Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is the largest free trade agreement between the 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states - Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam and their 5 other Free Trade Agreement(FTA) partners - China, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. The 15 signatories of RCEP constitute about one-third of the world's population that is around 2.2 billion people and their GDPs jointly stand for $26.2 trillion that is 30% of the world's GDP making this trade-agreement the biggest trade bloc worldwide. The RCEP agreement was drafted nine years ago on 19 November 2011 at ASEAN Summit, Bali, Indonesia. On 15 November 2020, the proposed agreement was finally signed by its members in a virtual conference hosted by Vietnam during which the negotiations were going on since 2012. The RCEP will take effect for the signatories after 60 days from its ratification by at least 6 ASEAN and 3 non-ASEAN nations. Three of the four largest economies of Asia(China, Japan, and South Korea) are signing a free trade agreement among them for the first time to create an open and integrated market to facilitate effortless trade of goods, services, intellectual property, etc across the region. The agreement terminates 90% of the tariffs on imports for 20 years after it is acted. The trading agreement also comprises provisions for e-commerce, financial and professional services, investment, telecommunications, etc. India was also to be a member of RCEP but in November 2019, it evacuated itself from RCEP as the agreement will likely cause more harm than good to the nation. Prime Minister of India stated that India is withdrawing its support from RCEP as the current form of RCEP agreement does not fully reflect the basic spirit and it also does not confront India's outstanding issues and concerns satisfactorily. The regional agreement will shape economies and politics globally. Analysts predict that the RCEP agreement will boost the economy of its participants and in the Asia-Pacific region by binding their strengths in technologies, manufacturing, agriculture, and natural resources. Some analysts stated that RCEP will be more beneficial for China, Japan, and South Korea than their other partner countries. The trading agreement will also help the economies to get on track after the covid situation. The agreement expects to increase the global national income by $186 billion per annum by 2030.

The regional trade pact has been signed by 15 countries, except India. The clash at the Galway Valley and various economic threats have soured the relations between India and China. After the Covid 19 Pandemic and the insane border face-off between India and China, it is very obvious for India's objection to indulge in any kind of trade agreements with China as well as to be a part of RCEP. However, markets with the greatest potential for India’s exports are the United States of America, China. Also, there are far more reasons listed behind India's objection to joining RCEP. India declared last year in November that it would not join RCEP. The decision will promote Narendra Modi's Make in India initiative to grow and protect the country's economic interests and national priorities. The Ministry of External Affairs praised India for this move and asserted it as the right step. This would help India to resolve bilateral issues with other countries. Since the latter's proposal is not acceptable to many other countries, India will remain aloof of the trade agreement. The following reasons display why India rose objections with RCEP:- 1. India runs a high trade deficit with RCEP countries and was gaping for specific protections for its industries and farmers. To ensure that they are not sensing loss through imports, especially from China. India formerly staggered while participating in the negotiations begetting the fact that the China exports would grow again in India, which was undesirable for them. Indian analysts were unanimously opinionated that the current stance of the country is consistent with its prescription. India would consider dropping some of its current demands. At the same time, there is a scope for India to make concessions on other demands. 2. Base year for tariff: The RCEP proposed to reduce tariffs in all countries. Since negotiations started in 2013, it should be regarded as the base year on which tariffs have to be reduced. But India wants to change the base year to 2019 to charge higher customs duty which has been applied since 2014. The negotiations have been significantly stretched and India has increased the tariffs on sectors like textile, auto components, and electronic items, on an average increase of 13% to 17%. 3. The pervasive fear of India is that its domestic market would suffer a sense of loss in other markets, dominated by the exports of other countries. The faith of the Indian government dwindled in its product to be sold in the international markets as Chinese products have already dominated the area. The prime focus is on Chinese manufactured goods and dairy products, which are coming via other countries and flooding Indian markets, hence diminishing local interests.  4. Auto Trigger: India wanted an auto-trigger mechanism if there happens a sudden efflux in imports because of the trade pact. This mechanism would allow India to decide which product it doesn't want to offer to the same franchise. This step would protect domestic industry and curb the import surges of India once tariffs are brought down under the RCEP. The auto-trigger method would automatically increase imports tax once shipments cross a given threshold limit. India deliberately thinks of protecting its local industry if there comes a situation like a sudden increase in imports after the duties or levies are eliminated or reduced for RCEP members.  5. Proper rules for country of origin: India has shown its preface regarding the rules of origin in the RCEP trade agreements. India wants strict restrictions on Chinese goods from indirectly flooding the country. Rules of origin are the criteria needed to determine a product to the source country, based on which they get tariff concessions as well as get subjected to their duties. However, trade experts aforementioned that strict rules of origin with China will be of no benefit as Beijing evades its exports through India’s other neighbors while China circumvents its textiles from Bangladesh so they need to have the origin norms with Bangladesh.  6. Ratchet Obligations:- There are issues around ratchet obligations. India wants exemptions built into the ratchet obligations as part of the agreement. A ratchet obligation implies that a member country can't be raising tariffs once the agreement comes into existence. Under the Ratchet mechanism, India needs the freedom to increase taxes on products, while other countries say once reduced, tariffs should only go down.  7. Data Localisation:- There is also the issue of data localization under the RCEP deal. India has projected locating computing facilities inside the country for security purposes. India moved all countries to own the rights to protect data. The countries may prevent the transfer of information across borders. On data localization, India wants control over e-data flow, while the majority stands for the free flow of data, apart from national security purposes. India also expresses that the participating countries may prevent the cross-border transfer of information by electronic means, including personal information, only where it is supposed to be necessary to achieve a legitimate public policy objective security interests or national interests.  8. Opposition of RCEP within India:- The other key issues concern the base year. India has conjointly opposed the proposal of 2013  being presented as the base year for reducing tariffs rates, which effectively means that the member countries should slash import duties on merchandise to the level that existed in 2013. The RCEP proposes that 92 percent of India's goods would be tariffs free over the next 15 years. India is projected for 2019 as the base year since the import duties on several products such as textiles and electronic products have gone up within the last six years. Most countries wanted India to slash existing tariffs on up to 90 percent of all products.

When you find yourself stuck down in a hole the first rule is to stop digging, after more than three years of the Trump administration's go-it-alone "America first" strategy the United States now finds itself in a very deep hole indeed. Now President Trump asked his trade team to look at Re-joining that trans-pacific partnership now known as the (CPTPP) comprehensive progressive agreement for trans Pacific partnership.  The first huge action made by former President Donald Trump upon taking office in January 2017 was to approve the Trans-Pacific Partnership( TPP). The twelve nation trading agreement had been roughly assembled by leaders of nations and marketing ambassadors from nations constituting 40 percent of the world GDP. By leaving the agreement the US relinquishes strategic benefits as economic benefits. It gave up leadership of a group of 11 growing and friendly economics in one of the world's most dynamic economic regions. The city TPP agreement includes Australia, Canada, Japan, Newzealand, Peru, Mexico, Singapore, Chile, Brunei, and Vietnam discount over 13 % of the global gross domestic product and 500 million people. The agreement was signed on March 8 and will go into effect once 6 countries rectify it. The Peterson Institute of international economics estimates that CPTPP will produce a global income benefit of 147 billion dollars for its members. Nevertheless, a study also found that economic benefit would be much larger if the US were to remember. It is speculated that the US will lose $2 billion in export if it stays out of the current CPT compared to the gain of $131 billion if the US had remained in the agreement. CPTPP members set aside 22 provisions from the original draught after the US opted out; these related largely to protections of the intellectual property and investments the member countries agreed at those issues could be taken up again if the US re-engages. The president's instruction to consider every joining the CPTPP makes excellent economic and geostatic since the US is an economic tug of war with China over its economic and trade practices it would be a major repair. The Trump administration to enter a negotiation with the 11 other countries rather than to pursue its stated preference for a bilateral agreement.

India has a long history of protesting about trade agreements. Previously, it has practically without any help held up accordance at different World Trade Organization gatherings. Yet, it appeared to be quite a bit of that was changing in the previous decade or somewhere in the vicinity. Under its previous prime minister, Manmohan Singh, an understanding had started to develop in New Delhi that trade treaties aren't just about the mechanics of who gains and loses; they're about worldwide relations, and how to tie nations and economies closer together. Under Singh, India arranged many international alliances - incorporating one with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which he trusted would prompt a "dish Asian" understanding. In the past years, India’s Trade policy has shifted towards regionalism. Regional Trade Agreements (RTA) like Bangkok Agreement(1975), Asia Pacific Trade Agreement(APTA), India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ISFTA), Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) with ASEAN Nations can be seen in the picture. However, export to FTA countries or the rest of the world has not performed well, as imports have escalated. The trade deficit with ASEAN, Korea, and Japan widened post-FTAs. Economic Survey 2016-17 says, on importing side metals and exporting side textiles have had a bigger impact. In any case, he never prevailed upon his officials or even numerous inside his party. Furthermore, his successors appear to be far less excited about the potential outcomes of free trade. Partly that is a direct result of India's involvement in the ASEAN pact, which started in 2010. It exasperated the domestic business and farmers' associations. One of the commerce chambers asserted that, since 2010, India's export to ASEAN had deteriorated, while imports had developed by a third. Farmers in the south, then, have contended that they can't rival flavors and vegetable oil from Southeast Asia. The public authority neglected to confront these voices; it declared a "review" of existing trade deals almost immediately in Narendra Modi's term of office, and there was the solid proposal that new ones would be disapproved of—viably finishing Singh's system and policies of economic integration. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with Association Of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN ) signed in 2010, had increased India’s trade to three-fold from $21 billion in 2005-06 to $96.7 billion in 2018-19. But from India’s point of view, ASEAN along with partner countries of RCEP is critical. India account’s for 27% of overall trade with RCEP. But India exports only 15% and imports 35% with them. Trade balance with ASEAN FTA has worsened in thirteen out of twenty-one sectors, specified by the United Nation’s consonant system of product classification. Trade surplus sectors have additionally shown solely marginal improvement. Overall, it concluded that India’s quality of trade has not improved underneath the ASEAN-India Free Trade Area (AIFTA). India’s tariff rates declined for Japan-FTA from 11.4% to 7.5% and for Korean-FTA declined from 11.1% to 8.3%. India’s trade deficit with the bloc has risen from $9 billion in the financial year 2005-06 to $83 billion in the Financial Year 2017-18. India has a trade deficit with as many as 11 RCEP countries and China is responsible for almost half of India’s trade deficit. China has grown  13% imports, while India has grown 26% of imports from China since 2004. This led to a widening gap of trade deficit. Since 2006, exports to RTA partners have increased by 13% which is almost the same trend as non-partner countries. This trade asymmetry is mainly compounded by the nature of goods flow. India exports primary materials such as Iron ore, Cotton, and minerals whereas imports a wide variety of sophisticated products higher up in the value chain. India’s trade basket is not much diversified as compared to other Asian countries. Also, the utilization rate of RTAs by exporters of India is only between 5 -25%. This had implications for the domestic trade as well. Recently, Farmers from South India have argued that they can’t contend with spices and vegetable oil from Southeast Asian countries.