APEC Summit Opens in South Korea as Leaders Seek Trade Consensus

A bridge for leaders to build consensus when consensus is breaking down
South Korea positioned its president as a mediator among nations with diverging views on global trade rules.

21 APEC member economies convened in Gyeongju to discuss boosting regional resilience amid rising unilateral trade barriers and global economic uncertainties. Key topics include strengthening supply chains, digital transition, and AI initiatives, with consensus-based declarations requiring unanimous support from all members.

  • 21 APEC member economies convened in Gyeongju, South Korea on October 31
  • Leaders discussed supply chains, digital transition, and AI amid rising unilateral trade barriers
  • All APEC declarations from 2021-2024 included commitment to WTO-based multilateral system
  • Unanimous consent required for any leaders' declaration; one dissenting nation blocks adoption

APEC leaders gathered in South Korea to address trade uncertainties and regional economic resilience, with discussions focused on free trade, supply chains, and digital transition amid differing views on multilateralism.

The leaders of twenty-one Asia-Pacific economies gathered in the South Korean city of Gyeongju on Friday to confront a question that has haunted global commerce for years: how to keep trade open when so many nations are building walls.

The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit brought together presidents, prime ministers, and representatives from international organizations for a two-day forum framed around resilience and growth. The timing was deliberate. Unilateral trade barriers are rising. Supply chains remain fragile. The consensus that once held the world's largest trading bloc together has fractured. Chinese President Xi Jinping attended. So did Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi. Donald Trump, the American president, did not—he had already left after a business forum and bilateral talks with South Korea's Lee Jae Myung and Xi.

Lee opened the proceedings by welcoming his counterparts and framing the work ahead under the theme "Towards a More Connected Resilient Region and Beyond." The presidential office described his role as that of a bridge, someone tasked with building consensus among leaders who do not always see eye to eye. South Korea, as this year's host, wanted to produce something tangible: a declaration endorsed unanimously by all participants, a document that would signal the region's commitment to collaboration and position APEC as relevant for the future. The country also planned to spotlight its own priorities—artificial intelligence, demographic change—as part of the broader conversation.

Over two sessions, the leaders would review recommendations from their foreign and trade ministers on how to make the Asia-Pacific more prosperous. The focus areas were familiar: strengthening supply chains, accelerating digital transition, addressing environmental concerns. But beneath these technical discussions lay a deeper tension. The world's trading nations do not agree on what the rules should be.

For the past four years, every APEC summit declaration had included a specific phrase: commitment to a rules-based multilateral trading system with the World Trade Organization "at its core." That language first appeared in 2021, after Trump's first term ended and the United States had rejoined the multilateral consensus. Now, with Trump returning to office and trade nationalism rising globally, that consensus was being tested. A leaders' declaration requires unanimous support—a single dissenting voice can block adoption.

On Thursday, as ministers wrapped up their preparatory session, South Korea's Foreign Minister Cho Hyun said the forum was "very close" to adopting a joint declaration, with last-minute negotiations still underway. Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo reported broad agreement on supply chains, digital transition, and environmental cooperation, calling these "the core of today's trade agenda and the pillar of the future economy." But he also signaled a shift in thinking. While the multilateral WTO system would remain the foundation, he said, nations were also exploring what he called "plurilateral cooperation"—agreements among smaller groups of countries rather than the whole.

It was a telling phrase. Plurilateralism is what you pursue when the grand consensus breaks down, when you can no longer wait for every nation to agree. Whether the leaders would formally embrace this approach, or whether they would find a way to reaffirm their commitment to the broader multilateral order, remained to be seen. The declaration was expected by Saturday, when the leaders would hold their final retreat. What it would say about the future of global trade—and whether it would hold—was still being written.

President Lee will take on the role of a bridge for leaders to help build consensus on the need for closer cooperation
— South Korean presidential office
We will continue to uphold the multilateral regime based on the WTO, but as the WTO system is at stake, we are also in support of plurilateral cooperation
— South Korean Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Inventor

Why does it matter that Trump didn't show up?

Model

Because the United States is the largest economy in the room, and his absence signals where his administration stands on regional trade cooperation. He came for the business forum and bilateral talks but skipped the main summit—that's a statement.

Inventor

What's the difference between multilateralism and this "plurilateralism" the trade minister mentioned?

Model

Multilateralism is everyone at the table making one agreement together. Plurilateralism is smaller groups making their own deals. It's what you do when you can't get everyone to agree, which is exactly where things are now.

Inventor

So the declaration might not even happen?

Model

It could. But it requires unanimous consent from all twenty-one members. One country says no, and there's no declaration. That's why the ministers were negotiating right up until the end.

Inventor

What does South Korea actually want out of this?

Model

They want to show APEC still matters as a forum, and they want to push their own agenda—AI, demographic issues. But mostly they want to broker a deal that holds the region together when it's fracturing.

Inventor

Is free trade actually at risk here?

Model

The commitment to it is. Nations are putting up barriers, pursuing bilateral deals instead of multilateral ones. The language about the WTO being "at the core" used to be automatic. Now it's something they have to fight for.

Quieres la nota completa? Lee el original en Lokmat Times ↗
Contáctanos FAQ