http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/30/news/economy/house_unocal.reut/
It sounds a little bit more complicated than just blocking the deal...
The House overwhelmingly voted for an amendment barring the Treasury Department from spending any money to recommend approving a takeover of Unocal by China's CNOOC Ltd.
What this means exactly is a bit too arcane for me at this point. I have no idea if this is just symbolic or if it effectively blocks a very real process (anything that would be required for CNOOC's bid to go through).
Personally, I don't really see why CNOOC shouldn't buy Unocal. Oil is a very liquid market. In times of peace, whoever has money can buy oil, even from its worst enemy (cases in point: Iran, the Soviet Union, Venezuela, etc...). If CNOOC shareholders get a good price, then it's all fair and fine. In times of war or conflict, you need control of the fields and of the shipping lanes, and the formal ownership of the assets doesn't have any influence there. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
That is rather strong language considering it formally is simply a private business transaction. I'm ever more convinced this will have ramifications on the allocation of the Chinese trade surplus versus the US. But what those ramifications will be I don't think even the Chinese know yet. It's too easy from e western perspective to fall for the image of scheming mandarins. But probably to a surprising degree the bulk of Chinese movers and shakers actually believed that the West believed in Free markets, Free Trade and all that jazz. This might prompt a slight rethink. Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits.
