Why China Established the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank

The media can be accessed here: http://streaming.osu.edu/KnowledgeBank/Mershon16/3-24-2016.m4vOn January 16, 2016, China officially opened the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for business, representing what might be a seismic shift in economic power from the United States to China and the culmination of what had been a diplomatic disaster for the United States. The AIIB creates a challenge to the U.S. dominated World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), two venerable international financial institutions created at the end of the Second World War. The battle over the AIIB represents a challenge by China to the leading role of the United States in writing the rules for international trade. Loans by the AIIB will likely have fewer conditions and will promote the policies of the Chinese Communist Party. While the United States has been the underwriter of the world financial system for at least the past seven decades, the rise of the AIIB, could be the first indication that China will succeed in its quest to displace the United States as the final arbiter of the rules of international trade in the twenty first century.Ohio State University. Mershon Center for International Security StudiesEvent web pag

China’s Response to the Global Financial Crisis: Implications for U.S. – China Economic Relations

The consequences of the global financial crisis for United States-China economic relations are still unfolding, and it is still unclear whether trade tensions will escalate into trade sanctions. What seems clear, however, is that there is a rising tide of protectionism in both countries based upon what hardliners on each side perceive to be unfair practices and policies implemented by the other. Historically, mutual policies of protectionism between trading partners leads to trade sanctions, which would be an unfortunate result for United States-China economic relations. It remains to be seen whether hardliners in both countries will push the two trading partners into an escalating trade war or whether more moderate voices in the two countries can help to address existing trade issues without resorting to a trade war. This article discusses the potential for an escalation in trade tensions between the two countries as a result of measures taken by China in response to the global financial crisis. This article proceeds in three parts. The first part examines the effects of the global financial crisis on China. The second part examines China’s response to the global crisis. The final part of this article examines the position of the United States that China’s policies (some of which predated the global financial crisis) and its current economic stimulus package may, in the view of the United States, contain unfair trade practices that justify the imposition of trade sanctions

China\u27s Anti-Corruption Crackdown and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

China’s highly publicized crackdown on corruption may affect the type and number of cases in China that arise under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”), but it should not be assumed that the crackdown will necessarily lead to fewer FCPA prosecutions. Although there is some overlap of the goals of China’s corruption crackdown and the goals of the FCPA, China’s crackdown also serves important goals of the ruling Communist Party. The main goal of the current crackdown is to reinforce the Party’s power by targeting enemies and rivals of the current leadership. The crackdown is not aimed at prohibiting bribes given to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining business; however, the FCPA is aimed at proscribing these types of bribes. As a result, while the crackdown may deter some types of FCPA cases from arising in China, other types of cases will be unaffected or may even increase

The Costly Problem of Poorly Drafted Choice of Law Clauses

This piece is a response to John Coyle, The Canons of Construction for Choice-of-Law Clauses, 92 Wash. L. Rev. 631 (2017)

Enforcement against Counterfeiting in the People\u27s Republic of China

Although the discussion in this Article is limited to counterfeiting in China, many of the issues discussed are endemic to the Chinese legal system as a whole, and apply also to other intellectual property rights, such as copyright piracy and patent infringements. Moreover, many of the themes raised in this Article also illuminate the current state of the nascent Chinese legal system as a whole and how its capacity is tested as it continues the struggle to keep pace with China\u27s many economic reforms and accompanying social changes. Part I of this Article begins with a review of the enforcement system against counterfeiting in China and examines the legal problems that prevent more effective enforcement in China.25 After reviewing China\u27s current issues, this Part will then analyze and suggest different ways of viewing and handling some of the same issues, based in some measure on United States law and practice.26 No attempt is made here to criticize the Chinese government for its current efforts in enforcing trademark rights against counterfeiting. Rather, this Article is intended to present China with some alternative ways of viewing and handling some of these difficult issues and to serve as a basis for exchange and dialogue between the United States and China. Part I concludes with some observations about the future of counterfeiting in China