The only useful testimony that the Chinese could provide -- and it would be totally voluntary -- would be if VN challenged our ability to finance the project as grounds for termination. In any other case it would be irrelevant.

I would be shocked if their counsel would make such an argument as grounds for the termination, as it would be so easily rebutted and would be a huge loss for them.

As I have studied the case, I find no significant issue that VN can raise that we cannot easily rebut. The only real risk that I see is our ability to finance the arbitration. If we can finance it -- we will get a huge award, if not we go to zero. Very simple binary result.