美國新總統特朗普上台之後，隨即簽署行政令，正式宣布美國退出TPP。儘管如此，TPP的餘溫仍在。而且，一談及全球貿易投資規則的未來發展，TPP始終是個繞不開的話題。那麼，TPP究竟是死了還是沒死？抑或是暫時中止？對於這個問題，需要從美國的內外兩個不同層面來解讀。

第一，從美國國內來看，儘管TPP只是特朗普“反奧（巴馬）運動”的一個標誌性動作，但其仍有一定的民意基礎。需要指出的是，TPP主要是在奧巴馬執政期內逐步成長發展起來的，但它並非是奧巴馬政府“一手遮天”製造出來的。換言之，TPP實則是美國國內精英階層對未來全球貿易投資規則的設想與判斷，更是美國社會對全球自由貿易理念的重新詮釋。因此，從這個層面來看，TPP的重要性不可小覷，而其後續影響還沒有完全發酵。但TPP同樣反映出美國國內社會就全球貿易投資規則發展的意見分歧，如對TPP現有的合作框架，美國國內的煙草集團、農業集團以及以華爾街為代表的金融保險業集團等均表示了不同程度的不滿，這在一定程度上佐證了特朗普政府宣布退出TPP決定的“正確性”和“合法性”。

儘管特朗普政府已經公開宣布退出TPP，並表示將通過強化雙邊經濟合作框架提升美國在貿易投資合作中的經濟利益，但這不能說明美國已經放棄了對全球經貿規則的主導權。恰恰相反，特朗普政府只是在貿易問題上選擇了戰術上的“退避三舍”，戰略上的“以退為進”、“退而求攻”。

這裡值得一提的是，貿易問題無疑是特朗普政府對外經濟政策的重中之重。與美國貿易政策相關的傳統職能部門是商務部、貿易代表以及隸屬於國會的國際貿易委員會等，但部分貿易爭端還涉及能源部、環境部等邊緣部門。在此基礎上，特朗普2016年12月宣布新設“白宮國家貿易委員會”，意圖顯然是要加強總統在貿易投資問題上的直接管控，同時在“意識形態”上加強白宮對美國貿易政策制定的影響。

第二，從美國境外來看，TPP存活下來還存一線希望。儘管美國宣布退出TPP，但日本、澳大利亞、新西蘭、加拿大等國家仍在TPP問題上表現出“不死心”的態勢，甚至仍有可能在暗中謀劃一個“沒有美國參加”的TPP合作框架。當然，日本等各方不願意放棄TPP的主要動因之一是它們已為此支付了巨大成本。而且日本更希望將TPP的部分條款直接引入RCEP或中日韓FTA等經濟合作框架，這就進一步加劇了相關經濟合作框架的構建難度。另一方面，日本國內多數意見認為，在美方宣布放棄TPP的背景下，日本仍應當堅持構建類似於TPP的“高水平、高標準”多邊貿易及投資合作框架。因此，日美FTA或許是一個不錯的選擇。但儘管如此，針對日美FTA談判，日本也極為擔憂美國要求其以超越TPP的水準開放國內農業市場等。

綜上所述，TPP問題仍懸而未決，需要冷靜觀察與應對。

Early in his presidency, President Trump signed a presidential memorandum announcing America's withdrawal from TPP. But TPP survived the setback, and people are still referring to TPP as an embodiment of the shape of things to come in global trade and investment development. So it begs the question: Is TPP is alive? Dead? Or just suspended?

First, for Trump to dismiss TPP carries the anti-Obama symbolism, but TPP in and of itself does have considerable popular support. While TPP was largely devised and fostered during the Obama presidency, it was not the brainchild of Obama administration alone. More accurately, it represents the vision and expectations of the American elite for the future shape of global trade and investment rules, and a modern interpretation of the global free trade concept of American society. From this perspective, TPP carried much weight and the fallout of US withdrawal will continue to reverberate. Admittedly, TPP cannot hide the divided views in the American society regarding global trade and investment rules and different interest groups, such as tobacco, agriculture, finance and insurance (or Wall Street), find TPP in its current form inadequate. That probably gives some legitimacy and justification to Trump's decision to quit TPP.

While the Trump administration has announced withdrawal from TPP, in favor of bilateral economic cooperation and negotiation to protect US interests, it does not necessarily mean the US has given up its dominancy in global trade rule-making. To the contrary, the Trump administration only made a technical retreat to set the stage for broad strategic gains.

Trade has been front and center of the Trump economic and trade agenda. In the US government, trade involves primarily the Commerce Department, USTR and ITC, etc., with the energy and environmental agencies playing a marginal role. In order to strengthen presidential oversight of trade issues, Trump announced the establishment of the National Trade Council, through which the White House could also wield direct ideological influence on trade policy-making.

Second, other TPP signatories, including Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, are not willing to let the deal fall by the wayside. They are planning a TPP without the US. Japan, for example, has invested heavily in TPP and that is behind Japan's reluctance to drop the deal. What's more, Japan wants to replicate some of the TPP provisions in the RCEP and China-Japan-ROK economic cooperation framework, which may complicate efforts on these fronts. Also, some voices in Japan are arguing that even though the US is leaving TPP, Japan should go on with its own pursuit of a high-standard multilateral trade and investment cooperation framework. An FTA between Japan and the US may be a viable option. But even in that scenario, Japan may be wary of demands to further open up its agriculture market beyond the TPP standards.

In sum, TPP is very much up in the air, and we will have to wait and see where it goes.