The main result of the APEC summit in Beijing was the signing of a declaration and map for formation of a free trade zone in the Asia-Pacific Region. The idea of creating a free trade zone was discussed at several summits and reached during China’s chairmanship.
Natalya Stapran, the director of the Russian Center of Studies of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, a docent of the subdepartment for Oriental studies at MGIMO, said that the road map to create the Asian free trade zone stipulated mechanisms of its formation. “Surely, in 2015, the integral regional partnership plan, the primary initiator of which was Japan, will come to the forefront. Because China has taken the initiative and continued it on the ASEAN+6 platform too,” reminds Stapran. “We see that the Chinese side managed to draw attention again to some global mechanism that can potentially untie the bowl of spaghetti, the diversity of existing treaties, which contradict, compete with each other, and draw attention again to what is needed within the framework of the APEC,” the docent assumes.
She expressed confidence that a clear common mechanism is needed: “In this regard, Russia benefits from the mechanism very much. Because we have just started the path of integration. And the openness and the first stage in the Asian free trade zone is very comfortable for us, because we have an opportunity to join it and act according to our circumstances, I mean the existence of the Eurasian Economic Union.”
Alexander Fedorovsky, the head of the RAS IMEMO sector of common problems of the Asia-Pacific Region, believes that China’s achievement was an accumulation of a common opinion of APEC members and stimulation of the free trade zone formation: “Concerning Russia, the problem we had was that we were not members of the World Trade Organization, and it was a serious obstacle for us in signing regional free trade treaties. Now, we have taken the path of signing such agreements, searching for a model of participation on the bilateral and non-bilateral levels. The first such project may be signed with Vietnam. It is being discussed. It is important for us to understand and feel the main trade forming in the region to focus our integration efforts, taking account of the mega goal of forming a common free trade zone. I think Russian-Chinese collaboration within the framework of the APEC is very important for Russia joining the integration process in this regard,” said Alexander Fedorovsky.
He reminds that skeptics have been talking for many years about the inability of the APEC to solve international problems in the region, problems of development of integration processes: “Nonetheless, we see that such a format of the forum allows for a gradual resolution of very complicated problems of strengthening integration processes. We see that there is certain succession in the policy of APEC states.”
Speaking about the Far East as the region closest to the partners of the APEC, Alexander Fedorovsky noted that private business should activate and the government, state corporations and private business in the Far East should be coordinated in regional integration processes. Investment exchanges need stimulation, in his opinion: “Because we are not actively participating in the chains of added value. Now traditional trade is in fact being substituted by industrial cooperation, innovative cooperation. New reforms need developing when the goal of developing the Far East is being set. The new reforms should be based on the activity of private business, the state and our partners from the Asia-Pacific Region.”
What agreements leaders of Asia-Pacific states made in BeijingThe main result of the APEC summit in Beijing was the signing of a declaration and map for formation of a free trade zone in the Asia-Pacific Region. The idea of creating a free trade zone was discussed at several summits and reached during China’s chairmanship.Natalya Stapran, the director of the Russian Center of Studies of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, a docent of the subdepartment for Oriental studies at MGIMO, said that the road map to create the Asian free trade zone stipulated mechanisms of its formation. “Surely, in 2015, the integral regional partnership plan, the primary initiator of which was Japan, will come to the forefront. Because China has taken the initiative and continued it on the ASEAN+6 platform too,” reminds Stapran. “We see that the Chinese side managed to draw attention again to some global mechanism that can potentially untie the bowl of spaghetti, the diversity of existing treaties, which contradict, compete with each other, and draw attention again to what is needed within the framework of the APEC,” the docent assumes.She expressed confidence that a clear common mechanism is needed: “In this regard, Russia benefits from the mechanism very much. Because we have just started the path of integration. And the openness and the first stage in the Asian free trade zone is very comfortable for us, because we have an opportunity to join it and act according to our circumstances, I mean the existence of the Eurasian Economic Union.”Alexander Fedorovsky, the head of the RAS IMEMO sector of common problems of the Asia-Pacific Region, believes that China’s achievement was an accumulation of a common opinion of APEC members and stimulation of the free trade zone formation: “Concerning Russia, the problem we had was that we were not members of the World Trade Organization, and it was a serious obstacle for us in signing regional free trade treaties. Now, we have taken the path of signing such agreements, searching for a model of participation on the bilateral and non-bilateral levels. The first such project may be signed with Vietnam. It is being discussed. It is important for us to understand and feel the main trade forming in the region to focus our integration efforts, taking account of the mega goal of forming a common free trade zone. I think Russian-Chinese collaboration within the framework of the APEC is very important for Russia joining the integration process in this regard,” said Alexander Fedorovsky.He reminds that skeptics have been talking for many years about the inability of the APEC to solve international problems in the region, problems of development of integration processes: “Nonetheless, we see that such a format of the forum allows for a gradual resolution of very complicated problems of strengthening integration processes. We see that there is certain succession in the policy of APEC states.”Speaking about the Far East as the region closest to the partners of the APEC, Alexander Fedorovsky noted that private business should activate and the government, state corporations and private business in the Far East should be coordinated in regional integration processes. Investment exchanges need stimulation, in his opinion: “Because we are not actively participating in the chains of added value. Now traditional trade is in fact being substituted by industrial cooperation, innovative cooperation. New reforms need developing when the goal of developing the Far East is being set. The new reforms should be based on the activity of private business, the state and our partners from the Asia-Pacific Regio
