UK Relations and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiations

Anastasia Oktayevna Mamedova – Lecturer at English Language Department #1, School of International Relations, MGIMO-University, 119454, Moscow, prospect Vernadskogo, 76, Russia. E-mail:
Вся статья: 

The article compares U.S. and UK approaches to concluding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, given the special relationship between Washington and London. The article is based on official statements and reports as well as the debate in the media.

Concluding TTIP was a priority for both U.S. President B. Obama and British Prime Minister D. Cameron. The trade agreement is both economic and political in nature. Geopolitically, the agreement may strengthen the role of the West in setting standards in global trade. U.S. and UK approaches were close when it came to the elimination of tariffs and further liberalization of non-tariff barriers. The U.S. was interested in accessing the EU procurement market; nevertheless, the British were more cautious in estimating the possibility of gaining access to U.S. procurement. Initially, the countries diverged on financial services regulation, with the U.S. being against its inclusion in TTIP. Officially, both countries supported including the ISDS mechanism in TTIP.

The Brexit victory in the UK and Donald Trump’s election in the U.S. have made the prospects of TTIP even more uncertain. Thus, it is necessary to continue exploring the U.S.-UK approaches to a Transatlantic FTA. If concluded, a future bilateral agreement between the UK and the U.S. might inherit some features of TTIP regarding trade liberalization, eliminating non-tariff barriers and the investment protection mechanism, as the interests of the U.S. and the UK elites converge on many of these issues.

Key words: the U.S., the UK, the EU, special relationship, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, free trade agreement.

1. Zaritskii B. Transatlanticheskoe partnerstvo: pozitsiia FRG [Transatlantic partnership: the position of the FRG]. Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn’ – International Affairs, 19.11.2015. Available at: (Accessed 29.06.2016). (In Russian)
2. Kadochnikov P.A., Ptashkina M.G. Transatlanticheskoe torgovo-ekonomicheskoe partnerstvo [Transatlantic trade and investment partnership]. Mirovaia ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia – World economy and international relations, 2015, no. 2, pp. 14–22. (In Russian)
3. Komarov I. Rossiia v sisteme novykh global’nykh torgovykh partnerstv [Russia within the system of new global trade partnerships]. Rossiiskii sovet po mezhdunarodnym delam – Russian International Affairs Council, 17.06.2016. Available at: (Accessed 29.06.2016). (In Russian)
4. Kuznetsov A.V., Zagashvili V.S. Regulirovaniemirovoitorgovliitransatlanticheskoiinvestitsionnoideiatel’nosti [Regulation of global trade and transatlantic investment activities]. Global’noe upravlenie: vozmozhnosti i riski – Global governance: opportunities and risks. Ed. V.G. Baranovskii and N.I. Ivanova. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ., 2015. 314 p. Pp. 70–88. (In Russian)
5. Nosov M.G. ES – SshA i Kanada [The EU – the USA and Canada]. Evropeiskii Soiuz v poiskakh global’noi roli: politika, ekonomika, bezopasnost’ – The European Union in search of a global role: politics, economy and security. Ed. by Al.A. Gromyko and M.G. Nosov. Moscow, Ves’mir Publ., 2015. 592 p. Pp. 367–392. (In Russian)
6. Ptashkina M.G. Pravila proiskhozhdeniia tovarov v peregovorakh o transatlanticheskom torgovom i investitsionnom partnerstve [Rules of origin in the negotiations on Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement]. Rossiiskii vneshneekonomicheskii vestnik – Russian Foreign Economic Bulletin, 2015, no. 6, pp. 72–83. (In Russian)
7. Rogov S.M. SShA [The USA]. Global’noe upravlenie: vozmozhnosti i riski – Global governance: opportunities and risks. Ed. by V.G. Baranovskii and N.I. Ivanova. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ., 2015. 314 p. Pp.154–178. (In Russian)
8. Sokolianskaia A. TTIP na grani sryva? [Is TTIP about to collapse?]. Rossiiskii sovet po mezhdunarodnym delam – Russian International Affairs Council, 11.05.2016. Available at: (Accessed 10.06.2016). (In Russian)
9. Tarabrin B. Neravnopravnye partnerstva [Unequal partnerships]. Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn’ – International Affairs, 12.05.2016. Available at: (Accessed 29.06.2016). (In Russian)
10. Kheifets B. Novye ekonomicheskie megapartnerstva i global’naya ekonomika [New economic mega partnerships and global economy]. Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn’ – International Affairs, 2016, no. 3. Available at: (Accessed 29.06.2016). (In Russian)
11. Shavkunov V.M., Romaniuk D.A. Transatlanticheskoe torgovoe i investitsionnoe partnerstvo: spasenie Evropy ili vtoraia Atlantida? [The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: the salvation of Europe or the second Atlantis?]. Ekonomicheskie nauki – Economic Sciences, 2015, no. 1 (122), pp. 107 – 126. (In Russian)
12. Akhtar S.I., Jones V.C. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Negotiations. Federation of American Scientists. Congressional Research Service, 2014. 50 p. Available at: (Accessed 09.06.2016).
13. Bromund T.R., Coffey L., Riley B. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): Economic Benefits and Potential Risks. The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, 17.09.2014, №2952. 16 p. Available at: (Accessed 16.12.2014).
14. Capaldo J. The Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: European Disintegration, Unemployment and Instability. Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper, no. 14-03, 2014. 29 p. Available at: (Accessed 02.07.2016).
15. Crouch C. Democracy at a TTIP’ing point: seizing a slim chance to reassert democratic sovereignty in Europe. IPPR, 06.12.2014. Available at: (Accessed 01.07.2016).
16. Czinkota M., Zeneli V. Why the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Is More Important Than TPP. The Diplomat, 30.01.2016. Available at: (Accessed 16.06.2016).
17. Dobson A., Marsh S. Anglo-American Relations: Contemporary perspectives. London, Routledge, 2013. 312 p.
18. Felbermayr G., Heid B., Lehwald S. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Who benefits from a free trade deal? GED Bertelsmann Stiftung. Gütersloh, 2013. 52 p. Available at: (Accessed 02.07.2016).
19. Francois J. Reducing Transatlantic Barriers to Trade and Investment: an Economic Assessment. Final Report for the European Commission. London, Centre for Economic and Research Policy, 2013. 124 p. Available at: (Accessed 02.07.2016)
20. Francois J. TTIP and the EU Member States. The World Trade Institute. Bern, 2016. 96 p. Available at: (Accessed 16.06.2016)
21. Hayes E. TTIP: transatlantic free trade at last? Global Affairs, 2015, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 113 - 120.
22. Hufbauer G.C., Cimino-Isaacs C. How will TPP and TTIP Change the WTO System? Journal of International Economic Law, 2015, vol. 18., no. 3, pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.1093/jiel/jgv036
23. Thelle M.H., Jeppesen T. The Danish pharmaceutical industry and TTIP (Novo Nordisk, Lundbeck, Leo Pharma). Copenhagen Economics. Available at: (Accessed 14.06.2016)
24. Troszczynska-Van Genderen W., Bierbrauer E. Briefing. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): The US Congress’s positions. DG EXPO/B/PolDep/Note/2014_117. European Parliament. Brussels, 09 September 2014. 9 p. Available at: (Accessed 10.06.2016)
25. Webb D. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. UK Parliament Briefing paper, no. 06688. London, 04.12.2015. 2015. 30 p. Available at: (Accessed 17.06.2016)
26. Webb D. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – Commons Library Standard Note SN/EP/6688. UK Parliament. 2014. 12 p.

DOI 10.24833/2071-8160-2017-2-53-208-225 (Read the article in PDF)