We are in a world where U.S. pursuit of antitrust objectives through a policy of encouraging foreign direct investment is far more complex. On the one hand, public policy toward foreign direct investment increasingly must carefully balance significant tradeoffs: the potential benefits of greater competition with the heightened risks to national security. On the other hand, Washington has been moving in a direction where such tradeoffs are seen as illusory: some U.S. policy makers judge the loss of competition, itself, as constituting a threat to national security. This was largely the case in the 1980s when Japan was in the sights of U.S. international economic policy. Today, however, Washington is dealing with a far more combustible mixture: unlike Japan, a liberal democracy, China is neither liberal nor a democracy. The challenge now before U.S. policy makers is thus how to deal with foreign direct investment from a country that is viewed as presenting a combination of threats to competition and national security. Effectively confronting that challenge requires a new analytical framework that provides a decision-making calculus to maximize the chances of achieving a balance by distinguishing between new domestic entrants versus new foreign entrants.

By Harry G. Broadman[1]

 

I. CHANGES IN THE ANTITRUST-FOREIGN INVESTMENT NEXUS

For decades, U.S. policy toward foreign direct investment was one of the most liberal in the world. Indeed, most Presidents, often soon afte

...
THIS ARTICLE IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR IP ADDRESS 44.200.137.63

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!