特朗普作为候任美国总统的第一个重磅炸弹无异于宣布退出TPP（跨太平洋伙伴关系协议），这在全球范围内产生了一系列的连锁反应。日本、澳大利亚、马来西亚等国纷纷表示，失去美国的TPP已经没有了实际意义。TPP是否已经宣告死亡，未来美国对外经济政策又将走向何方，这的确是影响世界经济变局的关键变量之一。

毋庸置疑，当前全球贸易格局正处于前所未有的新调整时期，在这个过程中发生的冲突与博弈正是这一变化的突出表现。根本而言，商品、资本和人员的自由流动是全球化繁荣的基础，阻碍这种要素的自由流动无异于是对全球化的巨大挑战。这也是人们认为竞选时宣扬修筑边境墙、撕毁贸易条约、大幅提高关税、高举贸易保护主义大旗的特朗普上台给全球带来的风险所在。

其实，特朗普对TPP的反对在西方国家确实有比较深厚的民意基础和现实基础。从发达经济体和成熟工业化国家的角度看，比较有代表性的观点认为，经济全球化以来，在发达经济体内部逐渐失去竞争优势的产业不断向国外转移，造成本国产业空心化趋势。这些都使得以传统农业和传统制造业为代表的旧经济部门利益受损，部门内出现利润下滑和失业率增加。

由此，在这轮去全球化甚至是反全球化思潮的影响下，全球贸易投资保护主义日渐增强。全球贸易预警组织（Global Trade Alert）的统计数据显示，2010年来，发达国家实施贸易保护措施（包括反倾销条例、原产地规则、进口配额制、出口配额制、进口许可证制、进口押金制、外汇管制、最低限价制和更严格的技术、卫生、检验标准等多种形式）数量激增，特别是美国，2015年实施贸易保护措施624项，为2009年的九倍。其中，2015年美国采取了90项贸易歧视措施，位居各国之首，成为限制贸易自由化最激进的国家，这对全球经济也是一种非常大的伤害。

2008年国际金融危机以来，全球贸易增长基本上减少了一半，从每年6.7%降至3%左右。更重要的是，全球贸易增长持续滞后于全球GDP增长。这意味着增长中的贸易强度正在下降，因此，全球经济正变得越来越背离全球化。

事实上，高调宣布退出TPP，不代表特朗普时代的美国会回到WTO框架内解决问题。本质而言，作为有可能成为史上最大地区贸易协议的TPP，它之于美国的意义在于如何在亚太地区展示领导地位，以及如何在未来全球贸易规则体系中确立新的主导权。因此，即便是持有极度保守主义思想的特朗普也不会轻易放弃对亚太乃至全球的领导权。

TPP未来走向到底如何仍是个未知命题，或许改头换面，或许另起炉灶。正如特朗普所强调的，“关于贸易，我将签发一项通告撤出TPP，取而代之的是，我将谈判一些公平的双边贸易协定，把就业岗位和产业重新拉回美国本土”。可见，未来无论TPP的走向如何，可以肯定的是全球贸易保护主义都可能进入加快发展期，而美国未来不排除在追求本土利益最大化情况下以特朗普重新定义的方式实施另一种形式的区域贸易协定，或是寻求双边协定。

不过这些都并不妨碍区域全面经济伙伴关系（RCEP）正在成为推动亚太区域合作的一个重要平台。RCEP由东盟10国发起，邀请中国、日本、韩国、澳大利亚、新西兰、印度共同参加（“10+6”）。是旨在通过削减关税及非关税壁垒，建立16国统一市场的自由贸易协定。若RCEP谈成，将涵盖约35亿人口，占全球人口的49%，GDP总和将达23万亿美元，占全球的28%，所涵盖区域也将成为世界最大的自贸区。RCEP覆盖的人口规模和外贸总额高于TPP，而TPP相关协议的要求要高于RCEP。

一直以来，在促进贸易全球化、自由化立场上，中国始终坚持以多边贸易为主，区域贸易安排为辅的立场，尤其强调要支持多边贸易体制，要把促进贸易和投资自由化、便利化放在更加突出的位置，重振贸易和投资活力。特别是中国积极推动亚太自贸区（FTAPP）作为推进亚太区域贸易整合的重要途径，正受到越来越大范围的认同。根据澳大利亚、中国、韩国、新西兰四国学者的联合研究报告，在货物贸易自由化、货物贸易自由化+贸易便利化、取消关税+贸易便利化+服务贸易自由化三种情况下，FTAAP将使APEC经济体的GDP分别增加0.55%、2.26%和2.33%。对中国而言，FTAAP所带来的收益是RCEP的2.7倍。对美国而言，FTAAP所带来的收益是TPP的2.5倍。因此，无论是对整个亚太，还是对国家，FTAPP都可能创造出更大的经济和社会福利。

刚刚在秘鲁结束的APEC部长和领导人会议也决定，APEC经济体将在2020年底审议“目前的路径”如何为帮助实现FTAAP作出贡献。可见，在TPP、TTIP（跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴协议）可能暂时搁置的情况下，向高标准贸易规则看齐，加快推进致力于建立国际贸易新规则和下一代贸易方式的FTAPP，将是未来努力和选择的方向。

The first blockbuster by President-elect Donald Trump is his announcement of intent to withdraw from the TPP “from day one”, setting off a chain reaction across the world. Japan, Australia and Malaysia all indicated that a TPP without the U.S. would be insignificant. Whether the TPP is pronounced dead and where US foreign policy will go in the future are key variables affecting global economic change.

Undoubtedly, the global trade pattern is now undergoing an unprecedented adjustment, featuring conflicts and games. Fundamentally, the free movement of commodities, capital and humans is the basis of global prosperity. Any barrier to the free movement of these elements is a huge challenge to globalization. Therefore, Trump's presidency is considered to be a source of global risk because he advocated building a wall along the southern U.S. border, tearing up the NAFTA, substantially increasing tariffs and holding high the banner of protectionism in his campaign.

Trump's opposition to the TPP reflects profound public opinion and the reality in the Western countries. The developed economies and the mature industrial countries hold a collective view that since globalization, the industries that gradually lost competitiveness in the developed economies have kept shifting to the outside world, causing a hollowing out of the domestic industries. All this hurts the interests of the “old economic sectors” based on traditional agriculture and manufacturing with their profits down and unemployment up.

So, in this round of de-globalization and even thoughts of anti-globalization, trade protectionism is getting stronger around the globe. According to Global Trade Alert statistics, since 2010 the number of trade protection measures implemented by the developed countries has surged (including anti-dumping regulations, rules of origin, import quota system, export quota system, import license system, import deposit system, exchange control, minimum price, tougher standards in technology, hygiene, inspection and so on). The US, in particular, put forward 624 trade protection measures in 2015, nine times as many as in 2009. Among them, 90 trade discrimination measures were taken in 2015, the highest number in the world, making the US the most radical country in restricting trade liberalization. It is also very harmful to the global economy.

Since the world financial crisis in 2008, world trade growth has basically declined by half----down from the annual 6.7% to around 3%. What's more, world trade growth continuously lags behind world GDP growth, indicating that the increased trade strength is weakening. Thus the global economy is getting away from “globalization”.

Actually, the high-profile announcement of abandoning the TPP does not mean that the US in the Trump era will return to the WTO to resolve issues within its framework. With the possibility of being the largest regional trade agreement in history, the TPP is significant to the US as it seeks to demonstrate its leadership in the Asia-Pacific region and renew its leading power in the future global trade rules. Therefore, even if he takes an extremely conservative position, Trump will not easily give up US leadership in the Asia-Pacific region and in the world.

Where the TPP will go in the future is still unknown. It may change or negotiations may start all over again. Just as Trump stressed:” I will issue a formal notification the United States is withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Instead, we will negotiate, fair, bilateral trade deals that bring jobs and industry back onto American shore." Evidently, no matter TPP's fate, global trade protectionism will surely enter a period of fast growth. It cannot be ruled out that in the future, the US would pursue another form of regional trade agreement redefined by Trump or seek bilateral agreements in pursuit of maximum domestic interests.

However, all this will not hinder the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) as an important platform to promote the regional cooperation. The RCEP was initiated by ASEAN which invited China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and India to join in(“10+6”). It would set up a trade liberalization agreement of a common market within 16 countries through cutting down tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Once the RCEP is reached, it will cover a population of 3.5 billion (49% of the world population), GDP will total $23 trillion (28% of the world GDP), and the covered region will become the world's largest free-trade area. The population and the total trade covered by the RCEP are higher than those by the TPP, thoughthe TPP agreement has a higher demand than the RCEP.

In promoting trade globalization and trade liberalization, China has always insisted on taking multilateral trade as the primary goal and the regional trade arrangement as the secondary. China has especially emphasized supporting multilateral trade system, has given higher priority to improving trade and investment liberalization and facilitation, and has revived the vitality of trade and investment. In particular, China's active promotion of the FTAAP as an important way to push forward Asia-Pacific regional trade integration has also gained support by more countries. Joint research by Australia, China, South Korea and New Zealand reports that under the three conditions of free trade in goods — free trade in goods plus in trade facilitation, tariff elimination plus trade facilitation and plus free trade in service — the FTAAP will raise the GDP of the APEC economies by 0.55%, 2.26% and 2.33% respectively. The benefit from the FTAAP will be 2.7 times as high as that from the RCEP for China and 2.5 times as high as that from the RCEP for the US. So, whether for the entire Asia-Pacific region or for each member country, the FTAAP can create greater economic and social welfare.

Ministers and leaders at the just concluded APEC conference in Peru decided that, at the end of 2020, the APEC economies would discuss how “the current path” could help the FTAAP make a contribution. Clearly, under the circumstance that the TPP and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) may be shelved for the time being, there is opportunity to accelerate the FTAAP, working in line with high-standard trade rules, committing to new international trade rules and basing the FTAAP on the next trade mode.