The TPP was probably doomed when the US joined, and certainly when Japan did. It then became more of a political project than an economic one. Big trade agreements had hitherto focused on physical goods, while the TPP had an aim of forging rules of trade beyond this in intellectual property, investment and services. China was a notable absence, and the US and Japan, in particular, were keen to set these rules with enough of the global economy behind them such that China would be forced into line later on. For now, the shape of international standards in these areas remains up for grabs. The next step for the TPP, if anything, is whether a smaller group—such as the founding four —will break away and go ahead on their own, with a much smaller share of global GDP involved, and in the hope that others will join later.
That is great news... I think. I am generally in favor of free trade but the fact that the content of the TPP was not public was very troublesome to me and so I have no idea whether I would have supported it or not. I did not like the rumours on IP and investment but who knows.
TIL that Greg Ip, a childhood friend, is no longer the economics editor at the Economist. I used to be susbscribed but it took me ten days to read it and, as it is a weekly, I always just got farther and farther behind. Great mag though.