Unfortunately, it was hard to see all that much progress in the blizzard of words that piled up in several days of negotiations that did more to suggest and highlight problems and differences than to do much about them.
The frustrations were most evident on Saturday and Sunday in Yokohama, where Obama wound up his travels at the APEC summit. By the time the meeting ended, skepticism if not cynicism had become the motif of the mission after reading statements that were skillfully crafted to say a lot but actually did not say all that much.
The final APEC statement was a masterpiece of obfuscation in which the group assured the few who might still be interested of its commitment "to maintaining open markets and fighting protectionism". Moreover, it said: "We reaffirm our common resolve to support the recovery in a collaborative and coordinated way."
Then there was China's President Hu Jintao, as skilled as anyone at the table in parrying demands for China to place a realistic value on its currency and stop dumping cheap goods on world markets, notably the United States.
Unlike Obama, who specifically cited China's habit of depreciating the value of its currency by large infusions of funds, Hu in Yokohama said simply that the danger of protection was rising "notably" around the region. He did not have to name the United States as the villain though lesser officials have not hesitated to do so.
And, in a bow to all the talk about "global imbalances", a code term for inequitable exchange rates, Hu said that the recovery from economic crisis had not been "firmly established". Nor, he said, was it "balanced".
By the time Obama and Hu got to confront one another across the table yet again at APEC, the day after the windup of the Group of 20 (G-20) summit in Seoul, Obama had already lost the major battles of the whole trip. It was here that his Asian odyssey reached a crescendo of excitement, and then disappointment.
First there was the disappointment of the failure to come to terms on a South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement that was completed in the waning months of the presidency of George W. Bush but still needs ratification by the U.S. Congress.
U.S. Special Trade Representative Ron Kirk said after a long lunch discussion between Obama and South Korea's President Lee Myung-Bak that U.S. officials still were not happy about differences over the huge disparity in market access for the American motor vehicle industry. "It became apparent that we weren't going to resolve all of these in the remaining hours," he said, so Obama and Lee "wisely made the decision" to go on with the talks over the coming weeks.
Korean experts were shocked, as were many foreign observers. "It's a big disappointment we didn't get the FTA," said Jang Ha-sung, dean of business at Korea University. "Korea has done much for its own share."
Jang said he had "no idea" on what issues the deal was stuck, and "they're not revealing" the reasons, but U.S. manufacturers cite a long list of standards, requirements and taxes that discourage U.S. imports.
As for the G-20 summit, Jang sympathized with the Chinese view. While Obama and others say China's central bank is intervening to maintain the Chinese yuan at an artificially low rate, he noted that the dollar is going down in value partly as a result of the Federal Reserve Bank's decision to buy $600 billion in Treasury bonds over the next seven months.
"Overall, the hard currency issue has surfaced" at the summit, he said, but "the U.S. view might be a problem."
Lee Chang-Choon, a former Korean ambassador to a number of countries, was still more critical. "Obama has been losing clout" since the congressional elections in which the Republicans won an overwhelming majority in the House of Representatives. "He is counting down to his last days."
Lee laughed at plans by his president to ballyhoo the summit as a great event in modern Korean history. "The Lee government is making a continued press campaign," he said. "They are so eager to celebrate the success of G-20. We are living in a very strange period."
Chosun Ilbo, Korea's biggest-selling newspaper, adopted a skeptical view as well. "Concrete agreements have been put off," said the paper. "For Korea as the host, the results leave something to be desired."
The paper, in an editorial, questioned the G-20's real future. "It remains to be seen whether the G-20 will truly become the world's top economic decision-making body," it said, "because consensus about the economic crisis and a sense of urgency among G-20 countries are diminishing."
While no one was paying much attention, the deliberations of the APEC leaders did bring new initials to the fore.
Look out for FTAAP. That stands for "Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific", though how to pronounce it as one word will be a problem. F-TAP, as someone noted, has a ring about it that won't sound great on the evening news.
The idea, as APEC potentates all agreed, was to have one vast "free trade area" that will unite the eastern with the western rims of the Pacific. Think of it. Chile and Mexico and El Salvador and Honduras, not to mention the U.S. and Canada, all enjoying free trade with China and Japan and India and points in between.
"Now is the time for APEC to translate FTAAP from as aspirational to a more concrete vision," they decided in Yokohama. "We instruct APEC to take concrete steps toward realization of an FTAAP."
It might be a few years, or decades, too soon to expect that one to get very far, but leaders in Yokohama did go home with one comforting thought. Most of them privately agreed that the Doha round of World Trade Organization negotiations is dead — that is, the grand illusion of breaking down trade barriers that everyone meeting at Doha nine years ago hoped to turn into reality will not do so.
As an Australian banker on the APEC Business Advisory Council remarked, "We've moved past Doha."
But to where? Here's another set of initials mooted at Yokohama — TPP for Trans-Pacific Partnership. That was one that even President Lee, basking in the glory of having hosted G-20, could endorse. Its future was not clear, he said, but South Korea might just sign on.
Could TPP serve as a substitute for KORUS — the Korea-U.S. free trade pact — and perhaps a device for curing global imbalances?
Optimism was not exactly rife, but be prepared to hear those initials a lot in the next few years of "currency wars" — a term that no self-respecting leader uses but which in reality may continue to rage unabated after all the talking is done.
ShareThis
