本文旨在探討這一波區域主義主要玩家（player）的美國，其作為發動者（initiator）與主要行為者（agent）選擇洽簽對象的內部原因與外在標準，一方面可藉以增加對現時國際經貿環境變遷的瞭解程度，另一方面或有助於釐清台灣未來可以依循的途徑（approaches）。 　　 　　 文中發現，美國在選取FTA的對象時，經濟規模會成為首要考慮因素。大規模的國家間之締結須顧慮對WTO的衝擊；而從美國實際已簽約或協商中的對象來看，有些小規模的國家之所以優先，主要出軍事外交等戰略考量，而針對中規模的國家則又多了些經濟層面的思考。另從美國已經簽署的FTA可以得知，其對象絕大部分都屬開發中國家，已簽署且屬於已開發國家的也只有加拿大(NAFTA)、新加坡，以及澳洲三個，可見美國在尋求FTA對象方面之保守。 　　 　　 台灣真正的經濟整合利益在東亞，但由於中國因素作祟，國際政治現實迫使台灣必須透過或繞道美國。一旦與美國簽訂FTA，則東亞國家比如日本、新加坡與其他國家比較可能跟進，但也僅止於可能，因為這些國家面對中國的壓力與誘惑與美國迥然有別；除非兩岸之間的敵對氣氛降低，否則USTR應不致投入有限談判資源去洽商一個極可能會「冒犯北京」而成局機率不大的美台FTA。

Second to globalization, the most conspicuous new trend worldwide is the proliferation of proposals for bilateral and regional Preferential/Regional Trading Agreements (PTAs/RTAs). Since 1990, the number of RTAs in force rose from 50 to nearly 230 (figure 1.1: The number of RTAs exploded in the 1990s). And due to their much lower negotiation costs and smaller impact on the domestic industries of participating countries, Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) have become the most widespread vehicle for regionalization. In plain words, An FTA is an agreement among member countries that substantially eliminate trade barriers such as tariffs and quantitative import restrictions between themselves under the auspice of GATT XXIV/GATS V. It’s a good example for the interplay among the legal basis, economic logic and realpolitik. I am convinced that the popularity of FTAs is due mainly to a shift in trade politics of the U.S. By emphasizing a “dual track” trade policy combining bilateral negotiations with multilateral negotiations under the WTO, the U.S. whose attitude moved from active hostility to enthusiasm towards regionalism since late 1980s have induced Domino effects and reinforced themselves worldwide. As for the surge of regionalism in East Asia, in which Taiwan is located, whose traditional outward-oriented strategy regards the whole world as their economic hinterland can be seen as a defensive response to regionalization in Europe (EU) and North America (NAFTA). However, a great amount of FTAs signed and under negotiations discussion indirectly proved that the surge of bilateralism in East Asia, hints at strategic considerations or becoming a politically-designed arena reshaped by the major players (US, Japan, China, ASEAN) and matched by the “herd instincts” of followers. Since the late 1990s, some 40 bilateral trade deals have been signed or proposed, however, in the name of strengthening economic ties within and beyond East Asia, including the Japan-Singapore Economic Partnership Agreement (2002) and others. The importance of preferential trade in the region was dramatically increased by the signing of the ASEAN-China Comprehensive Economic Co-operation Framework Agreement (2002) that schedules an FTA by 2010. The discriminating nature of FTA by definition implies that some countries inevitably get left out of trade agreements, either because they are not favored politically, because they cannot afford the costs of many separate negotiations, or because their neighborhood is less open (The World Bank’s annual Report—Global Economic Prospects 2005). Obviously, Taiwan and Cuba belong to the first category unlike some developing countries such as Bolivia and Sri Lanka of the second or third one. Due to problems of diplomacy, especially the boycott enforced against Taiwan by the People’s Republic of China, it is very likely that Taiwan will be excluded from the wave of economic integration taking place in the region. Even Japan, counted as the “natural partner” of Taiwan in the economic, historic and geographic sense, shows good intensions but lacks in political will to support any kind of FTAs between Japan and Taiwan. This form of realpolitik will undoubtedly have economic welfare consequences for Taiwan, the most worrisome of which is so-called marginalization. Indeed, concerns about the serious political and economic implications arising from Taiwan’s “economic isolation” are increasingly shared by many prominent scholars. Findlay et al. (2003) raises concerns about the treatment of Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) in the application of an Asian PTA. A genuine multilateral approach to the design of trade policy should provide a formula for the inclusion of Chinese Taipei, for its own benefit as well as that of the entire region. However, since few countries in the region would be willing to sign a preferential trade agreement with Chinese Taipei, the PTA route involves a high risk of Chinese Taipei’s economic isolation. What are the implications of this conundrum, and how would it affect the potential for conflict in the region Factors such as the future reunification of the Korean peninsula and the problematic relationship between China and Taiwan pose new economic, political, and security challenges for East Asia. As noted by Scollay and Gilbert (2001), “Whereas an understanding was reached within APEC to provide for the simultaneous participation of China and Taiwan (Chinese Taipei) as well as Hong Kong, this understanding may not necessarily carry over to the formation of an East Asian economic bloc. The possible exclusion of Taiwan from such a bloc carries serious political and economic implications.” We will at first try to identify the difficulties and constraints facing Taiwan about FTAs and show why the East Asian economic integration is important to Taiwan. This study in turn focuses on the selection criteria of US and makes some reasonable predictions in order to assess the possibility of Taiwan as the partner of US.