Under Pressure, Dubai Drops Port Deal Essay

Trade is an important transfer that is vital to the abundance of a country. International trade allows countries to exchange their goods and can improve their economies. Many businesses within the United States dislike international imports because they reduce their business within the U.S. Some people believe business can be improved within the United States by imposing tariffs on imports. Tariffs are taxes on imported goods from other countries. Others who favor international trade believe it’s beneficial to establish trade agreements. One trade agreement is NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, which President George H.W. Bush signed on December 8th, 1993. The treaty included the countries Canada, Mexico, and the United States, and intertwined all of their economies. It eliminated most of the tariffs between the three countries and installed a supply chain, which is a network where different countries make specific parts of a product. Recently, President Trump has proposed that NAFTA be abolished, to promote products manufactured in the United States. This recent situation relates to the issue of the tariffs at the Philadelphia Convention. At the time of the convention, the Northern states’ economy was based on manufacturing, so they wanted to impose tariffs to promote American products. The South’s economy was agricultural based, and exported many goods to Great Britain. So Southerners feared that if tariffs were imposed on Britain’s goods, then Britain would do the same on products from the South, which would negatively affect the South’s economy. Trade can be very beneficial to a country, but states can have different opinions on whether tariffs are necessary, depending

Around the turn of the 20th century, large multinational corporations began to form, and though they were sluggish about investment and market opportunities abroad, they quickly supported an aggressive foreign policy (Nash 589). In 1898 the State Department issued a memorandum stating: “we can no longer afford to disregard international rivalries now that we ourselves have become a competitor in the world-wide struggle for trade” (qtd Nash

An obstacle that arises in securing ships and ports is that of travelling to foreign ports. Security professionals are are encouraging the United States government to extend U.S. boundaries to foreign ports, which would put much emphasis on security at loading points (70). The fear is that attackers will board a ship at a foreign port and sail to American soil where they could practice terrorism. A way that shipping security has changed is that of the plan of the Container Security Initiative (CSI), which calls for international security criteria to identify high-risk cargo containers for pre-screening at their point of shipment (70). The Coast Guard has also increased patrols in the U.S. ports and waterways, specifically around the nation’s critical petro-chemical facilities (71). By 2004, The International Ship and Port Facility Security Code took effect requiring ship operators to develop security plans, appoint ship and company security officers and maintain a minimum level of on board security, while port officers are required to develop similar plans and hire a port facility security officer (71). This code made it mandatory for all ships to be secure both while still in ports and also while travelling. Not only does this protect passengers aboard the ship, but also citizens of the United States as threats cannot enter the country through shipping

When U.S business are thinking about going abroad, they need to be aware of the other country’s laws and regulations. “All businesses must, of course, follow the laws of the countries in which they are physically present and operating. Businesses may also be required, even in their foreign operations, to continue to follow certain laws of their home country. Also, businesses operating across national borders will also be subject to international law (Tony McAdams, 2014)”.

Any company that decides to expand internationally should consider many complexities that it might face. Because of the differences in political system, culture, surrounding environment, and many other factors, there might be great barriers for a firm to expand internationally. The CEO of Talisman Energy Inc and senior executive team have to convince the board of directors to enter Kurdistan region of Iraq. After Talisman's scandal in Sudan, taking any other step into an unstable region carries a great risk.

The CBP has an extremely important role in protecting the United States border and that most certainly involves protecting the maritime and port operations within the United States. Under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which

Which Countries are involved in this case? Describe the diplomatic relations between those countries? Are there any trade agreements, policies, sanctions, political circumstances, or diplomatic issues which would impact management’s decision to enter the market?

With a great nation comes great political power and responsibility played in the upkeep of our states. After the events of 9/11 America’s political side was forever altered. Clearly upset with the Middle East and whom the U.S. believed was responsible foreign affairs had to be looked at. Our government had put a stop to all communication, trade, travel, and influence from some countries overseas. Our President and congress were immediately forced to stop all meetings with foreign leaders due to the security regulations of our Department of Defense. Not only was our government no longer involved with the majority of other countries our citizens also could not travel to these places nor buy from them and all who were believed to be involved in secret affiliation would be brought to court. Policy with other countries prior to the events was different when looking at the topic of involvement of the U.S. and others.

The recent occurrences such as the 11th September 2001, epitomized the important exogenous watershed which influenced the American Government’s foreign policy decision- making. Apart from the exogenous dynamics which have made the bulk of judgments in the policy of U.S. foreign matters, there is also American government endogenous aspects. The elements include the Legislative body, the president, the public opinion Americans, and the bureaucracy which greatly influence the decision making concerning the foreign policy (Peterson, 1994).

ISDS has recently become a primary topic of controversy during the signing of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and other bilateral trade agreements. Some individuals argue that the focus on ISDS is either illegal, pointless and does not affect the pipeline of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in a country. Also, it is a “raw deal” that allows MNCs to contest host country’s public

There are several reasons why the US industry acted with caution. First of all, positive trade agreements were already in place from the 1992 trade agreement. The industry probably thought it should wait longer to ensure things worked out on their own before allowing politicians to intervene and make changes. If politicians had caused things to go south, which they inevitably do, these agreements would have been jeopardized. Secondly, the industry was practicing risk management. A lack of caution could have created a mess as the economy was taking a turn for the worse. Lastly, reopening old wounds could have caused Europe to pull out of many deals with the US, further disrupting international relations. The US weighed the odds and very quietly backed out, as they should have.

The level of internationalisation around the globe has grown throughout the years, with advanced technologies the ease and ability to work with foreign countries has also grown. However, firms do not simply interact with each other with no outside party involvement; the government can be seen to play a large role in conducting international business. Governments continuously have the responsibility to act in the manner that they believe is best for their nation; this includes decisions regarding protectionism, which may serve to aid domestic industries but simultaneously hinder international business. It can be seen that governments do not always act in their nation’s best interest and are corrupt which can serve to increase the risks and costs of entering an international business environment. While these are examples in which the government makes international business difficult it can also be seen that the presence of a government is instrumental in creating international business effectiveness, whether this be through their legal system or from trade agreements. This makes the role the government plays paradoxical; as their involvement generally increases the risks and costs of firms seeking to internationalise, whilst simultaneously playing a significant role in creating international business effectiveness.

When there many entrants in the market the ports does not have market power because of the fear of competition.

THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT: The critical concern Political environment has a very important impact on every business operation no matter what its size, its area of operation. Whether the company is domestic, national, international, large or small political factors of the country it is located in will have an impact on it. And the most crucial & unavoidable realities of international business are that both host and home governments are integral partners. Reflected in its policies and attitudes toward business are a governments idea of how best to promote the national interest, considering its own resources and political philosophy. A government control's and restricts a company's

Over the past few years, the global business operating environment has increasingly become challenging. First it was the global financial crisis followed almost immediately by the Europe crisis-which is currently threatening to become a global economic crisis-that presented these challenges. It was argued that economies, such as Jordan which are relatively smaller players in the Global arena would not suffer the adverse effect of the crisis. In fact Jordan and Lebanon were the main Middle East countries expected not to suffer from the adverse effect of the crisis. On the contrary, they were expected to benefit based on the fact they are consuming economies. Large trade deficit that would enable them enjoy cheaper imports as