中国政府于9月16日正式宣布申请加入《全面与进步跨太平洋伙伴关系协议》（CPTPP），对此国际社会反应不一，界限分明。在CPTPP成员国中，新加坡、马来西亚、越南、墨西哥和智利明确表示欢迎，日本、澳大利亚和加拿大则表示“质疑”，态度甚为消极。美国对中国申请加入CPTPP反应至为强烈，许多鹰派政要和专家高调指责中国“没资格”。中国宣布申请加入CPTPP仅仅六天后，台湾当局也宣布申请加入CPTPP，美国和日本第一时间表示欢迎。各方反应证明，中国政府的这一举措不仅十分必要，而且非常及时。

CPTPP前身是奥巴马政府发起的《跨太平洋伙伴关系协议》（TPP），于2016年2月签署，意欲在经济层面遏制中国。由于2017年特朗普政府决定退出，TPP并未生效。2018年3月，TPP其他11个谈判国经重新谈判，达成新协议CPTPP。该协议删除了许多由美国提出而其他国家反对的条款，如提升跨国公司公司起诉各成员国政府的能力。事实上，TPP演变为CPTPP，本身也是美国遏制中国策略的一次失败。

目前，CPTPP在墨西哥、日本、新加坡、新西兰、加拿大、澳大利亚和越南这七个成员国之间生效，文莱、智利、马来西亚和秘鲁等四国尚待国内立法机构批准。按CPTPP委员会规定的程序，新申请加入的国家需积极主动地与CPTPP各成员国接触，磋商协调，解决双边关切的问题。英国于今年年初正式申请加入，现已与CPTPP所有成员达成双边协议，距正式加入只一步之遥。韩国政府也表示准备申请加入，预计难度不大。相比之下，中国面临的阻力和障碍很多，加上台湾因素干扰，预计进程较为曲折漫长。

中国决定申请加入CPTPP，必然经过深思熟虑和审慎研究，所看重的绝非仅仅谋求尽快成为其成员。拜登政府上台后，沿袭了特朗普政府的策略，加紧在亚洲进行遏制中国的战略布局。由于国内经济竞争力衰落，政治危机重重，美国已无法为亚洲各国提供更多市场空间，因而也无意再加入CPTPP，参与亚太地区经济整合。美国虽不断向亚洲投入大量军事、政治和外交资源，强化对盟友的控制，构建对中国的包围圈，并试图通过“代理人”挑起与中国的军事冲突，但亚洲各国都很清楚，美国目前所做的一切，只会加剧地区安全风险和政治动荡，并不能带来亚洲各国真正需要的经济增长。

中国则一直在大力参与和推动亚太地区国际经济整合潮流，与周边多个国家积极磋商，签署自由贸易协议，努力推进“中日韩自由贸易区”，尤其成功促成2020年年底《区域全面经济伙伴关系协议》（RCEP）的缔结，为亚太地区未来几十年自由贸易经济圈提供了新的制度框架。事实上，由中国、日本、韩国、澳大利亚、新西兰及东盟十国共同参加的RCEP协议，已经囊括了CPTPP的绝大部分成员。

中国人口众多、市场广阔，陆上与俄罗斯、中亚、南亚、东南亚众多国家相连，并拥有连接各大洋的主要海上运输通道，是亚洲和平与发展的重心和基石。中国通过申请加入CPTPP，可以更深入地与亚洲及周边各国进行磋商，加深相互理解，达成共识。中国在更高水平上开放市场，势必有利于推进与各国间的经贸合作，维护亚洲和平与稳定。

德国19世纪社会学家拉采尔认为，人类谋取社会财富的手段可以归结为两种，一种是经济手段，另一种是政治手段。经济手段主要采取生产和交换方式，相对平等和公平。政治手段主要通过武力和以武力为基础的权力进行，包括欺诈、劫掠和其他各种不平等的强制性交易。人类社会以往的历史，可以归结为经济手段不断战胜政治手段的斗争历史，政治手段虽然一直存在，但总的趋势是政治服从经济。

近年来中美之间矛盾和冲突的发展，再一次体现了拉采尔的这一非凡洞见。中国寻求经济合作，而美国若只有政治，虽然强势，但实际上是行不通的，也是不可持久的。

The Chinese government announced on Sept. 16 its formal application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP. The response in the international community has been mixed. Among CPTPP members, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, Mexico and Chile warmly welcomed the application, while Japan, Australia and Canada expressed skepticism and a negative attitude. The U.S. reacted strongly, with many hawkish politicians and experts loudly accusing China of being “unqualified.”Just six days after the announcement, Taiwan authorities also filed an application, which was immediately welcomed by both the U.S. and Japan. These developments seem to support the necessity and timeliness of Beijing's move.

The CPTPP, previously known as the TPP, was initiated by the Obama administration to contain China economically. It was signed in February 2016. The TPP did not take effect because of the Trump administration's decision to withdraw in 2017, and in March 2018, the other 11 economies participating in TPP negotiations reached a new agreement. The CPTPP removes many of the provisions proposed by the U.S. and opposed by other countries, including one allowing multinational corporations to sue member governments. The evolution of the TPP into the CPTPP has itself been a failure of the U.S. strategy to contain China.

The agreement is now in force among seven member countries: Mexico, Japan, Singapore, New Zealand, Canada, Australia and Vietnam. Brunei, Chile, Malaysia and Peru are waiting for approval by their respective legislatures. Under the procedures laid down by the CPTPP commission, new applicants are required to proactively have consultations with each party to address questions or concerns in areas of interest.Britain formally applied for membership at the beginning of this year and has now reached an agreement with every CPTPP member, just one step away from full membership, and the Republic of Korea has announced a plan to apply for membership, which is expected to be a relatively easy process. By contrast, since China faces resistance and obstacles, complicated by the Taiwan factor, the accession process is expected to be tortuous and long.

Yet the Chinese decision was well thought out, and the country's objective is by no means merely to become a member of the CPTPP as soon as possible.The Biden administration in the U.S. has carried on Trump's strategies and stepped up strategic moves in Asia to contain China. But with its declining economic competitiveness and political crises at home, the U.S. has been unable to provide more market space for Asian countries and has no intention of joining the CPTPP again for the international economic integration process in the Asia-Pacific region.The U.S. continues to invest substantial military, political and diplomatic resources in Asia to strengthen its control over its allies, build up its encirclement of China and try to provoke, through proxies, military conflicts with China. Asian countries, however, are well aware that the American moves are exacerbating regional security risks and creating political instability instead of delivering the economic growth truly needed in the region.

On the other hand, China has been stepping up its participation in, and promotion of, the international economic integration of the Asia Pacific region. It has actively consulted and signed free trade agreements with various neighboring countries and pushed for the China-Japan-ROK Free Trade Area. It also successfully pushed for the conclusion at the end of last year of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement (RCEP), which provides a new institutional framework for an Asia Pacific free trade economic circle in the coming decades. In fact, the RCEP agreement, signed by China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and all 10 ASEAN members, already includes most of the CPTPP members.

China has a large population and a vast market. It is connected by land with Russia and many other countries in Central, South and Southeast Asia and has maritime transportation lanes linking different oceans. The country is the focus and cornerstone of peace and development in Asia. By applying to join the CPTPP, China is in a better position to conduct in-depth consultations with Asian and neighboring countries and foster common understandings. It must open up its market further, which will be conducive to promoting economic and trade cooperation with other countries and maintaining peace and stability in Asia.

Friedrich Ratzel, a 19th-century German sociologist, made an important point about the struggle for prosperity. In his view, humans seek prosperity and security on two tracks: economic and political. The former relies on production and exchanges and is relatively equal and fair. The latter primarily focuses on force and power, including fraud, pillage and various other unequal coercive transactions. The history of humanity is marked by many victories of economic means over political ones. Although political means have always been there, the general trend is that politics will be subordinate to economics.

Ratzel's remarkable insight has proved true again in the development of tensions and conflicts between China and the United States in recent years. China seeks economic cooperation while the U.S. has only politics, which is very pushy but not especially workable nor durable.