Two forum responses International Law with bluebook citations 250 words each

Post 1:

The issue of globalization has taken on many different particular meanings to individuals, often dependent upon whether they seek to venerate of denigrate the concept. The forum prompt for this week has as its intended meaning the general growth in international trade relations in both real and relative terms. As the matter of the inequity of trade gains accrued to nations and people around the globe, there are a number of reasons for this. First of all there is the question of geography, some nations are just better able to exploit existing raw materials, and some have effective access to well-traveled trade routes and can serve as major ports of transfer, furthermore some nations have terrain that lends itself well to development of infrastructure. While these are not necessarily major causes for the overall success of nations or peoples, they are however still noteworthy factors. Although, the matter of raw material access can actually prove to be a tricky subject, on the one hand raw material exports or export of processed materials acquired domestically can serve to greatly benefit income to a nation, if the exploitation of those resources constitutes a significant portion of the economy or at least a significantly profitable area of the economy, nations may place undue interest into the exploitation of those resources and not pursue policies under which other portions of the economy are able to effectively develop, and thus their economy is likely to stagnate in the event of resource depletion or severe shifts in global prices of those materials that an economy depends upon. This also brings the point of individual governmental actions. This may be the most glaring area of identifiable distinction between countries on the matter of trade. Government decisions impact individual behavior and, depending on the government’s structure, may outright dictate it.[1] Governmental tax policies are likely to attract or repel foreign and domestic investments in industries, depending on their relative and absolute severity. Tax and spending policies may encourage movements of the economy towards consumption, savings, or investment which in turn serve to emphasize the intention and capacity for a nation to import and export goods. This inclination towards consumption, savings, or investment also serves to determine whether the domestic economy is oriented towards export goods, or goods for domestic consumption. Furthermore, certain nations have as a popular export their own people in the form of labour to more prosperous and industrialized nations. This labour exportation can take the form of both low and high skilled labour and may in some circumstances include both, although this largely depends upon the situation in the country of origin and demands for labour from that nation, as well as cultural aspects of the involved nations.[2] This labour movement has the potential risk of creating a so called "brain-drain" whereby the most capable persons of a given country leave, generally for perceived greener pastures as it were. However, this may also serve as a means of income to the nation as those that have gone abroad may be inclined to send a portion of their higher incomes back to their home country [well, more specifically their family or loved ones still residing in that country] through remittances. This is of course very much a matter of choice and culture, often associated with larger, and more importantly, close families, in social environments in which able family members are expected to help their less able kin.[3] Remittances are likely to breakdown in particularly atomized family structures, especially if the home or new environment is heavily consumer oriented and there is an absence of a sufficient reinforcing social presence to reinforce them. Cultural concerns may be among the paramount areas for which differentiation of globalization’s results are explicable. It seems unlikely to be purely coincidence that the so called “Asian Tigers” often seen as the major success stories of the latter half of the 20^th century are all broadly Sinic in their civilization orientation, although South Korea (ROK) is a bit more distinct from the others [Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan (ROC)], in that it lacks a significant Chinese population, and has had significantly influence from both Japanese and Western civilization, in addition to their own distinct cultural attributes.[4] Although, those nations being definitively positioned in the capitalist camp during the cold war no doubt also played a major role, and contrasts with the PRC and Vietnam which have seen economic improvements of late but have are still a bit behind the “Tigers” in per capita income. [5] This of course does not wholly explain such nations as the Philippines, which has significant Sinic ties, easier linguistic access to many markets than the “Tigers” on account of their prior American colonial status and thus the use of English as an official language, and a pro-western position during the cold war.[6][7] This brings back certain matters of mentioned earlier, but also the concern of that nation being split between civilizations, and seeing a significant, and violent restive minority contributing to instability and retarding potential investment from abroad. The impact of civilizations upon particular nations is an immensely broad factor further complicated by the addition of the unique particulars of a given regional or national culture that is almost certain to produce significant variations in economic, political, and social circumstances.[8][9] This is not even scratching the surface as all the potential causes of the differentiation of outcomes that been brought by globalization, it seems like a great topic for a paper, or a book, or possibly even a multi volume set.

Post 2:

This week topic about private international law is very interesting and crucial to understand the current global status of trade, globalization, political climate, and economic growth. Private international law definitely adds another layer of complexity to international law because it lowers the focus down to the private organizations and corporations. Private international law is one of the two categories of international law, i.e., public international law and private international law. Public international law, mostly deals with the rights between multiple states, or states and the citizens subjects to other states. In contrast, private international law works with disputes between private citizens, resulting from problems having substantial relationships to more than one state.

According to the American Society of International Law, “Private international law is the body of conventions, model laws, national laws, legal guides, and other documents and instruments that regulate private relationships across national borders.”¹. Private International Law “include matters relating to children and families; dispute resolution (including international arbitration and mediation); judicial cooperation (including the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments); insolvency; finance and banking; secured transactions; contract law; electronic commerce; and wills, trusts, and estates.”²In other words, it simply means that private international law deals with the trade and interaction between international corporations and organizations.

One such international about international trade is the World Trade Organization. Most experts in this field would argue that the World Trade Organization is the most important trade organization in the world. As stated in this week lesson the World Trade Organization is the only international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations and its goal is to promote businesses around the world³. Due to globalization, the global trade has significantly increased throughout the past few years and decades. Globalization has enabled states to states to compete with each other and as well it has open up the existing markets to a wider consumer base. One major drawback to globalization and this increased trade is that it is control by the top states to naturally benefit themselves and promote their end goals. One of the reasons of this is that in developing countries their major source of exports are usually the raw materials, e.g., coffee beans, minerals, etc. versus compared to the exports of developed states which are the final product (brand). The money is not in the raw material market itself but in the conversion of the raw material into a brand. Think about Starbucks versus any company exporter of coffee bean, or Apple versus the companies that manufacture parts of the iPhone.

Although this increased in global trade does not benefits all states equally especially those with in a developing economy the World Trade Organization does to an extend tries to help them. It does this by providing developing countries with special agreements that gives them transition periods to adjust to the more unfamiliar and difficult provisions of the World Trade Organization. This is not enough to make a fair competition but it certainly is a step in the right direction.