New partnerships hint at reforming the World Trade Organization and defending against a possible US-China pact. If an EU–CPTPP alliance is formed, it would account for 30% of the world’s GDP, with a market of over one billion people
The ace up the sleeve is called—CPTPP. As one of its final moves, the European Union has pulled this card in its trade poker game with U.S. President Donald Trump, which is expected to conclude on July 9.
CPTPP stands for The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, established on December 30, 2018, covering free trade among 12 countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam. It is the second-largest economic integration agreement involving Asian countries (the largest being the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership – RCEP, which includes ASEAN countries along with Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea).
The ace was laid on the table recently by Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, during a summit of EU leaders in Brussels. She introduced it as an initiative to establish structured trade cooperation between the EU and Asian countries—potentially laying the groundwork for an alternative to the paralyzed World Trade Organization (WTO). EU leaders discussed reforming the WTO’s institutional framework, including its stalled dispute resolution mechanisms, to improve the current global trade landscape. Von der Leyen presented different trade agreement options (one was signed late last year with the South American Mercosur alliance).
Some see the announcement of the CPTPP agreement as a European bluff—a fake ace in the negotiations with Trump. But most serious analysts interpret it as a possible strategic move to diversify European partnerships and begin reshaping the global trade order. “The EU must take a leading role in guiding this initiative. We can think of this as the beginning of redesigning the WTO—understanding, of course, what needs to be positively reformed,” von der Leyen said, emphasizing the importance of demonstrating that rule-based free trade is still viable with a large group of interested partners.
Ursula von der Leyen’s initiative is neither new nor original. Finland and Sweden proposed in April 2024 that the EU deepen ties with the Asia-Pacific region, including the CPTPP, alongside the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and the RCEP. That proposal sat dormant until Donald Trump began his second term and reentered global trade like a bull in a china shop. After Trump announced a new U.S. tariff policy on “Liberation Day,” the EU and CPTPP countries revived the long-forgotten plan for a strategic partnership—loudly supported by Canada, New Zealand, and Singapore, and quietly by Japan.
In the wake of Trump’s disruption of the global trade order and China’s intensified state-led mercantilism, ideas for new regional partnerships are re-emerging. The EU initiated a plan to create a structured trade partnership with the 12 CPTPP member states.
Then, on May 13, Sweden proposed that the EU join the CPTPP to create the world’s largest free trade zone and prevent the harmful spread of Trump’s tariff policies. The Brussels summit of EU leaders revealed a growing belief that a systemic response to Trump’s tariffs is necessary—hence the search for new trade agreements with global partners. Ursula von der Leyen’s idea, intentionally or not, remains somewhat undefined. Though described with terms like “initiative,” “alternative,” “catalyst,” “closer ties,” and “structured cooperation,” two connected possibilities are emerging: deeper ties between the EU and CPTPP and a potential bid for EU membership in CPTPP (as the UK recently did).
Whatever the final form, this trade pact would represent an alliance of two powerful global economic players. CPTPP economies make up about 15% of global economic output, with a GDP of $15.4 trillion and over 580 million people. It’s fair to say CPTPP is one of the largest and most dynamic free trade zones in the world, rapidly becoming a key economic center of gravity. Meanwhile, the EU has 488 million people and an annual GDP of $19 trillion, about 18% of global GDP.
Why CPTPP?
The Asia-Pacific region is becoming one of the main global arenas for shaping new economic rules and strategic competition management. If the EU wants to remain a global economic player, it must be present in this region.
Notably, the EU already has bilateral free trade agreements with eight of the 12 CPTPP members, which could help accelerate accession talks.
Lisa McAuley, Executive Director of the Global Trade Professionals Alliance (GTPA), argues that the CPTPP, as a structured (but not full) alliance, offers a flexible rules-based platform that may be more adaptable than existing frameworks like the WTO. She notes that full EU accession to CPTPP may be complex and time-consuming, and instead advocates for economic alignment without full integration—a mutually beneficial “convergent partnership” focused on regulatory prudence, digital trade standards, and climate-related trade measures.
“CPTPP is more than a trade bloc—it’s a tool to promote high standards. A CPTPP–EU partnership could become the leading forum for setting next-generation trade and economic standards, covering carbon border adjustments, AI governance, digital services, and supply chain resilience,” McAuley said. “The alliance could serve as a 21st-century mechanism for collective economic resilience.”
Ignacio García Bercero, Bruegel Institute fellow and former WTO dispute settlement official, sees Trump’s tariffs and China’s state-led mercantilism as the main threats to the norms and institutions that have underpinned post-WWII economic stability. He urges the EU to go beyond bilateral trade deals and lead a cohesive coalition promoting WTO rules and multilateral economic reform:
“The immediate goal would be to agree on common principles for responding to U.S. tariffs and U.S.–China talks. The strategic goal should be building a strong alliance of countries committed to rules-based trade and modernizing global trade regulations. If multilateral reform fails, this coalition could provide a pillar of stability for rule-based trade.”
Among the most important reasons for EU–CPTPP trade cooperation is that the CPTPP sets the gold standard for future regional trade deals, offering maximum benefits to traders and investors while enhancing value for micro, small, and medium enterprises.
Jeffrey Schott, international trade expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, emphasizes that CPTPP fully complies with WTO criteria for free trade agreements. He cites benefits such as:
- Strengthening supply chain resilience
- Improving labor conditions and living standards
- Addressing market-distorting practices
- Revisiting dispute resolution mechanisms
- Linking trade with global environmental issues
- Updating digital economy rules
- Enhancing WTO rules to protect free trade from state coercion
Shiven Yap, an independent analyst from Singapore, reminds us that CPTPP allows duty-free trade among its members and suggests an EU–CPTPP alliance could boost supply chain resilience, promote fair competition, and encourage global trade governance reforms. He stresses a shared interest in fighting unfair competition, preventing dumping, and protecting regulatory integrity.
Yap views a key function of the EU–CPTPP integration as the ability to collectively counter China’s strategy of state-subsidized overproduction, which has flooded global markets. The EU’s role could be to selectively align with CPTPP, supporting a liberal, rules-based economic order as both the U.S. and China drift away from it. For Asia-Pacific partners, a more involved EU could be an anchor of predictability.
He claims that EU accession would increase CPTPP’s share of global GDP from 15% to over 30%, significantly boosting the bloc’s geopolitical influence.
It’s fair to say that CPTPP is one of the world’s largest and most dynamic free trade areas, rapidly becoming a key global economic hub.
A potential challenge in bringing the EU and CPTPP closer is the fear rooted in past experiences—such as the EU–Mercosur agreement, which showed how internal EU divisions can derail even long-negotiated deals. Only Trump’s tariff chaos finally pushed the EU to conclude talks with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay in December 2024.
Now, as the EU and Asia-Pacific partners “court” each other, the big question is: Will the U.S. and China remain spectators—or try to join and assert leadership? The U.S. withdrew from CPTPP in January 2017, one of Trump’s first moves in office. Japan stepped in to fill the leadership vacuum.
Ursula von der Leyen declined to answer whether the U.S. would be invited to join a potential EU–CPTPP pact. Shiven Yap believes EU membership could prompt U.S. reengagement to strengthen transpacific ties. However, others see that as unlikely in the short term under Trump’s administration.
As for China, Beijing officially applied to join CPTPP back in 2021, but the request is still under review. Members are skeptical about China’s ability to meet the pact’s high standards. Interestingly, 20 years ago, the EU’s trade with Asian markets was more than double that of China’s. Today, China trades almost four times more with those same countries than the EU does.
In addition to China, six other countries—Taiwan, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Indonesia—have applied to join CPTPP. South Korea, the Philippines, and Thailand are still weighing the costs and benefits. Negotiations with Costa Rica began this year, and the most likely next member is South Korea.
About the Author
