing any new notes, this looks like the right time to take them out of circulation completely.Two, since most of the ₹2000 denomination notes were issued prior to 2017, they have apparently completed the typical lifespan of a banknote which is between 4-5 years. In an ideal system, most of these old notes should have come back to the RBI by now. Further, these notes are not seen to be used for transactions anymore. They seem to be just sitting somewhere out there. So, in pursuance of the ‘clean note policy', the best course of action is to withdraw them from circulation. Lastly, there was also an allusion to the ₹2000 notes being often found by various investigative agencies in their haul of black money or frauds. So, somewhere there is a view that withdrawing these notes would smoke these fraudsters out, who are sitting on piles of this unaccounted-for cash.Now, as students of public policy, we must assess this measure based on its intended objectives, the likely costs of doing it and the unintended consequences that are likely to arise. The first reason—that the ₹2000 banknotes have served their purpose, so it is time we take them out—can be scrutinised further. I don't think it was made clear when they were introduced back in November 2016 that the only reason for doing it was to re-monetise the economy quickly. There's a bit of retrofitting of logic here. Also, the decision to stop printing new ₹2000 notes in 2018-19 has meant the total circulation of these notes has been on a decline. In the last four years, the total value of the ₹2000 notes in circulation has gone down from ₹6.5 trillion (over 30 per cent of notes in circulation by value) to about ₹3.6 trillion (about 10 per cent of total circulation by value). I guess, left to itself, we might have had this number slide to a smaller number, say below, ₹1 trillion in the next 3 years. The same point is relevant for the ‘clean note policy' since these notes would have eventually come back if they were not being used for transactions and were already at the end of their lifetime. So, the question is, did we need to accelerate something that would have followed a natural path to the policy objective that's desired? Would another three years of these notes in circulation have been detrimental to some policy objective? It is not clear. What's clear is there will be another season of ordinary citizens queuing up in front of bank branches that will begin on Monday. It might be argued that there won't be any panic because the regulator has made it clear that these notes will continue to be legal tender. But who will receive these notes for any transactions starting today? These notes are as good as useless, and for anyone who uses them for transactions or has stored them for any legal purpose, the only way is to get them exchanged for those notes that are both legal and usable. There's always a sense of schadenfreude among the middle class that it is the rich who will suffer. As was seen during the demonetisation exercise, the poor suffer equally, if not more. The cost of the logistics of sending all ₹2000 notes back from ATMs and branches to the RBI, replacing them with notes of other denominations, the extra hours spent by people exchanging their notes in batches of ₹20,000 and the additional measures to be taken to check for the provenance of the money that will come into the banking system and the risk of frauds during this process are all additional costs to the system. There should be a more compelling upside to these costs except to argue that these notes have served their purpose.Lastly, on high denomination notes abetting corruption and fraud, there's some data from experiences in other countries that suggest this. However, experience in India has shown after the initial ‘disruption', the system finds a new equilibrium, and things continue as usual. The idea that demonetisation would aid the digital economy and will bring down cash in circulation was compelling at that time. But as seen, over time, cash in the economy continued to rise despite a significant ramp-up in digital transactions, which might have happened anyway because of UPI. There are more fundamental reasons for corruption that need to be addressed than making a case for smaller denomination notes. Anyway, the corruption argument never gets old in India, where everyone assumes that, barring them, everyone else around is corrupt. So, the usual arguments have started surfacing on social media that this will impact a small minority of people, and they anyway need to answer why they were hoarding these high denomination notes. And, there's the political masterstroke argument which suggests this will derail the fundraising ability of the opposition in this election year. I'm not sure if that's supported by data because we had the unusual scenario of almost 100 per cent of the invalidated denomination notes during demonetisation eventually returning to the RBI. Nobody was wiser when that happened. The only upside at the end of this exercise will possibly be with banks that will have a temporary increase in their deposits. The scramble for deposits that was on because of shrinking liquidity will abate for some time. That will possibly help them support loan growth that was dependent on deposit mobilisation. That might not be a bad outcome, but it is a torturous way to get there. But then we like convolutions.In parallel, there was another interesting piece of policy-making going on. The TCS (tax collected at source) on international credit card spending outside of India. Earlier during the week, reports emerged that all such spends will now attract a TCS of 20 per cent which can then be recovered by individuals at the time of filing their annual return. The Indian Express on Tuesday reported:THE CENTRAL Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, in a late night notification Tuesday amended rules under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, bringing in international credit card spends outside India under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme (LRS). As a consequence, the spending by international credit cards will also attract a higher rate of Tax Collected at Source (TCS) at 20 per cent effective July 1.The notification brings transactions through credit cards outside India under the ambit of the LRS with immediate effect, which enables the higher levy of TCS, as announced in the Budget for 2022-23, from July 1. This is expected to help track high-value overseas transactions and will not apply on the payments for purchase of foreign goods/services from India.Prior to this, the usage of an international credit card to make payments towards meeting expenses during a trip abroad was not covered under the LRS. The spendings through international credit cards were excluded from LRS by way of Rule 7 of the Foreign Exchange Management (Current Account Transaction) Rules, 2000. With the latest notification, Rule 7 has now been omitted, paving way for the inclusion of such spendings under LRS.Now, what could be the reason for this? The Chief Economic Advisor in a column in the Indian Express gave an insight into the thinking:It is a fact that remittances under LRS have increased multi-fold in the last few years, and as per data published by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), LRS remittances which were Rs 0.9 trillion in FY2019, crossed Rs 2 trillion in FY2023. During FY2023, an interesting trend was noticed in the remittances for deposits, purchase of immovable property, investment in equity/debt, gifts/donations and travel. Remittances under these heads constituted almost 70 per cent of the total, representing a year-on-year growth of 74 per cent. Foreign travel alone was almost Rs 1.1 trillion in FY2023, a three-fold increase from the pre-Covid period. In all of these, payments made through credit cards are not reflected as such payments were not subject to the LRS limit. This is an anomaly that needed to be fixed anyway.We are back to the old Indian argument. There are people who are spending money on their credit cards abroad that's not captured in the LRS limit. We need to know who these people are and what is the amount they are spending. That's fair. It is an information problem that needs to be solved. Find out who are the people spending this and add it back to their LRS eligibility. Better still, increase the LRS limit so that people can spend more freely. We aren't in the 70s that we need to conserve foreign exchange through means that make the lives of ordinary citizens difficult. Why should a tax be applied to an information problem? And it is conceptually fine to say that this tax amount is only deposited with the government during the transaction and can be recovered at the time of filing the annual return. But there are way too many complications at an operational level, including upfront working capital costs. The challenge of tracking international spending, separating corporate and individual purchases and optimising for the overall LRS limit, especially if people have kids studying abroad, will burden individuals. For card companies, it will mean helping customers track this, figuring out all sorts of exception scenarios when a customer cancels a foreign transaction on which a TCS has already been paid or where they default on payment but the card company has already deposited the TCS with the government. Instead of simplifying the tax structure and remittances, the attempt is to complicate things to catch hold of a few exceptions. And those who claim this impacts only 7 per cent of people who have a passport, I can only say why inconvenience even 1 per cent of citizens if there's no compelling motive. Thankfully, some sense seems to have prevailed, and we had a clarification from the finance ministry on Friday. The ministry clarified:Concerns have been raised about the applicability of Tax Collection at Source (TCS) to small transactions under the Liberalized Remittance Scheme (LRS) from July 1, 2023. To avoid any procedural ambiguity, it has been decided that any payments by an individual using their international Debit or Credit cards up to Rs 7 lakh per financial year will be excluded from the LRS limits and hence, will not attract any TCS.Small mercies. But it still doesn't fully do away with an unnecessary measure. India Policy Watch #2: Technological Learning is a Marathon, Not a SprintInsights on issues relevant to India— Pranay KotasthaneElectronics manufacturing is a hot topic nowadays, as it is being seen as a lead indicator of India's improving manufacturing prowess. Not a week goes by without reports on this topic, ranging from the mobile exports clocked every quarter and the difficulties encountered by companies in localising production to the uptake of the Production-linked Incentives (PLI) scheme to encourage production. Broadly speaking, the analyses can be classified into two simple categories: detractive (“hum se naa ho paayega” type) and presumptuous (“Hum jahan khade ho jaate hain line wahi se shuru hoti hain” type). I contend that both kinds of analyses make a common mistake: they don't appreciate a concept of called technological learning. This leads them to reach similar conclusions, albeit through different perspectives.Dodgson, a scholar of innovation, defines technological learning as “the ways firms build and supplement their knowledge-bases about technologies, products and processes, and develop and improve the use of the broad skills of their workforces”. The assumption is that firms build additional capabilities over time as and when they keep getting better at doing relatively simpler tasks, projects, and processes. The detractors of India's nascent electronics manufacturing are quick to point out that Indian manufacturers' high failure rates are a clear indication that India cannot do large-scale manufacturing. For instance, the news report that iPhone casings produced at Tata's Hosur plant had a 50 per cent failure rate, has become an oft-cited datapoint to downplay India's manufacturing capabilities. While such critiques should not be dismissed lightly, it's also important not to overreact. Electronics manufacturing in China faced pretty much the same challenges; in fact, Chinese manufacturers had far lower yields in the initial phases. Technological learning and upgradation happen over time; it is unrealistic to expect immediate success in this field.On the other hand, fervent supporters believe that the Indian government can boost manufacturing output and export competitiveness merely by implementing industrial policies and import substitution measures. In this model, PLI schemes, higher import tariffs, and infant industry protection are necessary and sufficient conditions for building India's electronics manufacturing sector. This line of thinking also ignores technological learning. Indian firms will have to begin with the assembly of imported components necessarily. In fact, we should be willing to digest a decrease in the domestic value added per unit of demand over the next few years, as was the case in China and Viet Nam. As Indian manufacturing achieves global scale, local content addition will increase by default, as firms seek to optimise costs, and employees go on to become local entrepreneurs. The hurry to localise domestic value addition runs at odds with exporting competitiveness, a point that the self-assured are ignoring.And so, both viewpoints are misguided due to their disregard for the role of technological learning in manufacturing development. It is crucial to acknowledge that gaining proficiency in manufacturing takes time. Naushad Forbes Business Standard article explains this process of learning took place in East Asia:Firms like Samsung, Hyundai, LG, TSMC and Acer did not start as global brands. They began with outsourcing, as original equipment manufacturers or OEMs, building manufacturing operations of global scale. They used their demanding buyers as a source of technology that made them world-competitive. But they did not stop there. They invested in R&D, as process innovation, to make manufacturing more efficient. They then offered their buyers products with new and improved design, moving up the scale to own design and manufacture or ODM, claiming a piece of the innovation rents that came from better products.  This required them to invest in substantial product design capabilities, which over time completely outclassed and replaced the design capabilities of their buyers. And, finally, with world-competitive manufacturing and leading-edge product design in place, they made the shift to own brand manufacture or OBM, launching their own brands, going beyond their home market, spreading step by step into the world. This is the story of Samsung in microwaves and semiconductors, LG in TV sets, Hyundai in cars and excavators, TSMC in microprocessors, and Acer in laptops. This OEM to ODM to OBM story is one of continuous learning. It's crucial to bring technological learning back in conversations on India's manufacturing.P.S.: Earlier this week, the government announced another PLI scheme for "laptops, tablets, all-in-one PCs, servers etc.", with a budgetary outlay of ₹17000 crores over six years. If the government appreciated technological learning, it would accompany this PLI with a reduction in customs duties. Competitive exports need competitive imports of intermediate components and equipment. Matsyanyaaya: Launch India-US Trade into Another OrbitBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay KotasthaneAhead of the Indian PM's visit to the US next month, some of us at Takshashila propose an ambitious agenda on the trade front in this document—increase bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030 and $1 Trillion by 2040.Here're the pathways to achieve this goal:* Expand the existing US-India 2+28 ministerial dialogue: This dialogue currently comprises the Foreign and Defence ministers from both countries. However, to comprehensively address the intricacies of global trade relations, it would be beneficial to transition to a 3+3 format to include both nations' trade and commerce representatives. * Capitalize on the role of states: The economic landscape in India is witnessing a shift towards the states. Various factors that significantly influence business operations, such as land acquisition and law and order, predominantly lie under the jurisdiction of individual states. Owing to India's vast size and diverse nature, different states have fostered their unique strengths and advantages. The trade relations between the two nations can be further enhanced through a partnership where groups of states engage in reciprocal visits each year, bolstering trade ties and fostering mutual growth. * The Trade Policy Forum (TPF) must be held every year. It is the right cadence to ensure disciplined action and follow-through on ambitious goals. The institutional memory of the TPF will work to create continuity. The old adage "we overestimate what can be done in one year and underestimate what can be done in 5 or 10 years" is particularly applicable here. * The organic growth in trade between companies on either side needs only the occasional enablement. Trade in technology services, pharmaceuticals, SaaS, industrial goods and many other sectors can continue. It will benefit from forums like the US-India Business Council (USIBC) that seek to remove frictions in the ordinary conduct of business and shine a light on some sticky areas. * Create plurilateral trade partnerships. Until now, the US and India do not together find themselves in any regional trade partnership. The revived QUAD, with a heavy security focus, will be one such partnership with significant trade implications. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) proposed this summer is a promising way to advance on a partnership, but the partnership details must be worked out. For the greater good, India and the US will have to work out sticking points in the data & privacy sections of the agreement. There appears to be significant mutual concurrence on tax, anti-corruption and clean energy, the other three pillars of the IPEF agreement. * Trade in high-technology sectors would get a fillip from the two governments setting up specific framework agreements. The new US-India initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) is an example of a framework agreement that could kickstart interaction between government, industry and academia in areas such as artificial intelligence (AI), semiconductors, 5G/6G telecommunications, quantum computing, biotech, deep ocean and space technologies. * In commercial and societal terms, the exchange of people will be the biggest binding factor between the two countries. In the short term, reciprocal visa access and availability should be addressed on a priority basis. In the longer term, both sides should work on Indians being separated from the general pool of "H1" applicants and in a category of their own. Additionally, the thresholds for each country employing citizens of the other should be brought down gradually. [From Narayan Ramachandran et al., “Time to Launch the US-India Trade Relationship into Another Orbit,” Takshashila Policy Advisory 2023-02]HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters* [Article] Anupam Manur on the ₹2,000 note withdrawal in Moneycontrol — “Like a nightmare resulting from a traumatic experience for a person suffering from PTSD, demonetisation came back to haunt the collective consciousness of this country when the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) decided to recall the 2000 rupee note.”* [Podcast] In the next Puliyabaazi, Devashish Dhar talks about cities, urbanisation, working in government, etc. Strongly recommend it to people considering public policy as a career option.* [Articles 1, 2, & 3] Naushad Forbes' series on private R&D and national innovation in Business Standard is a must-read for those interested in technology geopolitics and tech policy. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

For call center workers in the Philippines, attempts to unionize the workplace don't just entail confrontations with local management—but overseas US-based multinationals and the US federal government's foreign policy agenda as well. Since 2022, the Biden administration has promoted a new economic initiative known as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF). Touted as a vehicle for “writing the new rules of the 21st century economy,” the IPEF links 14 nations across the Pacific Rim into an emergent bloc that has been compared to the defunct Trans-Pacific Partnership. Like the TPP before it, the IPEF attempts to build an exclusive economic regional pact that excludes China.In a special livestream panel, workers and organizers in the US and the Philippines discuss how trade policy and worker repression in the Philippines go hand-in-hand with the IPEF and the New Cold War on China. The event, moderated by Maximillian Alvarez, Editor-in-Chief of The Real News Network and Ryan Harvey, National Field Director for Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, is part of organizing efforts for two upcoming rallies in the U.S. during negotiating meetings for the Biden's administration's largest trade initiative, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). Those meetings and rallies will take place in Detroit in May and in Seattle in August. This event is co-hosted by Public Citizen, BAYAN USA, the BPO Industry Employees Network, and Communication Workers of America.Panelists include:Mylene Cabalona, President, BPO Industry Employees Network (Philippines)Kendra Williams, Member, Communications Workers of America, Local 6215 (US)Adrian Bonifacio, National Chairperson, BAYAN USA (US)Melinda St. Louis, Director, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch (US)Maximillian Alvarez, Editor-in-Chief, The Real News Network (moderator)Ryan Harvey, National Field Director, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch (moderator)Additional links:For more info about the May 20th Detroit IPEF/APEC rally: https://bit.ly/Detroit-IPEF / asiddiqui@citizen.orgFor more info about the August Seattle IPEF/APEC rally: julie@washingtonfairtrade.orgStudio Production: Cameron Granadino, Adam ColeyHelp us continue producing radically independent news and in-depth analysis by following us and becoming a monthly sustainer: Donate: https://therealnews.com/donate-podSign up for our newsletter: https://therealnews.com/newsletter-podLike us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/therealnewsFollow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/therealnews

Greg and Elina talk with Ted Osius, the former United States Ambassador to Vietnam and the President and CEO of the US-ASEAN Business Council. They discuss the private sector's perspective on the Biden administration's Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and the key issues for the upcoming APEC Leaders' Summit in November. Karen is joined by Mike Tiernan, research intern for the Southeast Asia Program at CSIS, to cover the latest developments in the region.

The recently announced Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) includes commitments on four pillars, one of which relates to building an inclusive, free and fair trade in digital markets, also on free cross-border data flow. India decided against engaging on the fourth pillar of the IPEF at the moment, waiting for emerging contours and owing to ongoing process of firming up digital framework laws. The article discusses existing and forthcoming laws on data protections, judicial precedents and reports with specific emphasis on cross-border transfer conditions in light of the importance that trade agreements relating to digital economies such as IPEF accord to free flow of information, while protecting individual privacy.Audio Source : An article published on the LKS website in August 2022 https://www.lakshmisri.com/insights/articles/indo-pacific-economic-framework-and-future-of-cross-border-data-flows/#Authors: Prashant Phillips, Partner (LKS),  Sameer Avasarala, Senior Associate (LKS)Voice : Dikshita Damodaran, Senior Associate (LKS) 

It was a great pleasure to invite Scott Kennedy back into the virtual studio. Scott has just recently returned from Asia after 5 weeks of travel and discussion and I wanted to get his insights into the how China is viewed in the Asia-Pacific but also how the United States is viewed following President Biden's first Asian trip. Among other diplomatic steps Biden met with the new President of Korea Yoon Suk Yeol; in Tokyo Biden held meetings with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) involving the United States and 13 other countries, and held a leaders' gathering of the Quad. Scott is the Senior Advisor and Trustee Chair in Chinese Business & Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington. Scott focuses on Chinese economic policy including industrial policy, technology innovation, business lobbying, US-China commercial relations and global governance. Scott has written extensively on China including most recently: Michael J. Green and Scott Kennedy CSIS Commentary: "U.S. Business Leaders Not Ready for the Next U.S.-China Crisis" https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-business-leaders-not-ready-next-us-china-crisis, Scott Kennedy TCH Blog Post: Bridging Differences with Friends on China https://www.csis.org/blogs/trustee-china-hand/bridging-differences-friends-china, and Gerard DiPippo, Ilaria Mazzocco and Scott Kennedy, CSIS Report: “Red Ink: Estimating Chinese Industrial Policy Spending in Comparative Perspective”. https://www.csis.org/features/how-inequality-undermining-chinas-prosperity. Before coming to Washington, Scott was a professor at Indiana University (IU), where he established the Research Center for Chinese Politics & Business and was the founding academic director of IU's China Office.

Tại vùng Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương chiến lược, Mỹ và Trung Quốc đang lao vào một cuộc chiến tranh giành ảnh hưởng. Bắc Kinh đưa ra một sáng kiến nhằm mở rộng hợp tác an ninh và tự do mậu dịch với các đảo quốc Nam Thái Bình Dương. Công du Đông Á, Joe Biden làm sống lại Bộ Tứ - QUAD, diễn đàn an ninh quy tụ bốn nước Nhật Bản, Mỹ, Úc và Ấn Độ, đồng thời thông báo hình thành Khuôn khổ Kinh tế Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương (Indo-Pacific Economic Framework - IPEF). Đài Loan : « Chính sách mập mờ » bị phá vỡ ? Những ngày cuối tháng 5/2022 có hai sự kiện đặc biệt thu hút sự chú ý của giới quan sát. Thứ nhất là tuyên bố của tổng thống Biden là Mỹ sẽ hậu thuẫn quân sự trong trường hợp Đài Loan bị Trung Quốc tấn công. Nhiều nhà quan sát tự hỏi : Phải chăng Hoa Kỳ đã từ bỏ chiến lược mập mờ đối với hồ sơ Đài Loan được duy trì từ nửa thế kỷ qua ? Michael Swaine, chuyên gia về quan hệ Mỹ - Trung, giám đốc chương trình Đông Á, Viện Quincy, cho rằng nếu như Joe Biden nghĩ đúng như ông tuyên bố, thì điều đó hoàn toàn không phù hợp với luật của Mỹ đối với Đài Loan:  « Chính sách của Mỹ quy định rằng Hoa Kỳ sẽ xem xét với một sự cẩn trọng, một mối bận tâm nghiêm túc bất kỳ cuộc tấn công nào nhắm vào Đài Loan và tổng thống sẽ phải tham khảo ý kiến của Quốc Hội về những gì phải làm về vấn đề này. Luật của Mỹ còn quy định không có cam kết triển khai các lực lượng quân đội như thể Đài Loan là một đồng minh an ninh của Mỹ. Nhưng có một cam kết cung cấp các phương tiện phòng vệ cho Đài Loan – nghĩa là bán vũ khí quân sự - nếu Mỹ đánh giá rằng tình hình an ninh của Đài Loan mỗi lúc bị đe dọa. » (Trang mạng Democracy Now ngày 24/05/2022) Michael Swaine nhắc thêm, nếu như từ nhiều năm qua, Hoa Kỳ vẫn bán vũ khí cho hòn đảo tự trị này, chính sách của Mỹ trong hồ sơ Đài Loan là duy trì sự mập mờ, nhằm ngăn cản Đài Loan tuyên bố độc lập và chặn mọi ý đồ hợp nhất hòn đảo bằng vũ lực từ Trung Quốc. Nhà nghiên cứu về Đông Bắc Á, Antoine Bondaz, Quỹ Nghiên Cứu Chiến Lược FRS, đưa ra một giải thích khác, cho rằng bản chất của chiến lược này nằm ở cách thức Hoa Kỳ đáp trả trong trường hợp Đài Loan bị Trung Quốc đơn phương tấn công, làm thay đổi nguyên trạng:  « Vấn đề ở đây chính là thực chất của sự hậu thuẫn : Phải chăng điều đó muốn nói là chỉ đơn giản cung cấp vũ khí nếu có xung đột ? Hay điều đó có nghĩa là sẽ can thiệp quân sự vào Đài Loan và củng cố khả năng phòng thủ cho đảo ? Hoặc cũng hàm ý rằng Hoa Kỳ sẽ đi xa hơn và có khả năng đánh vào các mục tiêu ở Hoa lục trong trường hợp có chiến tranh ? Chính là dựa trên câu hỏi về thực chất của sự can thiệp này, mà có một chiến lược mập mờ như thế ».(France Culture ngày 28/05/2022) Về phía Trung Quốc, nhà nghiên cứu người Pháp khẳng định từ lâu Bắc Kinh đã có một chiến lược rất rõ ràng : « Từ nhiều thập niên qua, giới chức Trung Quốc, giới chính trị cũng như là Quân Đội Giải Phóng Nhân Dân PLA, đã chuẩn bị cho một cuộc can thiệp quân sự Mỹ, nếu chiến tranh xảy ra ở eo biển Đài Loan. Trên thực tế, đây chính là lý do thúc đẩy Trung Quốc hiện đại hóa quân đội nhằm ngăn chặn một cuộc can thiệp từ Mỹ hay hạn chế tối đa sự phát triển đó. Thậm chí ngày nay năng lực hạt nhân của Trung Quốc còn nhắm đến việc ngăn chặn Mỹ đe dọa Trung Quốc trong khuôn khổ một kịch bản có chiến tranh tại eo biển Đài Loan, nhất là tấn công hạt nhân nhằm kết thúc cuộc xung đột. » (France Culture ngày 28/05/2022) Tuy nhiên, nhiều nhà phân tích khác còn cho rằng tuyên bố này của Joe Biden rất có thể còn là một lời cảnh cáo Bắc Kinh : Nếu như Trung Quốc dùng vũ lực với Đài Loan, những bài học kinh nghiệm rút ra từ việc Vladimir Putin đánh Ukraina sẽ không ngăn cản Hoa Kỳ có hành động đáp trả bằng quân sự. Sự trở lại của ngoại giao trong chính sách đối ngoại của Mỹ Điểm đáng chú ý thứ hai là bài phát biểu của lãnh đạo ngành ngoại giao Mỹ, Anthony Blinken tại đại học George Washington hôm 26/05, nhằm trình bày một chính sách về Trung Quốc của Mỹ. Theo đó, Trung Quốc vẫn bị xem là mối đe dọa chính cho « trật tự thế giới », ngày càng « xa rời các giá trị phổ quát ». Đương nhiên, tuyên bố này của Washington khiến Bắc Kinh nổi dóa và đã có phản ứng gay gắt, cho rằng mục tiêu của bài diễn văn là nhằm « ngăn chặn và cản trở sự phát triển của Trung Quốc », đồng thời tố cáo Mỹ tìm cách « duy trì thế bá quyền và sức mạnh » của mình. Trong một bài viết trên trang mạng Responsible Statecraft, nhà sử học Daniel Larison, cựu biên tập viên cho tạp chí « Đảng Bảo Thủ Mỹ » đánh giá, chính sách về Trung Quốc của chính quyền Biden là không có nhiều điều mới mẻ, và được mô phỏng chặt chẽ dựa trên chính sách của Donald Trump. Đây là một sự liên tục lớn nhất giữa chính quyền Biden với người tiền nhiệm, khi ông nhắc lại luận điểm theo đó, Trung Quốc là một cường quốc « hiếu chiến », là một thế lực gây bất ổn cần phải kềm hãm… Dù vậy, ông cũng nhìn nhận rằng điều đó không có nghĩa là không có một sự khác biệt trong chính sách đối với Trung Quốc của chính quyền Biden. Vẫn theo Daniel Larison, điểm đáng chú ý trong bài diễn văn của ngoại trưởng Blinken là đặt ngoại giao trở lại vào trọng tâm chính sách đối ngoại, vào lúc các hoạt động ngoại giao của Mỹ tại vùng châu Á – Thái Bình Dương ngày càng tỏ ra mờ nhạt. Maud Quessard, Viện Nghiên Cứu Chiến Lược trường Quân Sự Pháp (IRSEM,) ghi nhận đây chính là một phần trong chiến lược mới của Mỹ, ở đó vế « ngoại giao – kinh tế » của chính quyền Biden – Harris sẽ được chú trọng trong nỗ lực đáp trả thách thức thế bá quyền của Trung Quốc tại vùng châu Á – Thái Bình Dương. (Tạp chí Diplomatie số tháng 5-6/2022) Những tháng gần đây, nhịp độ hoạt động ngoại giao của Mỹ trong khu vực tăng mạnh. Washington muốn đuổi kịp Bắc Kinh sau một thời gian khởi động chậm chạp : Chuyến thăm ba nước Đông Nam Á của bộ trưởng Quốc Phòng Mỹ Lloy Austin (7/2021), Vòng công du châu Á của ngoại trưởng Mỹ (2/2022), Thượng đỉnh Mỹ - ASEAN tại Washington (trung tuần tháng 5/2022) hay như chuyến công du Đông Bắc Á của nguyên thủ Mỹ (cuối tháng 5/2022)… Mục tiêu là để tái khẳng định cam kết của Mỹ trong khu vực với những thách thức rất rõ ràng : Duy trì vai trò lãnh đạo của Mỹ với tư cách là cường quốc khu vực Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương « tự do và rộng mở » vào thời điểm « giấc mơ Trung Hoa của Tập Cận Bình » có nhiều nguy cơ thay thế vị thế của Mỹ, và qua đó tìm cách « sửa chữa chính sách đối ngoại » sau một nhiệm kỳ Donald Trump tạo thuận lợi cho Trung Quốc thực hiện tham vọng của mình trên bình diện khu vực cũng như trên thế giới. Châu Á : Mặt trận đối đầu chính cho Mỹ và Trung Quốc Tham vọng của Mỹ sẽ phải là tâm điểm của một trật tự thế giới tương thích với những thách thức mới của thế kỷ XXI, khi dựa vào các đồng minh trong vùng Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương từ Ấn Độ, Nhật Bản, Hàn Quốc, Úc, New Zealand, Philippines, Thái Lan… cũng như dựa vào các đồng minh vùng châu Âu – Đại Tây Dương (đặc biệt là Anh và Liên Hiệp Châu Âu), tùy theo vai trò mà các nước đó có thể nắm giữ (nhất là tại eo biển Đài Loan). Đây cũng là lần đầu tiên Washington nhấn mạnh đến vai trò này của các nước trong chiến lược mới của Nhà Trắng được công bố hồi tháng 2/2022, mà ví dụ điển hình có thể thấy rõ nhất là vị thế của Nhật Bản trong khu vực, như giải thích của bà Valérie Niquet, Quỹ Nghiên Cứu Chiến Lược (FRS): « Nhật Bản có một vai trò trung gian khá thú vị giữa Mỹ và các nước Đông Nam Á. Ngoại trưởng và thủ tướng Nhật Bản thường xuyên có mặt trong vùng, bên cạnh các đối tác thuộc khối ASEAN. Nhất là họ gây áp lực sao cho những nước đó chấp nhận một phần nào tham gia vào khuôn khổ kinh tế mới (IPEF) do Mỹ đề xướng. » (France Culture ngày 28/05/2022) Vẫn theo bà Maud Quessard, tham vọng dài hạn này của Washington được thấy rõ qua lập trường của nhiều cố vấn tổng thống Biden, những thành viên trong Hội Đồng An Ninh Quốc Gia NSC. Phần đông trong số họ giữ những vị trí hàng đầu tại nhiều nước châu Á – Thái Bình Dương, hay những người từng tham gia kiến tạo cho chiến lược « xoay trục của Obama ». Điển hình nhất là trường hợp của Kurt Campell, từ lâu tin rằng tái định hướng chiến lược của Mỹ sang châu Á là điều cần thiết. Chiến lược này cần phải được dựa vào việc huy động những phương tiện quân sự, kinh tế và công nghệ. Tầm nhìn này đã được cố vấn cho tổng thống về Trung Quốc, Rush Doshi, đồng chia sẻ. Ông là tác giả tập sách The Long Game : China's Grand Strategy to Displace American Order (NXB Oxford University Press USA, 2021). Theo Doshi, việc Donald Trump đắc cử tổng thống năm 2016 dường như đã làm thay đổi cảm nhận của Trung Quốc về sức mạnh của Mỹ, khi nuôi dưỡng hy vọng về « những thay đổi lớn chưa từng có từ một thế kỷ nay ». Cũng theo vị cố vấn quyền lực này, Bắc Kinh có lẽ ngay từ năm 2008 đã theo đuổi chính sách bành trướng, nhất là thiết lập những nền tảng cơ bản trật tự bá quyền của mình mang tư tưởng xét lại trong lòng các định chế quốc tế hay khu vực. Mục tiêu là nhằm chứng tỏ ưu thế của mô hình Trung Quốc trước một « Hoa Kỳ đang thoái trào» và mở rộng ảnh hưởng trên bình diện kinh tế và chính trị, khi tự cho rằng các định chế của Bắc Kinh được thiết kế tốt hơn để có thể huy động Nhà nước, xã hội và thị trường thực hiện các chính sách công nghiệp, phục vụ cho những tham vọng công nghệ của Trung Quốc. Cuối cùng, trên bình diện quân sự, Trung Quốc tự trang bị cho mình các phương tiện nhằm ra sức phát triển một quân đội mang cấp độ thế giới, có khả năng hậu thuẫn, bảo vệ những lợi ích của Trung Quốc ở nước ngoài và nhất là vùng châu Á – Thái Bình Dương. Kinh tế : Con chốt mới của Mỹ đã bị Trung Quốc qua mặt ? Trong bối cảnh này, ngoài việc phải tăng cường hệ thống phòng thủ và bảo vệ các căn cứ cũng như đồng minh quân sự tại khu vực, chính quyền Biden cho rằng cần phải mở rộng hợp tác đối tác trên bình diện kinh tế và chính trị, để có thể « kềm hãm đà ảnh hưởng của Trung Quốc » tại các định chế quốc tế, cũng như ở vùng châu Á. Washington đánh giá phải hoàn thiện cân bằng chiến lược và thành công ở những điểm mà các đời tổng thống tiền nhiệm Obama hay Donald Trump đã thất bại khi không đề xuất được những thỏa thuận tốt nhất cho nhiều nước cường quốc hạng trung như Singapore, Đài Loan, Việt Nam, hay các đảo quốc Nam Thái Bình Dương. Từ những quan sát này, nhằm bổ sung cho chiến lược mới, chính quyền Biden – Harris vạch ra một khuôn khổ hợp tác đối tác kinh tế mới IPEF – Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, ước tính chiếm giữ đến 40% kinh tế toàn cầu và sơ khởi đã tập hợp được 12 nước (Nhật Bản, Hàn Quốc, Úc, New Zealand, Ấn Độ, Singapore, Brunei, Việt Nam, Philippines, Malaysia và Thái Lan). Việc 6/12 nước tham gia ban đầu đều là các thành viên của khối ASEAN, cho thấy một lần nữa chính quyền Biden chú trọng đến đặc tính « trung tâm » của ASEAN trong vùng Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương. Những nỗ lực này, đương nhiên, cho thấy chính quyền Biden tìm cách vượt qua khuôn khổ một Ấn Độ - Thái Bình Dương quá chú trọng vào những thách thức an ninh khi bổ sung thêm lĩnh vực kinh tế. Tuy nhiên, theo một số nhà quan sát, chiến lược này của Mỹ chẳng khác gì « ăn miếng trả miếng », nhằm đáp trả lại sáng kiến Vành Đai và Con Đường của Bắc Kinh, nhưng lại trong sự muộn màng. Barthélémy Courmont, chuyên gia về Đông Á và chính sách đối ngoại Mỹ, Viện Quan Hệ Quốc Tế và Chiến Lược IRIS, lấy làm tiếc rằng từ hơn hai thập niên qua, chính sách Belt and Road Initiatives đã giúp Trung Quốc cắm rễ sâu với các khoản đầu tư trên toàn châu lục. Châu Á không còn nhiều chỗ dành cho Washington trong khi khả năng đầu tư của Mỹ lại  hạn hẹp do phải cấp bách đầu tư vào cơ sở hạ tầng ở trong nước. Trong cuộc đua khốc liệt này, rõ ràng quân chốt của Mỹ đã bị Trung Quốc bỏ xa !

Former US Consul General to Hong Kong & Macau, Kurt Tong, who now serves as Managing Partner, The Asia Group, discussed President Biden's recent trip to Asia and the newly launched Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). An expert on the Indo-Pacific affairs, Kurt believes that the IPEF is a step in the right direction for the US to engage with allies in the region. The framework also provides the opportunity for both the public and private sectors to address supply chain issues in a collaborative manner. Background music by fiftysounds

Aufnahme vom 1 Juni 2022 Nachrichten aus Asien: Wahlen in Australien und chinesische Offerte an weitere Inselstaaten im Südpazifik; UN-Menschenrechtskommissarin Michelle Bachelet besucht China; und Joe Biden kündigt das Indo Pacific Economic Framework IPEF an. Im Interview: Dr Stormy-Annika Mildner, Executive Director des Aspen Instituts in Deutschland, zum Handel zwischen Asien und Europa, multiplen Krisen, Lieferkettenproblemen und dem Schrumpfen wirtschaftlicher Wachstumsprognosen. Moderation: Jan Kliem, Alina Reiss

This week, Les, Jane, Scott, and Sarah discuss President Biden's articulation of the US policy in the event China invades Taiwan, the creation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), and the first Russian soldier convicted of war crimes. Was it truly a mistake on President Biden's part when he says that the U.S. would defend Taiwan if China were to invade? Will China engage in military activity against Taiwan in the next 2.5 years? Is IPEF significant? What are the implications of Ukraine convicting the first Russian solder of war crimes? These questions and more are answered on the latest episode of Fault Lines! Like this episode? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. **Fault Lines Update** Fault Lines is taking a break for the rest of June. Join us in July for our limited and special summer series that will highlight the many serious human rights violations we are witnessing across the globe - from war crimes in Ukraine to new information coming out on China's treatment of the Uyghur. You don't want to miss this! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Quad leaders launched Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) at the recently held Quad summit in Tokyo. In this episode, Megha Pardhi and Manoj Kewalramani discuss various aspects of IPEF.Follow Megha on Twitter: https://twitter.com/pardhimegha21Follow Manoj on Twitter: https://twitter.com/theChinaDudeCheck out Takshashila's courses: https://school.takshashila.org.in/You can listen to this show and other incredible shows on the new and improved IVM Podcast App on Android: https://ivm.today/android or iOS: https://ivm.today/iosYou can check out our website at https://www.ivmpodcasts.com

News Focus 1- South Korea joins the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF)- 한국, 경제협력체 IPEF 가입Guest: Prof. Hyo-young Lee, Korea National Diplomatic AcademySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

While addressing delegates at the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that the pact will pave the way for development, peace and prosperity in the region. While joining the block floated by US President Joe Biden, India made its intentions very clear. Peace in the region was the foremost priority for it, without which business and prosperity was not possible. IPEF is a critical part of the US President Joe Biden's plan to counter China's growing influence in the Asian economic sphere. Biden plans to do so by partnering with other countries which are India, Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) has four pillars.  The first is supply-chain resilience. The second involves clean energy, decarbonisation, and infrastructure. The third deals with taxation and anti-corruption. And, the fourth one is fair and resilient trade. The US is also seeking to include digital economy issues like the cross-border flows and localisation of data.   So what will be the shape of the pact? According to a February report by the US Congressional Research Service, US officials have stated that they do not envision the IPEF taking the form of a “traditional trade agreement”. The report cited a USTR official saying in February that the initiative would include different modules covering "fair and resilient trade, supply chain resilience, infrastructure and decarbonisation, and tax and anticorruption". Basically, the pillars we spoke of before. Countries will have to sign up to all of the components within a module, but will not have to participate in all modules.  In particular, the “fair and resilient trade” module will be led by USTR and include digital, labour, and environment issues, with some binding commitments.  As reported by Business Standard, the IPEF joint statement does not call for launching negotiations for a trade pact. Instead, it only promises to begin “collective discussions towards future negotiations”.   Without ruling out tariff negotiations under the proposed trade pact, the joint statement said that cooperation in the digital economy would be part of the efforts under IPEF.   A White House fact sheet spoke of pursuing high-standard digital economy rules with regard to cross-border data flows and data localisation, along with seeking strong labour and environment standards and corporate accountability provisions.     And, it is in these details that the devil lies. As explained previously by Business Standard, India and the US have contrasting views on digital commerce, labour, and environmental standards. In fact, India strongly resists putting such standards in any of the free-trade agreements it enters into.   Speaking to Business Standard, Biswajit Dhar, Professor of Economics, Jawaharlal Nehru University said IPEF intends to bring about regulatory coherence, which is similar to what was happening with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. It will impact digital economy, e-commerce, environment and labour regulations, but data portability is one of the key issues for India that remains unaddressed, he said. E-commerce rules are another key issue. India's labour standards have actually become weaker. Indian institutions lack the depth to address these regulatory issues. All the other countries in the IPEF have a certain amount of preparedness. India is an outlier in this regard, Dhar says. India will have to see what kind of sensitivity other members show towards its concerns. The nature of the framework itself could be a cause for concern. According to a brief written by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, the Biden administration has domestically portrayed the IPEF as an initiative that will enable the US t

Almost a million people in Ontario and Quebec were left without power this weekend as a severe thunderstorm rocked the area. A report from ****The North American Electric Reliability Corporation predicts widespread blackouts this summer. Joe Biden is launching a new trade agreement with 12 Indo-Pacific countries (and no Canada), in a bid to economically isolate China. The countries participating in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) make up 40% of the world's GDP. Apple is pushing its contract manufacturers to start making its product outside of China. The country's covid-zero policies have cost Apple, who make 90% of their products in China, $8 billion in Q1. The Peak Daily is produced by 306 Media Productions. Hosted by Alex Blumenstein and Jay Rosenthal.

The statement raises a question about the Pheu Thai Party's position as well as that of Thaksin Shinawatra towards efforts by the current US administration to take on China in the light of an unlikely alliance earlier in May between Red Shirt activist Jatuporn Promphan and royalist lawyer Nitithorn Lamlua when they protested at the US Embassy against US efforts to counter China in the Indo Pacific and Thailand's declared engagement, revealed on Friday by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce Jurin Laksanawisit, with the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), a new US economic pact with Asian countries which is to be unveiled in France next month. https://www.thaiexaminer.com/thai-news-foreigners/2022/05/23/former-pheu-thai-finance-minister-concerned-at-us-china-rift/ Joseph O' Connor reports from Bangkok.

President Joe Biden in Tokyo is launching a new Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) with 12 other countries in the region, who together are signing up as the first members of the economic partnership focusing on the Asia-Pacific. “This framework is a commitment to working with our close friends and partners in the region on challenges […]

Kia ora,Welcome to Tuesday's Economy Watch where we follow the economic events and trends that affect Aotearoa/New Zealand.I'm David Chaston and this is the International edition from Interest.co.nz.Today we lead with news that despite lingering recession worries, there are a set of 'comeback' moves on today. Equities are rising, bond yields are firm, currencies are strengthening and some data is expanding. All this gives a comeback vibe, even if none of them are completely convincing on their own.First in the US, the National Activity Index compiled by the Chicago Fed delivered a rise from sales, orders and jobs, and the gains were from personal consumption and housing. But these April gains were the sixth in the past seven months, so they have now established a rising trend.And the US Fed has been surveying households and has found most of them are pretty happy with their financial status. Self-reported financial well-being reached its highest level since the series began in 2013. In Q4-2021, almost 80% of adults reported either doing okay or living comfortably financially. Financial well-being also increased among all the racial and ethnic groups measured in the survey, with a particularly large increase among Hispanic adults. Parents were one group who reported large gains in financial well-being with three quarters saying they were doing at least okay financially, up +8 percentage points from 2020. These are results that challenge the accepted narrative that "most people are struggling". It seems that most American are not.Singapore reported its April inflation data late yesterday and it was highish but not excessive, coming in at 5.4% and unchanged from March.Hong Kong inflation was even tamer, reporting just +1.3% annualised inflation when 1.9% was expected.And Taiwanese April inflation came in at 3.4% with a small rise from March. Taiwan also said its April industrial production was up 7.3% and a gain that well exceeded its March result. Retail sales were up +4.7% and a growth rate slightly lower than for March.In China, more analysts are accepting that their Q2-2022 economic activity will be lower than in Q1. And that seems to include officials in Beijing who have announced new tax cuts and increased rebates, postponed social security payments and loan repayments, and they have rolled out new "investment projects" to support their economy. They say "the downward pressure on the economy continues to increase and it's very difficult for many market entities". These measures are said to be worth more than NZ$32 bln in this round of stimulus. Recall, they have also recently cut their loan prime rate that underpins mortgages.And this latest set of economic rescue measures seems to be being driven by Premier Li rather than President Xi.Meanwhile, the US has assembled 13 countries to be part of its Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) free-trade group, its follow-up to the Trump-rejected CPTPP (which includes neither China nor the US nor India), and its answer to the China-sponsored RCEP. New Zealand is 'in' the IPEF, as it is with the other two trade sets as well. India is part of the IPEF, but not the other two. The IPEF will encompass 40% of global GDP. The RCEP encompasses 30%, and the CPTPP covers about 14% - at least until China and Taiwan are accepted.And there was positive news out of Germany. Their Ifo Business Climate indicator rose unexpectedly to a 3-month high in May and April's reading was revised up. Views of both current conditions and future expectations improved. There are no signs of a recession at the moment in Germany, Europe's largest economy, though demand for industrial products has waned significantly and supply issues persist in industry and retail, according to the surveyers.And the head of the ECB confirmed it is likely to increase its key interest rate, currently negative, to zero by September and could continue raising rates after that. It is doing this because underlying economic conditions are improving.The UST 10yr yield will start today at 2.85% and up +6 bps. The price of gold is a little firmer today, up +US$5 since this time yesterday at US$1852/oz.And oil prices are marginally softer today and now just under US$109.50/bbl in the US, while the international Brent price is still just over US$110.50/bbl.The Kiwi dollar will open today back up another +½c against the US dollar, now at 64.6 USc. Against the Australian dollar we are little-changed at 91 AUc. Against the euro we are softish at 60.5 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today at 71.5 which is up +20 bps from this time yesterday.The bitcoin price has risen a mere 0.7% from this time yesterday and is now at US$30,131. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been moderate at +/- 2.7%.You can find links to the articles mentioned today in our show notes.And get more news affecting the economy in New Zealand from interest.co.nz.Kia ora. I'm David Chaston and we'll do this again tomorrow.

Korea24 – 2022.05.20. (Friday) News Briefing: US President Joe Biden has arrived in Seoul for his first trip to South Korea as President. He will be staying for three day and hold his first summit with President Yoon Suk Yeol on Saturday. (Tom MCCARTHY) In-Depth News Analysis: In President Yoon Suk Yeol’s first summit with US President Joe Biden there promises to be much on the agenda. North Korea’s nuclear threat and the widespread COVID-19 outbreak in the regime is set to be a key topic. They are also expected to discuss supply chain issues and economic security. The US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), which South Korea has now agreed to join, is also set to feature. To help us preview the summit in a special in-depth, Professor Kim Hyun-wook from the Korea National Diplomatic Academy joins us on the line. Korea Trending with Walter Lee: 1. Sri Lanka has defaulted on its debts for the first time, due to effects from the COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine and soaring inflation. (스리랑카, 건국 후 첫 디폴트 선언) 2. First Lady Kim Keon-hee is said to be considering making her first formal public appearance since President Yoon’s inauguration at a concert on Sunday. (김건희 여사, 靑에서 열리는 '열린 음악회' 관람 검토) 3. High jump star Woo Sang-hyeok received a hero’s welcome on his return to South Korea, after becoming the first Korean to capture a Diamond League title last Friday. ('2ｍ40 세계선수권 우승' 우상혁 금의환향) Movie Spotlight: In welcome news for the local film industry, a major Korean commercial release has finally hit cinemas. "The Roundup (범죄도시2)" starring Ma Dong-seok, aka Don Lee, was released on Wednesday. Film Critic Jason Bechervaise joins us to review this sequel to the 2017 sleeper-hit "The Outlaws (범죄도시)”. He will also review the US drama "Mass (매스)” starring Jason Isaacs. Next Week From Seoul with Richard Larkin: - A memorial service commemorating the 13th anniversary of the late former President Roh Moo-hyun’s death is taking place next Monday. - The Environment Ministry will announce more details next week on the new deposit refund scheme for single-use cups at franchise stores. - Football player Son Heung-min will look to become the first Asian player to win the Premier League Golden Boot at the final game of the season on Sunday.

Korea24 – 2022.05.18. (Wednesday) News Briefing: President Yoon Suk Yeol said the spirit of the May 18 pro-democracy movement serves as the cornerstone of national unity, as he attended a ceremony to mark the event in Gwangju. (Eunice KIM) In-Depth News Analysis: South Korea announced that it will be joining the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). President Yoon is set to virtually attend a summit launching the initiative next Tuesday. However, there are concerns that Seoul’s decision could take a toll on its relationship with Beijing. For analysis on this issue, we are joined on the line by International Trade & Diplomacy Professor Lee Hyo-young (이효영) of the Korea National Diplomatic Academy. Korea Trending with Walter Lee: 1. The suspect who opened fire at a Korean hair salon in Dallas’ Koreatown last week, wounding three women, reportedly harbored delusions about Asians. (미 댈러스 코리아타운 총격범 체포…"아시아계에 피해망상") 2. A leading consumer organization in Korea has found that 11 out of 25 popular meal kits inspected exceeded the recommended daily intake of sodium. (밀키트로 집 밥 해결?‥나트륨 범벅에 포화지방도) 3. Police booked actress Kim Sae-ron for allegedly driving under the influence on Wednesday morning. (김새론, 만취 음주운전 혐의 입건) Korea Book Club: Literary critic Barry Welsh brings us another work by author Keum Suk Gendry-Kim (김금숙), who won numerous international awards for her graphic novel ‘Grass(풀)’. Once again translated by Janet Hong, ‘The Waiting (기다림)’ follows a young novelist who is shocked to learn that her now elderly mother has family members she was separated from in North Korea, including her husband and a son. Morning Edition Preview with Richard Larkin: - In tomorrow’s Korea Herald, Park Ga-young explains how Bunhwangsa (분황사), a Korean Buddhist temple, will open in Bodh Gaya, India this week. - In tomorrow’s Korea Times, Kang Seung-woo explains how the Republic of Korea Air Force’s aerobatic team, known as the Black Eagles, will be performing in Europe for the first time in ten years.

On April 14, Elina and Greg sat down with the Trade Guys to discuss the Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). We are re-publishing the conversation with their permission. Don't forget to check out The Trade Guys- releasing every week on the CSIS network.

This week, the Trade Guys and their guests, Elina Noor from the Asia Society Policy Institute and Greg Poling from CSIS' Southeast Asia program, discuss the complexities of the Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF).

Two hundred members of the U.S. House of Representatives have shown their support for Taiwan's inclusion in the Indo–Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) that the Biden administration plans to launch early this year. https://ept.ms/3IRetb7 Taiwan, United States, Indo–Pacific Economic Framework, House of Representatives, participation, Indo–Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), economic engagement, vital region, Indo–Pacific, supply chains,