隨著近年「印太」成為國際關係與外交研究的重要詞彙，歐盟於2021年4月首次提出「印太戰略」，並特別強調與東協在印太區域合作的重要性。事實上，歐盟自2010年代以來受到全球經濟重心東移、亞洲地緣政治競爭激烈等結構性因素影響，已加速與東協的「第三波區域間主義（Third Interregionalism）」發展；除與東協國家洽簽經濟協定，並於2020年底將原有與東協的對話夥伴關係升級為戰略夥伴關係。本文主張歐盟透過與東協國家洽簽經濟協定以增強其「印太戰略」的效力，而雙邊升級的關係不但強化東協..

Indo-Pacific strategies have become salient in international relations and diplomatic studies. In April 2021, the European Union (EU) for the first time declared its own Indo-Pacific strategy and emphasized the importance of cooperation with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In fact, global systemic factors such as the shift of economic power to Asia and the intense geopolitical rivalry in the region have galvanized the evolution of the Third Interregionalism between the EU and ASEAN. Other than economic agreements, both b..

WTO爭端解決機制一向被譽為皇冠上之珍珠，如今上訴機構陷入停擺危機，反而成為皇冠上之荊棘。過去數年來，美國運用WTO所要求之共識，屢次反對上訴機構成員之選任案，尤其是川普政府上台後更加強杯葛之力道。根據爭端解決規則暨程序瞭解書之規定，上訴案件最少由三名成員審理並作成裁決。然而2019年12月10日之後，上訴機構已無法正常運作。長期以來美國對上訴機構提出許多批評，包括系統性、實質性與程序性問題;反之，許多WTO會員則急於補實懸缺，而疏於處理美國關切之事項。根據爭端解決規則暨程序瞭解書第3...

The dispute settlement system, often considered as the “crown jewel” of the WTO, is in a present crisis and becomes the crown of thorns. Over the past years, the United States through the use of the WTO’s consensus requirements has successfully blocked the launch of a process to select the Appellate Body members. This is carried forward by the Trump administration. With a Settlement of Disputes Understanding (DSU) requirement that appeals be heard by three AB members, with the AB membership down to zero at the present time..

歐盟於 1968 年成立一個糖共同行銷組織，在價格體系下，針對糖採取國內補貼與出口補貼。補貼額度超過歐盟 1995 年減讓承諾的補貼金額與出口數量，影響到澳洲、巴西與泰國糖的出口利益，而向 WTO 提起控訴。本案顯示補貼問題的複雜性，尤其很多國家透過國內補貼，而對出口產品實施交叉補貼，形成變相的出口補貼，這是本案的主要爭議。歐盟糖出口補貼被認定為違反 WTO 農業協定相關規定，因此影響到澳洲、巴西與泰國糖合法利益。本案對於歐盟糖體系的改革、WTO 杜哈發展議..

The European Union (EU) established a Common Organization for sugar in 1968, and accordingly applied subsidies to sugar under the price support system. However, the EU has been providing export subsidies in excess of its budgetary outlay and quantity commitment levels specified in the Schedule of 1995, thereby nullifying or impairing benefits expected to accrue to Australia, Brazil and Thailand under the Agreement on Agriculture. This case demonstrates the complexity of subsidies, in particular as more and more WTO members ap..