The argument is that multilateral agreements undermine the trading system by diverting the interest of more complex and difficult multilateral negotiations and diverting trade to multilateral partners. Of course, this is the latter point – the promotion of trade between partners – but when it is simply a matter of diverting trade from elsewhere and not creating trade that would otherwise not take place, what is the net profit? Skepticism about these agreements explains that there could be no net benefit, that trade should simply be relocated. Second, a theory of plurilaterals is that their dissemination creates the need to bring them together into a truly multilateral agreement. We are a long way from that, but it is a fascinating idea, not least because the obvious place for that is in the World Trade Organization (WTO), which would help the organization return to its fundamental objective of trade liberalization. In this scenario, the world gets a robust WTO through the back door and not through the front door, but it still gets one. Ambassador Lighthizer recently revived a topic that scientists have discussed in the past, but which has generally not been the subject of political debate in the United States – whether the continuation of regional or multilateral agreements poses a threat to the multilateral trading system. He did so with a biblical reference in calling the European Commission a Pharisee for the defence of multilateralism and the exercise of bilateralism. What is remarkable is that this government, despite little evidence, with the exception of the vice-president, liked to use the Bible as an accessory that each of them had actually read it. The ambassador receives points to remember his Catholic upbringing, and he is right about his characterization of European hypocrisy, but his next argument, that we should not have both at the same time and that we must vote instead, is more complex.
Let`s consider the arguments for and stupid. If it is the result of the limited number of negotiating states and the subject matter of a contract that the application of the treaty in its entirety between all parties is an essential condition of the agreement of each party which is supposed to be bound by the treaty, a reservation requires adoption by all parties.  A final argument is that plurilaters are multiplied, they create confusion in the trading system because of conflicting rules, particularly rules of origin, which greatly increase uncertainty in the system and cause compliance problems for businesses.