When the Dragon comes Home to Roost: Chinese Investments in the EU, National Security, and Investor–State Arbitration

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Szilárd Gáspár-Szilágyi
{"title":"When the Dragon comes Home to Roost: Chinese Investments in the EU, National Security, and Investor–State Arbitration","authors":"Szilárd Gáspár-Szilágyi","doi":"10.1093/jnlids/idad028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The gradual rise of China as an economic, normative, and lending power has resulted in more protectionist measures in areas of the world that traditionally championed economic liberalization. Currently, 21 out of 27 European Union (EU) Member States have national laws or measures in place for the screening or review of foreign investments. However, such restrictive national measures can result in investment treaty-based arbitration under the existing bilateral investment treaties concluded by 26 EU Member States with China, as evidenced by the recent arbitration initiated by Huawei against Sweden. Therefore, this article assesses whether EU Member States are likely to see a spike in investor–State arbitral claims initiated by Chinese investors as a result of the former’s investment screening measures. To achieve this aim, the article first looks at the bilateral investment treaties (BIT)-level variables that can influence the initiation of arbitration against EU Member States, such as the presence and type of investor–State arbitration (ISA) clauses, the types of investments being made, the coverage of the pre- and/or post-establishment phases, or the inclusion of ‘non-precluded measures’ clauses. This is then followed by a look at other variables, such as the decreasing number of Chinese foreign direct investment into EU countries, the treatment of Chinese investors in recent high-profile cases, and the importance of security alliances. The article concludes that those EU States are at a higher risk of being respondents in arbitrations initiated by Chinese investors whose BITs with China include modern ISA clauses, cover the pre-establishment phase, and lack non-precluded measures clauses. However, EU States should wait for the outcome of the Huawei v Sweden arbitration before deciding whether the amendment or termination of the existing BITs with China is needed.","PeriodicalId":44660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","volume":"38 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad028","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The gradual rise of China as an economic, normative, and lending power has resulted in more protectionist measures in areas of the world that traditionally championed economic liberalization. Currently, 21 out of 27 European Union (EU) Member States have national laws or measures in place for the screening or review of foreign investments. However, such restrictive national measures can result in investment treaty-based arbitration under the existing bilateral investment treaties concluded by 26 EU Member States with China, as evidenced by the recent arbitration initiated by Huawei against Sweden. Therefore, this article assesses whether EU Member States are likely to see a spike in investor–State arbitral claims initiated by Chinese investors as a result of the former’s investment screening measures. To achieve this aim, the article first looks at the bilateral investment treaties (BIT)-level variables that can influence the initiation of arbitration against EU Member States, such as the presence and type of investor–State arbitration (ISA) clauses, the types of investments being made, the coverage of the pre- and/or post-establishment phases, or the inclusion of ‘non-precluded measures’ clauses. This is then followed by a look at other variables, such as the decreasing number of Chinese foreign direct investment into EU countries, the treatment of Chinese investors in recent high-profile cases, and the importance of security alliances. The article concludes that those EU States are at a higher risk of being respondents in arbitrations initiated by Chinese investors whose BITs with China include modern ISA clauses, cover the pre-establishment phase, and lack non-precluded measures clauses. However, EU States should wait for the outcome of the Huawei v Sweden arbitration before deciding whether the amendment or termination of the existing BITs with China is needed.
当龙回家栖息:中国在欧盟的投资、国家安全和投资者与国家间仲裁
中国作为经济、规范和借贷大国的逐步崛起,导致世界上传统上倡导经济自由化的地区采取了更多的保护主义措施。目前,27 个欧洲联盟(欧盟)成员国中有 21 个制定了筛选或审查外国投资的国家法律或措施。然而,根据欧盟 26 个成员国与中国缔结的现有双边投资条约,此类限制性国家措施可能导致基于投资条约的仲裁,华为公司最近对瑞典提起的仲裁即为例证。因此,本文评估了欧盟成员国是否有可能因前者的投资筛选措施而导致中国投资者提起的投资者与国家间仲裁申请激增。为实现这一目标,本文首先研究了双边投资条约(BIT)层面上可能影响针对欧盟成员国提起仲裁的变量,如投资者与国家间仲裁(ISA)条款的存在和类型、投资类型、设立前和/或设立后阶段的覆盖范围,或是否包含 "非排除措施 "条款。随后,文章对其他变量进行了分析,如中国对欧盟国家的外国直接投资数量不断减少、中国投资者在近期备受关注的案件中受到的待遇以及安全联盟的重要性。文章的结论是,那些与中国签订的双边投资协定包含现代国际投资协定条款、涵盖设立前阶段且缺乏非排除措施条款的欧盟国家在中国投资者提起的仲裁中成为被告的风险较高。然而,欧盟国家应等待华为诉瑞典案的仲裁结果,然后再决定是否需要修改或终止与中国的现有双边投资条约。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信