Over time, is it likely that one nation will gravitate towards the other’s model and if so what would be the reasons for so changing?

Question One:

The foundation of modern international law is Euro-centric and over the last 70 years turned into a U.S.-led Western based order. China (and other nations) were essentially excluded from the table of international law creation being considered “uncivilized” (i.e., barbarians, savages). However, China has established the AIIB, BRI and is the second largest economy with enormous technological/military strength. Now that China is an important global actor, China can no longer be out-casted and China will likely become an architect of international law which will be a transformative development.

In what ways will China’s rise influence the creation and interpretation of international law?

In what ways could this influence clash with existing international law?

What is the likelihood of Western adoption (or non-adoption) of the Chinese “vision” of international law (i.e. non-interference, etc.) and why or why not?

Question Two:

China’s State-Owned Enterprises (“SOEs”) are powerful economic actors which have been active in investing in businesses in Western nations. Western nations have expressed national security concerns because SOEs are not purely private market actors – they are controlled by a government. The Western concerns are that (1) SOEs have strategic motivations to transfer technology and promote political objectives and (2) concerns exist with respect to the claim that SOEs are not purely profit-making businesses, and therefore SOEs may be less efficient and less productive (profitable) than purely private market actors. In response to these concerns Western states are tightening their domestic national security screening mechanisms to protect critical economic and infrastructure sectors from SOEs.

Are Western concerns over SOEs (and blocking SOE investments) a legitimate expression of national security or used as a cover for protectionism?

Aside from national security concerns, are Western nations legitimately concerned that SOEs may be inefficient economic actors and therefore less productive and less profitable than purely private market actors and is it therefore legitimate to discourage/block SOE investments based on this factor or used as a cover for protectionism?

Should SOEs be reformed so that these concerns (national security as well as productivity) disappear - and if so how, what would you recommend?

Question Three:

The United States National Security Strategy has shifted from the context of welcoming China into the global trade order and encouraging Chinese investment into the United States to viewing China as a strategic and economic adversary. Increased CFIUS scrutiny to thwart or reduce Chinese investments into certain businesses as well as trade tariffs and increased military tension in the South China Seas are examples of this perception.

Do you think that China’s growing global prestige and importance in the global economy will lead to increased hostility between the United States (with the US trying to block China’s rise) and its traditional Western allies (who are becoming integrated with China)?

Do you think U.S. allies will gravitate (moved towards) a Chinese governance model if it is successful and ally with China in international politics much as Western nations aligned with the United States in recent decades?

Will China gravitate towards a Western governance model over time and be influenced by Western norms and if so in what way or will the opposite likely to happen (Western adoption of Chinese norms)?

Question Four:

China’s rise and its governance model presents a challenge to the existing US-led international governance architecture. The two models have very different notions and values with respect to international law norms, rights, governmental involvement in the domestic economy and national political governance. Friction between China and the United States in trade and military power projection is increasing. The issue is whether the two models can co-exist in the international order or will one need to dominate the other.

Over the next 5-10 years, which outcome do you feel is most likely; peaceful but looking at each other as a rival, cooperation/partnership or economic/military conflict and why?

When a new power rises is it inevitable that the existing power will attempt to contain the new power’s rise or does globalization change that thinking?

Over time, is it likely that one nation will gravitate towards the other’s model and if so what would be the reasons for so changing?