As a follow up to our sustainability session with Lahey, Jencks, et al., I thought this PBS interactive map was done well enought and was important enough to list as a seperate post. This interactive map will give you a feel for the water issues that China must come to terms with in the coming decades. Be sure to click on the boxes with each item to learn more.

Huge population, huge country, limited resources, seemingly intractable water issues and problems to solve — sheesh, and I thought my job was hard.

Your thoughts?

Submitted By: Victoria Whelan

I found this good US State Department website (Tips for Travelers To China) about traveling to China if anyone is interested.

Wow.

Who would have ever thought that the poor and developing countries of the world would have the option of turning down the IMF, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank, etc. for financing?

Well, per this NY Times article [subscription may be required], “Help Not Wanted,” that day has arrived. See also related NY Times Op-Ed piece, “Patron of African Misgovernment.”

The author of the article points out that countries such as China, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, etc., are pushing the “good guy” foreign aid programs out of the market through their own activist aid programs with no bids, no conditions and no need to reform attached. The article strongly criticizes these countries as “rogue states” for doing this, and predicts that their alternative development model will “create a world that is more corrupt, chaotic and authoritarian.”

Perhaps, but geeeezzz, the IMF, World Bank and the like are certainly no saints in this regard. See, e.g., this recent Wall Street Journal article on the African Development Bank, Continental Divide: U.S. Stirs Debate Over Africa Bank. See also/read, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins and/or just about anything written by the academic adversaries of economist Jeff Sachs at Columbia University.

I read this NY Times article three times to try to get my arms around it. Each time I finished something just did not feel right, and my gut and brain still tell me that the jury is still out on this issue. For example, it seems to me that many of the African countries have tied their wagons to the West and its instituions for the past three centuries and have little to show for it. The author ignores this point and that makes me a tad suspicuous of why the article and its author are so quick to come to the defense of the foreign aid agencies that many contend have done a crappy job helping poor countries improve over the years.

So, why not give the Chinese and others their shot, even IF their intentions are money, international politics and access to raw materials?

Your thoughts? Where is “truth” in this mess? These are less than clear questions and issues for those of us from the legal world.

A number of months ago the China Law Blog did a nice post on the Rule of Law in China. This past weekend I finshed good book related to the subject of that post which just came out by James Mann called The China Fantasy: How Our Leaders Explain Away Chinese Repression.

Some of the book I disagreed with, but other parts of the book I found to be really well done and overall it is a book that is forcing me to rethink some my own learning, biases and conceptions toward China. (In a future post I will discuss Mann’s book; you can use this book as one of your three book reviews if you wish.) A pro-China book, it is not. It also has a very, very good chapter on how we might see/view the upcoming Beijing Olympics as China presents that event and itself to the world.

Having provided the above background, a recent related NY Times aticle, Rivals on Legal Tightrope Seek to Widen Freedoms in China, was published that is very well done and written.

It focuses on two born again Christain attorneys in China, Li Jinsong an Li Jianqiang, who have devoted themelves to expanding freedoms and the rule of law in China. The problems is they cannot get along and agree on strategy. This article, and the lives of these two lawyers, focus on a fundamental issue that is the subject of fierce debate in and outside of China:

Should the legal academy and rights activists in China try to improve the current Communist Party-run sytem by supporting well-intentioned party leaders, or, should the seek an outright end to Communist rule?

The old “will the Emperor (i.e., Beijing) look out for us (the peasants) if we treat him right or will he not” argument?

Read this article, enjoy, and learn.

Click here to read about and see it for yourself (scroll down and you can click on the video and watch it).

What is the NFL doing with an interest in China? Give me an “M”-”A”-”R”-”K”-”E”-”T”!!! What’s that spell? MARKET! MARKET! MARKET!! — New fans to replace the old ones in the US that don’t give a rip anymore about pro football and the girlie men players and owners with big egos that go with it!

In Parts I and II of my Spanish versus Mandarin posts we had some great discussions and debate (click here and here). This is also a good follow up to Steve Feng’s recent post and kind offer to lead getting some of you together to learn some Mandarin.

I can’t seem to let a sleeping dog lie:

Per this Wall Street Journal article, “Mexico’s Case Study: Looking to China, and Away From It,” Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was asked by a Mexican MBA student at Tsinghua University (an elite school in China) while Paulson was recently visiting Beijing, “How will countries like Mexico, who are still emerging markets, compete with this monster that is China?” Paulson replied to the effect of, “See China’s growth as an opportunity.”

I.e., look for ways to do business and partner with these folks and no more whining about how China is kicking your butts.

Per this article, and as I alluded to in Parts One and Two of this discussion thread, think of the professional opportunities here for those students armed with a Cal Poly MBA who speak English (as you all do), Spanish (some do) and Mandarin (??). In my view, with some more hard work, continued networking, talent (see/refer to my earlier post on skills needed for successful expats in China) and yes, a little luck along the way, the world could be your oyster if you spoke or took some time off to learn to speak all three languages reasonably well.

Ah, if only I were in my 20s again …

Uuuhh, I think it’s a lot.  Wikipedia said it’s more than $2.37. 

As a follow up to Professor Ramezani’s session with us, read this recent Wall Street Journal article [subscription may be required], “China May Get More Daring With Its $1.07 Trillion Stash.”

Per this article, China is looking at new ways of managing its investments in the US that he spoke about – fewer purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds and more buying of riskier investments such as corporate bonds, stocks, real estate and/or commodities.

What does this mean for the U.S.? Per Professor Ramezani’s talk, is this a good or bad development for the US? And what business opportunities might this shift in Chinese investing present for YOU?

And for an article on “the man” in China who gets to decide how to spend this money, click on this Wall Street Journal article (”Beijing Taps Top Official To Invest Its Cash Stash“).  Note that he does not have a PhD in finance or economics; a masters degree.  This was suprising to me given much of Asia’s fixation with perception, formality and high levels of education (e.g., PhD from a Tier 1 Western Univesity preferred for top positions; others need not apply, etc.).   Then again, both Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping were peasants and did not come from the bourgeoise.

Submitted By: Derrick Fischer

I ran into this video on the Three Gorges Dam, from a link on Google Earth. Some of you may have seen this already if you watched the Discovery Atlas episode done on China. Anyway, it summarizes a few of the pros and cons of building the largest dam in the world. This dam is going to tame the devastating effects of the Yangtze River during a flood, and provide China with a clean source of energy to cover 10% of their annual electricity demands. However, according to the video and these two articles found here and here, this great feat of Chinese engineering comes at a great cost. Over one million people were forced off their land with minimal reimbursement. 1,200 towns and villages with centuries of history will be buried beneath the water. This is just another example that China is not afraid to do whatever it takes to pull their country into the 21st century.

This project is a major step forward in terms of providing China with a clean renewable source of energy. However, do the benefits outweigh the costs?

Is this another project designed to benefit the rich (those who can afford and receive the electricity) at the cost of the poor (those who are removed from their homes and left with a stagnant polluted lake)?

Is this how China should be dealing with their power crisis, or should they be spending their money on finding ways to use less electricity (i.e. more efficient buildings), or a mixture of both? Your thoughts?