What makes the APEC economies different is that its businessmen and politicians actually count the days left to attain free trade. That perception got reinforced by last week?s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit of CEOs in Singapore (November 12-14). Meanwhile, the APEC?s theme for the year 2009 is ?Sustaining Growth, Connecting the Region?.

That is the crux since APEC businessmen?even politicians?all trace the source of the present slowdown mainly to inadequate commerce. That is very unlike the 1997-98 financial crisis. Ergo, they saw the latest summit as yet another chance to reiterate the ideals of free trade.

Those ideals show their conviction that best way to raise growth rates, and iron out economic cycles, is to make the Asia-Pacific region into a huge free trading zone. That helps enlarges the domain of purchasing power; it also provides the competitive environment for R&D. Clearly, the focus has shifted from the US and Europe, to Japan and East Asia.

That also explains the APEC?s preoccupation with the ?Bogor Goals? of free and open trade?including sand in the wheels of commerce, like tariffs, NTBs, and other trade and investment restrictions. Rules of Origin, because of how they tend to get misused, also come in for special consideration.

The idea is to give businesses freedom to profit from the 42 FTAs that already exist amongst APEC member-states. A study has already quantified the net results of 30-odd such FTAs, noting the possible areas of convergence, dissonance, and also the various ?docking, merging or enlarging? options FTAs face if they are to coalesce into a region-wide FTA.

Also at the proposal stage is APEC?s wish to marshal a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) pact between Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore. The idea is then to turn the pact into a region-wide trade agreement. (There is virtual unanimity within APEC that such a grouping would yield superior returns, as would the creation of FTAAP?a free-trade area of the Asia-Pacific.

All that sums up the intent of the ?new growth paradigm? which aims at sustained and balanced growth which is all-inclusive (in the sense of extending to small developing economies like Papua New Guinea).

Indeed, even President Barack Obama threw his weight behind Asia-Pacific free trade in a speech in Tokyo last Saturday (November 14). Declaring himself to be the USA?s ?first Pacific president?, Obama cited the Asia-Pacific region as the key to future US trade and, therefore, employment.

This makes good sense since APEC gets its biggest mileage out of trade. But never really had they thought that they might also have to assume the trade-liberaliser-like role of the WTO!

That indeed they are so doing is also a matter to wonder at: for, they have neither the sanction(s) nor the brute force of majority rule to fall back upon. All that they do to ease mutual tread access is justified by invoking ?enlightened? self-interest and persuasion. Can there, we ask, be a better advertisement of the fact that free trade and increased welfare go hand-in-hand? The above explains also why the APEC is so impatient with the WTO?s stalled Doha Round.

As for what the APEC grouping has already achieved, it has indeed traveled a long way in reducing trade barriers. 2010 in fact is the deadline for the richer APEC economies to harmonize, and lower, trade barriers?while the more backward economies have up to 2020 to do that. Thereafter, though, it is understood that the benefits will be immense; that is why the APEC does not want roll-backs.

The seriousness of the venture can be seen also from how APEC leaders committed themselves in Lima, last November, to a 12-month status quo on protectionism. APEC relies extensively on the WTO to help monitor and trace such trade distortions. It locates the sources of regulatory hurdles with the help of businessmen?using The World Bank?s report on Doing Business for that purpose.

Clearly, the grouping feels offence is the best defense against protectionism, and research has indeed revealed that its economies gain more from structural reform than from tariff reductions! That simply demonstrates they are already deep inside NTB territory – something mentioned in APEC?s Economic Committee this year.

That the Economic Committee is able to do so is reminiscent of the juridical and executive powers possessed by the European Commission. That also serves to explain just how APEC?s Committee on Trade and Investment (CTI) can pursue its aim of improving domestic business environments. It does so by implementing the ?Second Trade Facilitation Action Plan? (TFAP-II) to reduce transaction costs. They will be slashed a further 5% by 2010.

Also progressing is the CTI?s new Investment Facilitation Action (IFA) Plan. Designed to enhance the region?s investment climate, its focus is on key performance indicators. CTI has already identified the actions that must be taken under each of the priority theme heads identified in 2008 (i.e., e-transparency, reducing investor risk and simplifying business regulation).

As for India, we are in an unenviable position. We have no immediate prospect of APEC membership despite its figuring heavily in our two-way trade. Indeed, our proportion of trade with Asia and ASEAN is higher than with any other region of the world (exports: 52.11%, imports: 61.40%, over April-March 2009)! Also, trade with the grouping is amongst the fastest growing. But the current moratorium on admissions rules out hopes of immediate membership. And, even afterwards, when the moratorium ends in December 2009, Laos and Cambodia in Asia, and Colombia in Latin America look all set to be the first ones in. (APEC has accorded them priority.) The agony gets compounded if one looks at the current proportion of India?s trade with South Asia. It is 0.61% (for imports) and 4.62% (exports).

The only saving grace is that delays?while irksome?will at least conceal the dirigiste nature, and distortions, of Inxdia?s domestic tariff area. It would be apposite if we ironed them out before the invitation to enter APEC.

?The author is a fellow at the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies, Kolkata