As of October 9, 2024, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF), initiated by US President Joe Biden, is facing increasing scrutiny and skepticism regarding its effectiveness and relevance in the global trade landscape. Critics argue that after 2.5 years, IPEF has not provided substantial market access compared to traditional free trade agreements. Instead, it has focused on establishing standards across four main pillars: fair trade, supply chain resilience, infrastructure and clean energy, and tax and anti-corruption measures. [aa027432]
The fragmented nature of IPEF negotiations and the lack of robust Congressional support have raised concerns among Asia-Pacific nations, which are still seeking improved access to the US market following the withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) under the Trump administration. Many countries view IPEF's offerings as modest, which could undermine the US's reputation in the region, especially when compared to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). [aa027432]
Additionally, the exclusion of Taiwan from IPEF discussions has introduced strategic ambiguity, further complicating the framework's perceived effectiveness. With upcoming US elections on the horizon, there are fears that bipartisan protectionist sentiments could further jeopardize IPEF's future and hinder any potential for meaningful trade agreements. This situation reflects a broader trend of a fading approach to international engagement by the US, challenging the previous frameworks that aimed for more comprehensive trade relationships. [aa027432]
In light of these developments, India's recent shift towards accepting labor rights provisions in IPEF agreements may be seen as an attempt to enhance its standing within the framework. However, the overall skepticism surrounding IPEF raises questions about whether such efforts will yield significant benefits in a landscape marked by protectionism and fragmented negotiations. [ecb44145]