The logic is that U.S. business would like to cut through the complicated systems needed to ensure free-trade agreements that benefit only regional members. The second big problem with the ftaa talks is that many objectives high on the wish list in the draft text are simply not realizable in a regional agreement. Take free trade in agriculture. High on the agenda of most countries is putting restraints on subsidized U.S. agriculture export programs, a goal of great importance throughout the Americas. But the U.S. will never tie its hands on subsidies unless the E.U. does the same.
Agricultural subsidies are a global problem that affects products traded globally.
Countries in the western hemisphere would also like to see a reform of U.S. antidumping laws, which impose, often arbitrarily, steep penalties on cheap imported goods. The U.S. is not going to change its antidumping laws in one hemisphere and keep them for the rest of the world. That is a long time to sustain momentum and business support. Meanwhile, at some point the 140 members of the wto are going to get a new round of trade talks off the ground. The reality is that most governments of the hemisphere don't have the resources, or the will, to push an ftaa and a wto at the same time.