
- Findings of the investigation into China’s acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Office of US Trade Representative, March 22, 2018)Download at USTR site, at CVD
- Update concerning China’s Acts, policies and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation (Office of US Trade Representative, Nov. 20, 2018)Download at USTR site, at CVD
- China White Paper: The Facts and China’s Position on China-US Trade Friction (Information Office, China State Council, Sept. 28, 2018)Read on China Daily, Download from CVD
- Trump’s Trade War Timeline: An Up-to-Date Guide (Peterson Institute for International Economics)Read here







Commentary By
Theodore R. Bromund, Ph.D.@Bromund
Senior Research Fellow in Anglo-American Relations
James Jay Carafano@JJCarafano
Vice President, Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute
Brett D. Schaefer
Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
KEY TAKEAWAYS
U.S. accession would provide no benefits not already available to the U.S., while creating unnecessary burdens and risks.
The U.S. does not need to join the convention in order to access oil and gas resources on its extended continental shelf, in the Arctic, or in the Gulf of Mexico.
Despite subsequent changes in 1994 that led the Clinton administration to support U.S. accession, the Trump administration should oppose accession to this treaty.