I'm not sure I exactly follow. Sometimes agreements and relationships are "zero-sum" - A gains implies B loses. Other agreements are not win-lose ("potluck ver

I'm not sure I exactly follow. Sometimes agreements and relationships are "zero-sum" - A gains implies B loses. Other agreements are not win-lose ("potluck versus buffet"). In the case of the TPP the US is looking to establish itself, its rules and its influence in the Pacific - to the chagrin of China. While partnerships between the US and China continue to strengthen, some key areas have always kept the two from being too close. Financially China poses a threat to the US it hasn't faced in close to a century. The Renminbi represents a real (but not grave) threat to the dollar and established economic dominance. China refuses to acknowledge a fixed Western world order and in these pursuits it plays fair and nonviolent but hard. Obama gleefully reminded Chinese delegates that it championed TTIP before the birth of the TPP. At this level of the game, when nations are not in full competition, there's some level of gain-and-lose. That is to say: yes - one side is getting screwed by the TPP (China). But only if the US plays its cards right. If it doesn't, it will be China that screws the US. And let us not discount the dreams and ambitions rest of the Asia-Pacific or the rest of the world.