The American and Chinese strategies on regional trade are incompatible and in competition. The case of the TPP supports the theoretical projection of the realist school of continual balancing. Rivalry will persist and two competing trade blocs will divide the region. This will lead to hinder further multilateralization of the region and draw a line in the regional trade architecture. Balance between the two superpowers and the mitigation of competition seems unlikely. Terada proposes Japan as the mediator of the U.S. and China. However, “binding” two different quality free trade agreements seems highly unrealistic and unfeasible. Trading blocs with different levels of liberalization and standards cannot be bound by a member country. The utilization of the free trade agreements is dependent on negotiations of the TPP as well as the corporations and its production networks of a country. While it is true that Japan’s production networks will benefit through RCEP, Japanese interest in balancing China and its alliance with the U.S. may be possible motivations to join the TPP. Also, there is little room for middle powers like Korea to balance the two superpowers on the regional level.