Executive Summary

At the historic 2025 G-20 summit in Johannesburg, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong articulated a pragmatic vision for reforming the global economic order through “flexible multilateralism.” This approach represents a significant shift from traditional consensus-driven international institutions toward more agile, coalition-based frameworks. For Singapore, a small open economy heavily dependent on international trade, this strategy is not merely diplomatic positioning but an existential imperative with profound implications for the nation’s future prosperity and security.

Understanding Flexible Multilateralism: A Paradigm Shift

The Traditional System’s Paralysis

The post-World War II international order was built on ambitious multilateral institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO), designed to operate on universal consensus. While this approach ensured legitimacy and broad participation, it has increasingly resulted in gridlock. The WTO’s consensus rule requires all 164 member countries to agree before new trade deals can be finalized—a threshold that has proven virtually impossible to meet in an era of divergent national interests and rising protectionism.

PM Wong’s call for flexible multilateralism acknowledges this fundamental dysfunction without abandoning multilateralism altogether. Instead, it proposes a pragmatic middle path: allowing smaller groups of like-minded countries to forge ahead with agreements that can later serve as templates for broader adoption.

The Core Concept: Pathfinders and Building Blocks

The flexible multilateralism framework operates on several key principles:

Coalition of the Willing: Rather than waiting for universal consensus, countries with shared interests and values can form plurilateral agreements. These smaller groupings can move quickly to address emerging challenges like digital trade, data governance, and supply chain resilience—issues that traditional multilateral negotiations have struggled to tackle.

Incremental Expansion: Initial agreements serve as “pathfinders,” demonstrating what’s possible and creating momentum for others to join. This addresses the free-rider problem that often plagues multilateral negotiations, where countries hesitate to make concessions unless everyone does simultaneously.

Multiple Overlapping Networks: Instead of a single universal framework, flexible multilateralism envisions a web of interconnected agreements. Countries participate in multiple arrangements based on their specific interests and capabilities, creating a more resilient system overall.

Singapore’s Strategic Imperative

Why This Matters for a Trading Nation

Singapore’s advocacy for flexible multilateralism is rooted in hard economic realities. As a small city-state with virtually no natural resources, Singapore has built its prosperity entirely on its ability to serve as a global trading hub. Several factors make the current moment particularly critical:

Trade Dependency: Singapore’s trade-to-GDP ratio exceeds 300%, among the highest in the world. Any disruption to the rules-based trading system directly threatens the nation’s economic model. When global trade rules fragment or become politicized, Singapore loses the level playing field that allows it to compete with much larger economies.

Vulnerability to Protectionism: The rise of economic nationalism and bilateral trade wars disproportionately hurts small, open economies. Large countries can leverage their market size in bilateral negotiations; Singapore cannot. Multilateral or plurilateral frameworks that emphasize rules over power are essential for Singapore’s negotiating position.

Digital Economy Leadership: Singapore has positioned itself as a leading digital economy hub in Asia. However, the lack of international standards for digital trade, data flows, and e-commerce creates uncertainty that could undermine this positioning. Flexible multilateral agreements on digital trade rules would provide the regulatory certainty Singapore’s businesses need.

Historical Precedent: The CPTPP Model

PM Wong specifically cited the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) as a successful example of flexible multilateralism—and Singapore’s role in this agreement illuminates the strategic thinking behind the approach.

The CPTPP evolved from the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership, originally formed in 2005 by just four countries: Singapore, Chile, New Zealand, and Brunei. This “P4” agreement was ambitious for its time, including innovative provisions on digital trade and environmental standards that went far beyond WTO rules.

The small group’s bold approach attracted interest from larger economies, eventually expanding into the TPP with twelve members including the United States, Japan, and Canada. Even after the U.S. withdrawal in 2017, the remaining eleven countries salvaged the agreement as the CPTPP, which now represents a market of 500 million people and 13% of global GDP.

For Singapore, the CPTPP demonstrates several strategic advantages:

First-Mover Benefits: By helping design the initial framework, Singapore ensured the agreement reflected priorities important to small, trade-dependent economies—including strong protections against arbitrary trade barriers and robust dispute resolution mechanisms.

Network Effects: The CPTPP’s success has attracted additional applicants, including the United Kingdom (which joined in 2024) and pending applications from China, Taiwan, and others. Each addition strengthens the network and increases Singapore’s strategic value as a founding member.

Standard Setting: The CPTPP has established high standards for modern trade issues like digital trade, state-owned enterprises, and intellectual property. As other countries seek access to CPTPP markets, they must adopt these standards, effectively extending Singapore-friendly rules globally.

The November 20 Dialogues: A New Template

PM Wong highlighted the inaugural trade and investment dialogues between CPTPP countries and both ASEAN and the European Union on November 20 as exemplifying the next phase of flexible multilateralism. These dialogues represent a sophisticated strategy of linking regional blocs and trade agreements.

CPTPP-ASEAN Integration

The CPTPP-ASEAN dialogue is particularly significant for Singapore, which is a member of both groupings. This creates several strategic opportunities:

Bridge Building: Singapore can serve as a facilitator and translator between the two groups, leveraging its deep relationships in both. This intermediary role enhances Singapore’s diplomatic relevance beyond what its size would normally permit.

Standards Harmonization: Many ASEAN countries have expressed interest in eventually joining the CPTPP, but face challenges in meeting its high standards. The dialogue process can help identify areas for capacity building and technical assistance, gradually bringing ASEAN members closer to CPTPP requirements.

Supply Chain Resilience: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent geopolitical tensions exposed vulnerabilities in global supply chains. Closer integration between CPTPP and ASEAN would create a more diversified and resilient production network spanning the Pacific and Southeast Asian regions—reducing dependence on any single country.

CPTPP-EU Engagement

The dialogue with the European Union serves different but complementary objectives:

Transatlantic Alternative: With U.S. trade policy becoming increasingly unpredictable, the CPTPP-EU relationship offers an alternative framework for maintaining open trade between developed economies. This is particularly important as both the EU and CPTPP members seek to reduce strategic dependence on unpredictable partners.

Regulatory Alignment: Both the EU and CPTPP have developed sophisticated approaches to digital trade, data protection, and regulatory cooperation. Finding common ground between these frameworks could establish de facto global standards that other countries would need to adopt.

Counterbalance to Bilateralism: As large economies increasingly pursue bilateral trade deals that leverage their market power, the CPTPP-EU dialogue represents a coalition of medium and smaller economies committed to rules-based trade. For Singapore, this coalition approach is essential to maintaining negotiating leverage.

Addressing Modern Trade Challenges

PM Wong emphasized that existing trade rules have not kept pace with contemporary realities, particularly in digital trade. This observation reflects several specific challenges:

Digital Trade and Data Governance

The WTO agreements were finalized in 1995, before the commercial internet existed. They contain virtually no provisions addressing:

• Cross-border data flows: As services become increasingly digitized, the ability to move data across borders freely is essential. However, many countries are implementing data localization requirements that fragment the global digital economy.
• Digital taxation: The current international tax system was designed for physical goods, not digital services. Countries are implementing unilateral digital service taxes, creating chaos for multinational companies.
• E-commerce regulations: Standards for online consumer protection, digital payments, and electronic contracts vary widely across countries, creating barriers for digital businesses.
• Emerging technologies: Artificial intelligence, blockchain, and other technologies raise new questions about liability, intellectual property, and regulatory oversight that existing frameworks don’t address.

For Singapore, which has positioned itself as Southeast Asia’s technology and innovation hub, establishing international rules in these areas is crucial. Singapore’s digital economy accounts for approximately 13% of GDP and is growing rapidly. Without international frameworks providing regulatory certainty, this growth could stall.

Supply Chain Resilience and Economic Security

The pandemic and subsequent geopolitical tensions have transformed how countries think about trade. Traditional trade theory emphasized efficiency through specialization and comparative advantage. Today, governments increasingly prioritize resilience and security, even at the cost of some efficiency.

This shift creates challenges for Singapore’s traditional role as a trading hub:

Friend-Shoring Pressures: Large economies are attempting to reorganize supply chains to run primarily through allied countries. This could exclude Singapore or force difficult choices about alignment.

Critical Goods Restrictions: Countries are restricting exports of semiconductors, rare earth elements, and other goods deemed strategically important. Singapore, as a major semiconductor manufacturing hub, is directly affected by these restrictions.

Industrial Policy Renaissance: Governments worldwide are using subsidies, tax breaks, and procurement preferences to build domestic industries. These policies often violate WTO rules, but enforcement mechanisms have weakened.

Flexible multilateral frameworks addressing supply chain resilience could help Singapore navigate these tensions. Plurilateral agreements among trusted partners could establish rules allowing some consideration of security concerns while preventing these concerns from becoming pretexts for pure protectionism.

The Developing Country Dimension

PM Wong noted that “the unravelling of the rules-based multilateral order would most acutely impact developing countries.” This observation is both analytically correct and strategically important for Singapore’s diplomatic positioning.

Why Developing Countries Lose Most

When the rules-based system breaks down, power politics fill the vacuum. Large countries can use their market access as leverage in bilateral negotiations, extracting concessions from smaller trading partners. Developing countries, with limited bargaining power and often desperate for market access, face particularly difficult choices.

The multilateral system provided developing countries with several protections:

Most-Favored-Nation Treatment: WTO rules generally require countries to extend the same trade terms to all members. This prevents large countries from playing developing nations off against each other.

Dispute Settlement: The WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism gave even small countries a forum to challenge unfair trade practices by larger partners. While imperfect, it was more accessible than trying to resolve disputes through diplomatic or economic pressure.

Special and Differential Treatment: WTO rules provided developing countries longer implementation periods and less stringent obligations in recognition of their development needs.

As the WTO weakens, these protections erode. Bilateral and regional trade deals often include provisions favorable to large countries that would never pass in multilateral negotiations.

Singapore’s Strategic Positioning

By emphasizing the impact on developing countries, PM Wong positions Singapore as an advocate for smaller and medium-sized economies rather than just pursuing narrow self-interest. This is smart diplomacy for several reasons:

Coalition Building: Many developing countries face similar challenges to Singapore in navigating a world of great power competition. By championing their interests, Singapore can build coalitions that amplify its influence.

Moral Authority: Singapore’s argument for flexible multilateralism becomes more persuasive when framed as protecting vulnerable countries rather than just preserving the status quo that benefits Singapore.

African Engagement: Speaking at the first African G-20 summit, PM Wong’s emphasis on developing country concerns directly addresses the priorities of the host and African Union members. This strengthens Singapore’s relationships in a region where it has been expanding economic ties.

The Future of Investment and Trade Partnership

PM Wong mentioned Singapore’s launch of the Future of Investment and Trade Partnership (FITP) to bring small and medium-sized economies together. This initiative exemplifies flexible multilateralism in action.

The FITP includes fourteen countries spanning different regions and development levels, but sharing concerns about maintaining open, rules-based trade. The partnership focuses on practical cooperation rather than comprehensive trade liberalization:

Investment Facilitation: Streamlining approval processes and reducing regulatory barriers to investment, making it easier for businesses from member countries to operate across borders.

Dispute Resolution: Creating accessible mechanisms for resolving commercial disputes, particularly important for smaller businesses that can’t afford expensive international arbitration.

Capacity Building: Sharing expertise and providing technical assistance to help member countries develop effective trade-related institutions and regulations.

For Singapore, the FITP serves multiple purposes. It demonstrates leadership in organizing coalitions of medium and small economies. It creates a network of countries committed to Singapore-friendly trade principles. And it provides a platform for testing ideas that could later scale to broader multilateral frameworks.

The Governance Challenge: Balancing Flexibility and Legitimacy

While flexible multilateralism offers practical advantages, it also raises important questions about legitimacy, coherence, and inclusiveness.

The Spaghetti Bowl Problem

As countries join multiple overlapping trade agreements with different rules, the resulting complexity can become a barrier to trade rather than facilitating it. Businesses face varying standards, rules of origin requirements, and regulatory procedures depending on which agreement applies to a particular transaction.

Singapore addresses this through:

Harmonization Efforts: Using its participation in multiple agreements to advocate for compatible standards and procedures across different frameworks.

Digital Solutions: Developing electronic systems for managing trade documentation and compliance that can handle multiple rule sets efficiently.

Template Agreements: Promoting model provisions that can be adopted across different agreements, reducing divergence over time.

Ensuring Inclusivity

Critics argue that plurilateral agreements among wealthy countries could create a two-tier global economy, leaving the poorest nations further behind. PM Wong’s emphasis on eventually bringing more countries on board addresses this concern, but implementation matters.

The CPTPP model includes provisions specifically designed to facilitate future expansion:

Technical Assistance: Helping aspiring members build capacity to meet agreement standards.

Staged Implementation: Allowing new members longer timelines to implement certain provisions.

Open Accession: Maintaining clear, objective criteria for membership rather than giving existing members arbitrary veto power.

Maintaining Core Principles

PM Wong emphasized the importance of upholding international law and norms guiding state behavior. This points to a potential tension in flexible multilateralism: as countries form multiple overlapping agreements, how do we ensure they remain consistent with fundamental principles?

Singapore’s approach emphasizes:

WTO Compatibility: Designing plurilateral agreements to complement rather than undermine WTO rules, even as they go beyond WTO standards in certain areas.

Transparency: Sharing agreement texts and negotiating outcomes to allow non-members to understand and potentially adopt similar provisions.

Core Standards: Insisting that all agreements respect basic principles like non-discrimination, transparency, and due process, even if specific rules vary.

Geopolitical Context: The Trump Boycott and U.S. Withdrawal

The 2025 G-20 summit takes place against the backdrop of President Donald Trump’s boycott over disputed claims about treatment of white South Africans. This dramatic gesture illustrates the challenges facing traditional multilateralism and makes PM Wong’s flexible approach more relevant.

U.S. Unpredictability and Asian Responses

The United States has historically been the guarantor of the rules-based international order, but American commitment has become increasingly uncertain. This creates both challenges and opportunities for Singapore:

Leadership Vacuum: As the U.S. steps back from multilateral engagement, other countries must fill leadership roles. This creates opportunities for middle powers like Singapore to shape international frameworks, but also increases uncertainty and potential instability.

Regional Architecture: Asian countries are building stronger intra-regional connections to reduce dependence on U.S. engagement. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which includes ASEAN, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, represents one such effort.

Values vs. Interests: U.S. withdrawal from multilateral forums often stems from perceived conflicts between international commitments and domestic interests. This reinforces Singapore’s argument for flexible arrangements that accommodate different national circumstances rather than requiring uniform approaches.

China’s Role and the Balancing Act

Conspicuously absent from PM Wong’s public remarks but central to the geopolitical calculation is China’s role. As the U.S. retreats from multilateral engagement, China has positioned itself as a defender of globalization and multilateralism. However, China’s approach to international rules is selective—enthusiastic about economic openness but resistant to transparency and dispute settlement mechanisms.

For Singapore, navigating U.S.-China tensions is perhaps the defining foreign policy challenge. Flexible multilateralism offers some advantages:

Non-Exclusionary: Unlike security alliances or explicitly anti-China coalitions, trade agreements based on objective standards allow countries to participate regardless of geopolitical alignment.

Multiple Pathways: By maintaining strong relationships with both the U.S.-led CPTPP and China-led RCEP, Singapore can benefit from both frameworks without being forced to choose.

Pressure Through Example: As more countries join high-standard agreements like the CPTPP, pressure grows on non-members to adopt similar standards if they want market access. This provides a pathway for encouraging Chinese reform without direct confrontation.

Implementation Challenges and the Path Forward

While PM Wong’s vision is compelling, significant obstacles remain to implementing flexible multilateralism effectively.

Political Will and Domestic Opposition

Trade agreements face growing domestic opposition in many countries, as workers and communities disrupted by globalization demand protection. Even flexible, plurilateral agreements require political capital to negotiate and ratify.

Singapore’s advantages in this regard include:

Bipartisan Consensus: Singapore’s political system has maintained broad agreement on the importance of open trade across decades.

Visible Benefits: As a trading hub where most citizens directly or indirectly benefit from international commerce, the case for trade agreements is easier to make.

Government Capacity: Singapore’s efficient bureaucracy can negotiate and implement complex trade agreements effectively.

However, Singapore cannot implement flexible multilateralism alone. Success requires other countries, particularly larger economies, to embrace the approach.

The Question of Enforcement

Trade agreements are only as valuable as their enforcement mechanisms. The WTO’s dispute settlement system, while imperfect, provided a forum for resolving disagreements. Plurilateral agreements need credible enforcement mechanisms or they risk becoming empty promises.

Options include:

Domestic Enforcement: Building compliance requirements into domestic law, making violations justiciable in national courts.

Arbitration: Using international arbitration panels similar to investment treaty mechanisms.

Reciprocal Measures: Allowing countries to suspend benefits under the agreement if partners violate their commitments.

Singapore, with its strong rule of law tradition and well-developed commercial arbitration industry, is well-positioned to help design effective enforcement mechanisms.

Addressing the Climate-Trade Nexus

An emerging challenge not explicitly addressed in PM Wong’s remarks is the intersection of trade and climate policy. The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and similar initiatives in other countries are creating new trade barriers justified on environmental grounds.

Flexible multilateral frameworks will need to address:

Carbon Pricing Integration: How do different national carbon pricing systems interact in trade agreements?

Green Standards: What environmental standards should products meet to qualify for preferential treatment?

Technology Transfer: How can trade agreements facilitate the spread of clean technologies to developing countries?

Singapore, as a highly efficient economy with limited renewable energy resources, has particular interests in ensuring climate-trade policies don’t unfairly penalize efficient producers or create backdoor protectionism.

Implications for Singapore’s Future

PM Wong’s flexible multilateralism represents more than a diplomatic initiative—it’s a blueprint for Singapore’s continued relevance and prosperity in a fragmenting world.

Economic Implications

Trade Diversification: By participating in multiple overlapping agreements connecting different regions, Singapore reduces dependence on any single market or trade route.

Value-Added Activities: As a founding member and active participant in setting rules for multiple frameworks, Singapore can ensure they support the high-value services and advanced manufacturing the economy is moving toward.

Innovation Ecosystem: International frameworks addressing digital trade, intellectual property, and data flows create the regulatory certainty needed for Singapore’s technology sector to thrive.

Diplomatic Implications

Honest Broker Role: Singapore’s participation in multiple frameworks with different membership allows it to serve as a bridge and facilitator, enhancing diplomatic influence beyond what its size would suggest.

Coalition Leadership: By organizing groups of small and medium-sized economies around shared interests, Singapore amplifies its voice in international forums.

Principle-Based Positioning: Consistent advocacy for rules-based trade allows Singapore to maintain productive relationships with major powers while defending core interests.

Strategic Implications

Hedging Strategy: In an uncertain geopolitical environment, diversified relationships through multiple frameworks reduce Singapore’s vulnerability to pressure from any single large power.

Institutional Insurance: If the WTO and other universal institutions continue to weaken, Singapore’s participation in functional plurilateral alternatives ensures access to rules-based trade regardless of broader multilateral dysfunction.

Adaptation Model: By demonstrating that small countries can thrive through strategic engagement in flexible multilateral networks, Singapore offers a model for others facing similar challenges.

Conclusion: Pragmatic Idealism in Action

PM Wong’s articulation of flexible multilateralism at the G-20 summit represents a sophisticated response to contemporary challenges facing the international trading system. Rather than despairing over the weakening of traditional multilateral institutions or embracing a Darwinian free-for-all, he offers a middle path: practical cooperation among willing partners that remains open to expansion and grounded in core principles.

For Singapore, this approach is both pragmatic necessity and strategic opportunity. A small, trade-dependent nation cannot afford the collapse of rules-based international commerce, but neither can it single-handedly preserve institutions that larger countries are abandoning. By helping organize coalitions of like-minded countries around concrete agreements, Singapore helps build the foundations of a more resilient system while ensuring its own continued prosperity.

The success of this vision depends on several factors beyond Singapore’s control: the willingness of other countries to embrace plurilateral pathfinders, the ability of existing agreements to demonstrate value and attract new members, and the avoidance of geopolitical conflicts that make any form of international economic cooperation impossible.

Yet even acknowledging these uncertainties, flexible multilateralism represents the most promising pathway forward. In a world of growing complexity and divergent interests, expecting universal agreement on comprehensive frameworks was always unrealistic. By allowing different groups to move at different speeds while maintaining commitment to core principles, flexible multilateralism offers the best hope of preserving the gains from international economic cooperation while adapting to new realities.

For Singapore, the stakes could hardly be higher. The nation’s entire post-independence development strategy has rested on integration into the global economy and adherence to international rules. As that system faces unprecedented pressures, PM Wong’s vision offers a roadmap for how Singapore can help shape whatever comes next—ensuring the city-state remains not just a participant in global trade, but a architect of its evolving framework.

Flexible Multilateralism: Case Studies and Strategic Outlook for Singapore

Part I: Case Studies

Case Study 1: The CPTPP Evolution – From P4 to Global Template

Background and Genesis (2005-2018)

The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership represents the quintessential example of flexible multilateralism in action, and Singapore’s role throughout its evolution offers crucial lessons for the future.

The P4 Foundation (2005-2008)

In 2005, Singapore joined with three other small, trade-dependent economies—Chile, New Zealand, and Brunei—to form the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership, colloquially known as the P4. This was an audacious move for several reasons:

The four founding members represented just 0.5% of global GDP and 1% of world trade. Conventional wisdom suggested such small economies should wait for larger partners to set trade rules. Instead, they took the initiative to design an ambitious agreement that went far beyond existing WTO standards.

Key innovations included:

• Comprehensive coverage: Unlike traditional trade agreements that carved out sensitive sectors, the P4 aimed for genuine free trade with minimal exceptions
• Digital trade provisions: Forward-looking rules on e-commerce and digital services, revolutionary for 2005
• Services liberalization: Deep commitments on cross-border services trade
• Regulatory cooperation: Mechanisms for aligning regulations to reduce non-tariff barriers

For Singapore, the strategic calculation was clear. As Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong explained at the time, small countries needed to demonstrate that ambitious, high-quality trade agreements were both possible and beneficial. If they succeeded, larger economies would take notice.

The Expansion Phase (2008-2016)

The P4’s bold approach attracted exactly the attention Singapore hoped for. In 2008, the United States expressed interest in joining, followed by Australia, Peru, Vietnam, and eventually Japan—the world’s third-largest economy.

This expansion created the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), announced in 2015 with twelve members representing 40% of global GDP. The agreement included provisions that would have been impossible to negotiate in the WTO:

• State-owned enterprises: Rules ensuring SOEs compete fairly with private companies, directly relevant to Vietnam and other state-led economies
• Labor and environment: Enforceable commitments linking trade benefits to labor rights and environmental protection
• Intellectual property: Comprehensive IP protections (though some provisions proved controversial)
• Investment: Strong investor protections with dispute settlement mechanisms

For Singapore, the expansion validated the pathfinder approach. The city-state helped design the framework when only small countries were involved, then welcomed larger economies that had to accept the template Singapore helped create. This gave Singapore disproportionate influence over the final agreement.

The Crisis and Rebirth (2017-2018)

When President Trump withdrew the United States from the TPP in January 2017, many observers declared the agreement dead. The conventional wisdom held that without the U.S. market, the agreement lacked sufficient value for the remaining countries to proceed.

Singapore played a crucial role in the resurrection. At ministerial meetings in Hanoi and Tokyo, Singapore’s trade negotiators joined with Japanese and Australian counterparts to argue that the TPP’s value transcended U.S. participation. The eleven remaining countries represented significant markets, and the regulatory framework would help members attract investment and boost productivity.

The eleven countries salvaged the agreement as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which entered into force in 2018. They suspended certain provisions (mainly related to intellectual property) that were U.S. priorities but maintained the core framework.

Strategic Outcomes for Singapore

Market Access: The CPTPP gave Singapore preferential access to major markets including Japan, Canada, Mexico, and Vietnam. This diversified Singapore’s export markets beyond traditional partners and created opportunities for Singaporean businesses across the Pacific region.

Standard Setting: As a founding member that participated in designing the agreement, Singapore ensured the CPTPP reflected principles important to small, open economies:

• Strong rules against arbitrary trade barriers
• Transparent, predictable regulatory processes
• Robust dispute settlement
• Comprehensive digital trade provisions

Network Expansion: The CPTPP’s success attracted additional members. The United Kingdom joined in 2024, making it the first European member. China, Taiwan, Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Uruguay have applied for membership, with more countries expressing interest.

Each new member strengthens Singapore’s position. As a founding member, Singapore participates in the accession process for new applicants, giving it influence over the agreement’s expansion. The growing membership also increases the CPTPP’s economic significance and its role as a standard-setter for global trade rules.

Diplomatic Leverage: Singapore’s role in the CPTPP enhances its diplomatic standing. Other countries recognize Singapore’s commitment to high-quality trade agreements and its ability to help organize coalitions. This reputation has opened doors in other initiatives and strengthened bilateral relationships.

Lessons Learned

Small Can Lead: The P4 demonstrated that small countries need not wait for large powers to organize trade frameworks. By taking initiative, small economies can design systems reflecting their interests before larger players arrive with different priorities.

Resilience Through Quality: The agreement survived U.S. withdrawal because its substantive value extended beyond access to any single market. High-quality rules that reduce costs, increase predictability, and boost productivity provide value even without the world’s largest economy.

Openness Enables Growth: The CPTPP’s clear accession criteria and open architecture allowed expansion without requiring unanimous consent for each new member. This growth potential was built into the agreement from the start.

Flexibility Within Rules: The CPTPP includes mechanisms for flexibility—development timelines, technical assistance, transitional arrangements—while maintaining high ultimate standards. This balance makes ambitious agreements achievable.

Case Study 2: The Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA)

Innovation in Digital Trade Governance (2020-Present)

While the CPTPP demonstrates flexible multilateralism in comprehensive trade agreements, the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA) shows how the approach works for specific issue areas. Singapore launched DEPA in 2020 with Chile and New Zealand—notably, three of the original P4 members, demonstrating continuity in strategic thinking.

The Digital Governance Gap

By 2020, digital trade had become crucial to global commerce, yet international rules remained underdeveloped. The WTO had made limited progress on e-commerce issues. Many countries were implementing divergent regulations on data flows, digital taxation, artificial intelligence, and fintech—creating a fragmented regulatory landscape that hindered cross-border digital business.

Large countries pursued different approaches:

• China: Strict data localization and government control over digital platforms
• European Union: Comprehensive privacy regulations (GDPR) with restrictions on data transfers
• United States: Light-touch regulation emphasizing innovation and free data flows

Rather than waiting for global consensus or accepting that digital trade would remain unregulated, Singapore proposed a different approach: a dedicated agreement among like-minded countries establishing high standards for digital trade that others could eventually join.

DEPA’s Innovative Features

The agreement includes several groundbreaking elements:

Modular Architecture: Unlike traditional trade agreements with comprehensive, take-it-or-leave-it terms, DEPA is organized into modules. Countries can join the core agreement and then opt into additional modules based on their priorities and capabilities. This modular approach lowers the barrier to participation while maintaining high standards.

Forward-Looking Provisions: DEPA addresses emerging technologies explicitly:

• Artificial intelligence governance and ethics
• Digital identities and trusted data sharing
• Fintech cooperation and regulatory sandboxes
• Emerging technologies working group to address issues not yet prominent

SME Focus: Recognizing that digital trade benefits disproportionately accrue to small and medium enterprises that can reach global markets without massive investment, DEPA includes specific provisions to help SMEs navigate digital trade:

• Simplified customs procedures for e-commerce
• Access to government procurement opportunities
• Technical assistance and capacity building

Living Agreement: DEPA includes built-in mechanisms for updating provisions as technology evolves. This addresses a fundamental problem with traditional trade agreements: they become outdated quickly in fast-moving sectors.

Strategic Expansion

Since 2020, DEPA has expanded deliberately:

• South Korea joined in 2023, bringing a major digital economy with advanced technology sector
• China applied for membership in 2021, though accession negotiations remain ongoing
• Canada announced intent to join in 2023
• Multiple other countries have expressed interest

Each addition strengthens the agreement’s role as a standard-setter. As more economies adopt DEPA’s framework, its provisions become de facto global standards that businesses design products and services to meet.

Singapore’s Strategic Gains

Digital Hub Status: DEPA reinforces Singapore’s position as Asia’s leading digital economy hub. Companies establishing regional operations in Singapore gain preferential access to DEPA markets and benefit from regulatory certainty about cross-border data flows and digital services.

Regulatory Leadership: Singapore’s government gained expertise and influence in digital governance by helping design DEPA. This positions Singapore to shape future international frameworks as digital issues become more prominent in global trade discussions.

Balancing Act: DEPA provides Singapore a framework for managing U.S.-China digital competition. By establishing standards based on agreed rules rather than geopolitical alignment, Singapore can engage both powers constructively. China’s DEPA application shows that even countries with very different digital governance models see value in rules-based frameworks.

Innovation Testing: DEPA’s modular approach and built-in flexibility allow Singapore to experiment with regulatory approaches. Provisions that work well can be promoted in other forums; those that prove problematic can be revised without renegotiating the entire agreement.

Case Study 3: Singapore-Australia Green Economy Agreement (2022)

Pioneering Climate-Trade Integration

The Singapore-Australia Green Economy Agreement (GEA), signed in 2022, represents another dimension of flexible multilateralism: addressing the intersection of trade and climate change through bilateral pathfinders that could scale to multilateral frameworks.

The Climate-Trade Challenge

As countries implement policies to address climate change, new tensions emerge with international trade rules:

• Carbon border adjustments may violate non-discrimination principles
• Green subsidies could be challenged as unfair trade practices
• Technology transfer requirements might conflict with intellectual property protections
• Environmental standards could become backdoor protectionism

Traditional multilateral forums struggle to address these tensions. The WTO has limited environmental provisions, while climate negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change don’t cover trade issues directly.

GEA’s Approach

Singapore and Australia crafted an agreement establishing principles for how trade and climate policies should interact:

Carbon Markets Linkage: Provisions exploring connection of carbon pricing systems, allowing efficient emissions reduction across borders. This is particularly relevant for Singapore, which has limited renewable energy potential but high capital available for climate investment.

Green Technology Trade: Elimination of tariffs on environmental goods and services, with ambitious lists going beyond the limited WTO environmental goods agreement that stalled.

Sustainable Supply Chains: Cooperation on supply chain traceability and certification for sustainable products, helping businesses demonstrate environmental credentials.

Just Transition Support: Recognition that climate policies have distributional impacts, with commitments to help affected workers and communities adjust.

Standards Harmonization: Alignment of green standards and certifications, reducing compliance costs for businesses operating in both markets.

Strategic Implications

Template Building: The GEA establishes precedents for how trade agreements can support climate action without creating new protectionist barriers. As climate becomes more central to trade policy globally, these precedents position Singapore advantageously.

Competitive Positioning: By proactively addressing sustainability in trade, Singapore signals to international businesses that it’s future-oriented. Companies facing pressure to reduce emissions see Singapore as a partner rather than an obstacle.

Regional Model: The GEA creates a model that could extend to other ASEAN countries. As a tropical nation with climate vulnerabilities, Singapore’s engagement on climate-trade issues resonates with Southeast Asian partners facing similar challenges.

Innovation Opportunity: The agreement’s focus on green technology trade creates opportunities for Singapore’s cleantech sector. By reducing barriers and creating supportive regulatory frameworks, the GEA helps Singapore develop expertise in climate solutions.

Part II: Strategic Outlook for Singapore

Near-Term Outlook (2025-2027)

Opportunities

CPTPP Expansion Management: With multiple countries seeking membership, Singapore will play a key role in accession negotiations over the next 2-3 years. Priority applications include:

• China: If China joins CPTPP, it would be transformative—integrating the world’s second-largest economy into a high-standards framework. Singapore is well-positioned to facilitate this process given strong economic ties with China and credibility with existing members. However, China’s accession requires reforms to state-owned enterprises and digital trade practices that may prove challenging politically.
• Taiwan: Taiwan’s application creates geopolitical complications given China’s objections. Singapore’s careful diplomacy will be tested in navigating these tensions. The outcome will signal whether trade agreements can remain economically focused despite geopolitical pressures.
• South Korea: If South Korea joins (having already joined DEPA), it would strengthen the CPTPP’s position as the premier Asia-Pacific trade framework and create beneficial linkages between the CPTPP and South Korea’s multiple FTAs.

ASEAN Integration Deepening: The CPTPP-ASEAN dialogue PM Wong highlighted could evolve into concrete initiatives:

• Technical assistance programs helping ASEAN countries meet CPTPP standards
• Sectoral agreements in specific areas like digital trade or services
• Enhanced supply chain cooperation post-pandemic
• Possible pathway for ASEAN countries to eventually join CPTPP

This integration would strengthen Singapore’s role as bridge between ASEAN and broader Asia-Pacific frameworks, leveraging its dual membership.

EU-Asia Trade Corridors: The CPTPP-EU dialogue could lead to:

• Regulatory cooperation reducing non-tariff barriers
• Digital trade framework alignment
• Supply chain diversification away from overreliance on single countries
• Joint approaches to sustainable trade and carbon border adjustments

For Singapore, closer EU-CPTPP ties mean enhanced access to European markets and positioning as gateway for European companies entering Asia-Pacific.

India Engagement: India remains outside both RCEP (which it withdrew from) and CPTPP. As India pursues its “Act East” policy and seeks to balance China’s influence, opportunities may emerge for India to engage with Asia-Pacific trade frameworks. Singapore’s strong India ties position it to facilitate this engagement through plurilateral pathfinders before comprehensive FTA membership.

Risks and Challenges

U.S. Trade Policy Volatility: The Trump administration’s boycott of the G-20 signals continued U.S. ambivalence toward multilateral engagement. This creates several challenges:

• CPTPP Rejoining Uncertainty: If the U.S. rejoins CPTPP under terms favorable to existing members, it would strengthen the agreement significantly. However, if the U.S. demands renegotiation of core provisions as condition for rejoining, it could undermine the framework and create tensions among members.
• Bilateral Pressure: The U.S. may pressure Singapore and other partners to choose between U.S. bilateral deals and multilateral frameworks including China. Singapore must maintain that these are complementary rather than competing.
• Digital Trade Fragmentation: U.S.-China technology decoupling extends to digital trade standards. Singapore’s DEPA framework may face pressure to align with one bloc or the other.

China’s Strategic Intent: While China has applied to join both CPTPP and DEPA, questions remain about its willingness to implement reforms these agreements require:

• State-Owned Enterprises: CPTPP requires SOEs to operate commercially and not receive unfair advantages. China’s political economy depends heavily on SOEs playing strategic roles.
• Digital Trade: DEPA requires data free flow provisions that may conflict with China’s data governance model.
• Transparency: Both agreements require regulatory transparency that may challenge China’s governing approach.

If China joins without genuinely implementing reforms, it could undermine the agreements’ credibility. If accession negotiations drag on or fail, it signals limits to engaging China through rules-based frameworks.

ASEAN Fragmentation Risk: ASEAN faces internal divisions over economic models, political systems, and great power alignment. These divisions could hinder collective engagement with broader frameworks:

• Some ASEAN members (Vietnam, Malaysia) may progress toward CPTPP membership while others lag
• Digital trade approaches vary widely across ASEAN
• Myanmar’s political crisis complicates regional cooperation

For Singapore, ASEAN fragmentation would undermine its strategy of serving as bridge between ASEAN and broader frameworks.

Climate Trade Tensions: As countries implement carbon border adjustments and green subsidies, trade tensions will intensify:

• EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism takes effect in phases through 2026-2034
• U.S. may implement similar measures
• Developing countries view these as protectionism harming their development

Singapore must navigate between:

• Supporting climate action (given vulnerability to climate change)
• Defending free trade principles
• Maintaining competitiveness as manufacturing and logistics hub

Domestic Opposition Emergence: While Singapore has maintained pro-trade consensus, risks emerge:

• Rising cost of living could fuel skepticism about globalization benefits
• Technology displacement of jobs may create anxiety about digital trade
• Younger generations may prioritize values (human rights, environment) over economic efficiency in trade policy

If domestic consensus weakens, Singapore’s ability to pursue ambitious trade agreements may face constraints.

Medium-Term Outlook (2027-2032)

Structural Shifts

Regionalization of Supply Chains: Global supply chains will continue fragmenting into regional networks driven by:

• Geopolitical tensions reducing trust in complex global networks
• Climate policies favoring shorter supply chains
• Technology enabling more localized production (additive manufacturing, AI-driven automation)
• Pandemic resilience lessons emphasizing redundancy over efficiency

Implications for Singapore:

• Traditional hub model (import, add value, re-export globally) faces challenges
• Opportunities in serving regional manufacturing networks for Southeast and South Asia
• Emphasis shifts from pure logistics toward higher-value services (financing, legal, technical)
• Need to ensure Singapore remains within major regional networks rather than between them

Digital Trade Dominance: Digital services will represent growing share of trade:

• Physical goods trade may grow slowly; digital services trade will boom
• More services become tradable as technology advances (education, healthcare, professional services)
• Data becomes key strategic resource, creating governance challenges
• Platform business models create winner-take-all dynamics

Implications for Singapore:

• Digital hub strategy becomes more critical
• Need for continued leadership in digital trade governance (DEPA expansion)
• Positioning as trusted jurisdiction for data services
• Competition intensifies with other digital economy hubs (Seoul, Dubai, Bangalore)

Climate-Trade Integration: Climate considerations will be inseparable from trade policy:

• Carbon-intensive industries face trade barriers
• Green technology transfer becomes trade priority
• Sustainability standards affect market access
• Climate finance links to trade finance

Implications for Singapore:

• Green Economy Agreement approach needs to scale
• Opportunity to serve as green finance hub for Asia
• Vulnerability as energy-intensive logistics hub without domestic renewables
• Regional renewable energy integration critical (importing solar from Australia, hydropower from Laos)

Plurilateral Architecture Solidifies: The fragmented post-WTO order will solidify into durable pattern:

• Multiple overlapping trade agreements with different memberships
• Issue-specific plurilaterals (digital, services, green technology)
• Bilateral deals among major powers
• WTO maintains baseline rules but not frontier issues

Implications for Singapore:

• Strategy of participating in multiple frameworks validated
• Need for sophisticated management of overlapping commitments
• Opportunity to serve as “honest broker” between frameworks
• Must ensure key principles (non-discrimination, transparency) maintained across fragmented system

Strategic Positioning

Network Orchestration Role: Singapore should evolve from network participant to network orchestrator:

• Convening Authority: Host negotiations and working groups for plurilateral initiatives, leveraging reputation for neutrality and efficiency
• Technical Secretariat: Provide administrative support for emerging agreements, similar to APEC secretariat role
• Capacity Building: Help smaller economies participate in multiple frameworks through technical assistance
• Standard Translation: Bridge different frameworks by helping align standards and reduce conflicts

This role builds on Singapore’s traditional diplomatic approach while adapting to fragmented multilateral landscape.

Digital Governance Leadership: DEPA should evolve into comprehensive digital economy framework:

• Expand Membership: Bring in major digital economies (EU, India, South Korea already progressing)
• Deepen Provisions: Address emerging issues like AI governance, platform regulation, digital currencies
• Link to Other Frameworks: Ensure DEPA compatible with and referenced in broader trade agreements
• Implement Robustly: Demonstrate that digital trade agreements have teeth through effective implementation

If successful, DEPA positions Singapore as leader in most important frontier of trade governance.

Climate-Trade Expertise: Scale Green Economy Agreement approach:

• Regional Climate Market: Develop Southeast Asian carbon market connecting national systems
• Green Technology Hub: Position Singapore as headquarters for climate technology companies serving Asia
• Sustainable Finance Standards: Lead in developing standards for green bonds, climate risk disclosure, transition finance
• Just Transition Advocacy: Champion approaches that balance climate action with development needs, resonating with developing countries

This positions Singapore constructively on climate while protecting trade interests.

Services Trade Champion: Push for ambitious services liberalization:

• Professional Services Mobility: Agreements facilitating movement of professionals across borders
• Digital Services Market Access: Ensure digital services receive same treatment as goods
• Regulatory Cooperation: Align licensing, qualification recognition, and standards
• Data Free Flow: Establish default of free data flows with narrow exceptions

As services become dominant in Singapore’s economy, leadership on services trade becomes critical.

Long-Term Outlook (2032-2040)

Scenarios

Scenario 1: Successful Flexible Multilateralism (40% Probability)

In this optimistic scenario, the flexible multilateralism approach proves successful:

• Multiple plurilateral agreements emerge covering key trade areas
• Membership overlaps create de facto convergence toward common standards
• Major economies (U.S., China, EU, India) participate in various frameworks
• WTO reforms successfully to coordinate plurilateral initiatives
• Digital trade, climate-trade, and services frameworks mature and interlink

Singapore’s Position: In this scenario, Singapore thrives as central node in multiple networks. The city-state’s early leadership in flexible frameworks pays dividends as these become the new architecture of global trade. Singapore serves as connector, facilitator, and standard-setter, punching well above its weight in shaping rules. Economic position strengthens as businesses locate in Singapore to access multiple frameworks efficiently.

Scenario 2: Bloc Fragmentation (35% Probability)

In this concerning scenario, flexible multilateralism fails to maintain coherence:

• Competing trade blocs solidify around major powers (U.S.-led, China-led, EU-led)
• Security considerations dominate economic relationships
• Overlapping memberships become impossible as countries forced to choose sides
• No effective coordination mechanism emerges
• Trade costs rise as regulatory fragmentation increases

Singapore’s Position: This scenario poses existential challenges. Singapore cannot afford to choose between major powers but may face pressure to do so. The city-state would need to:

• Maintain strict neutrality despite pressure
• Focus on ASEAN integration as fallback position
• Develop niche roles serving all blocs
• Possibly accept reduced economic growth as trade fragments
• Strengthen defense and deterrence to maintain autonomy

Scenario 3: Crisis-Driven Re-multilateralization (15% Probability)

In this scenario, a major crisis creates political will for renewed multilateralism:

• Economic crisis, pandemic, climate disaster, or conflict demonstrates fragmentation costs
• Major powers negotiate grand bargain reviving universal trade framework
• WTO significantly reformed with stronger enforcement and faster decision-making
• Climate and digital trade integrated into comprehensive framework
• Flexible plurilaterals fold into renewed multilateral structure

Singapore’s Position: Mixed implications. Renewed multilateralism would benefit Singapore economically, but the city-state might lose influence as small countries have less agenda-setting power in comprehensive negotiations. Singapore would need to:

• Quickly pivot from plurilateral to multilateral approach
• Leverage experience from plurilateral experiments to shape renewed framework
• Ensure small country interests protected in grand bargain
• Build coalitions with other medium and small economies

Scenario 4: Technology-Driven Disruption (10% Probability)

In this wildcard scenario, technology disrupts fundamental trade assumptions:

• Advanced AI and robotics enable economically viable local production of most goods
• 3D printing and biotechnology reduce need for cross-border trade in physical products
• Virtual/augmented reality makes in-person services tradable digitally
• Cryptocurrency and blockchain enable trade without traditional financial infrastructure
• Climate impacts force major supply chain reorganization

Singapore’s Position: Profound challenges to traditional hub model. Singapore would need radical adaptation:

• Shift entirely from goods to services, data, and intellectual property
• Become development center rather than distribution center
• Leverage governance quality for virtual services localization
• Position as trusted neutral zone for data and AI services
• Massive retraining as logistics jobs disappear

Long-Term Strategic Imperatives

Regardless of which scenario unfolds, certain imperatives emerge:

1. Maintain Strategic Flexibility

Singapore must avoid overcommitment to any single framework or alignment. This requires:

• Participation in multiple overlapping agreements
• Careful balance between U.S., China, and other partners
• Strong ASEAN foundation as fallback
• Domestic consensus supporting flexible positioning

2. Invest in Human Capital

As trade evolves toward services, digital, and knowledge-intensive activities:

• World-class education system must maintain edge
• Continuous upskilling and reskilling as economy transforms
• Immigration policies attracting global talent
• Culture of innovation and adaptation

3. Technological Leadership

Maintain position at technology frontier:

• AI and data capabilities
• Green technology development and deployment
• Advanced manufacturing and Industry 4.0
• Fintech and digital finance innovation

4. Governance Quality

Singapore’s key competitive advantage is efficient, predictable, low-corruption governance:

• Maintain institutional quality despite political transitions
• Adapt regulations to technological change while preserving stability
• Balance privacy and openness in digital age
• Ensure rule of law remains unquestioned

5. Values-Based Positioning

As values become more prominent in international relations:

• Articulate clear Singapore values compatible with diverse partners
• Demonstrate commitment to sustainable development
• Show responsible leadership on global challenges
• Build reputation beyond pure economic efficiency

6. Regional Integration

Deepen ASEAN ties as foundation:

• Help less developed ASEAN members build capacity
• Promote ASEAN integration into broader frameworks
• Position as ASEAN champion while maintaining individual flexibility
• Balance regional solidarity with global engagement

7. Defense and Deterrence

Maintain security as prerequisite for economic strategy:

• Credible defense despite small size
• Strong diplomatic relationships across political spectrum
• Contribution to regional security architecture
• Cyber security and resilience

Conclusion: Navigating Uncertainty

PM Wong’s flexible multilateralism represents strategic clarity amid global uncertainty. The case studies demonstrate that small countries can lead in building new architectures when traditional institutions fail. Singapore’s success with the CPTPP, DEPA, and Green Economy Agreement shows this approach works.

However, success is not guaranteed. The outlook presents both opportunities and risks across multiple timeframes. Singapore must remain adaptive, maintaining the strategic flexibility that has served it well while investing in capabilities needed for an uncertain future.

The fundamental insight of flexible multilateralism is that perfect solutions are impossible in a diverse, rapidly changing world. Instead of waiting for ideal comprehensive frameworks, countries should build practical arrangements among willing partners while remaining open to broader cooperation when possible. For Singapore, this approach aligns with both national interests and temperament: pragmatic, incremental, rules-based, and open.

The next fifteen years will test whether flexible multilateralism can evolve into a durable architecture for global trade or proves merely a transitional phase toward greater fragmentation. Singapore’s role in this process—as architect, advocate, and exemplar—will significantly influence the outcome. The city-state’s prosperity and security depend on getting this right.