在革命和内战中保护外国投资——对当代仲裁实践的批判

IF 0.8 Q2 LAW
K. Greenman
{"title":"在革命和内战中保护外国投资——对当代仲裁实践的批判","authors":"K. Greenman","doi":"10.1093/lril/lrab019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The protection of foreign investment during times of revolution and civil war, and especially against acts of non-state forces, has a history—both recent and longer past. The issue has re-emerged as a result of the series of revolutions and civil wars, known as the Arab Spring. This is demonstrated by several recent awards against Libya, Egypt and Syria, as well as a number of pending claims. This article considers what a critique of this practice might look like and how it might fit in with existing critiques of international investment law. It argues first, that the contemporary arbitral practice concerning investment protection during revolution and civil war encourages a particular type of security state—and a particular type of state violence—along gendered and racialised lines and second, that it domesticates revolution and restrains revolutionary contestation of the prevailing economic order.","PeriodicalId":43782,"journal":{"name":"London Review of International Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protecting foreign investments in revolution and civil war: critiquing the contemporary arbitral practice\",\"authors\":\"K. Greenman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/lril/lrab019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The protection of foreign investment during times of revolution and civil war, and especially against acts of non-state forces, has a history—both recent and longer past. The issue has re-emerged as a result of the series of revolutions and civil wars, known as the Arab Spring. This is demonstrated by several recent awards against Libya, Egypt and Syria, as well as a number of pending claims. This article considers what a critique of this practice might look like and how it might fit in with existing critiques of international investment law. It argues first, that the contemporary arbitral practice concerning investment protection during revolution and civil war encourages a particular type of security state—and a particular type of state violence—along gendered and racialised lines and second, that it domesticates revolution and restrains revolutionary contestation of the prevailing economic order.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"London Review of International Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"London Review of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/lril/lrab019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London Review of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/lril/lrab019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

革命和内战时期对外国投资的保护,特别是对非国家势力行为的保护,有着悠久的历史——无论是最近的还是过去的。这一问题因一系列革命和内战而重新出现,被称为“阿拉伯之春”。最近对利比亚、埃及和叙利亚的几项裁决以及一些未决索赔证明了这一点。本文考虑了对这种做法的批评可能是什么样子,以及它如何与现有的对国际投资法的批评相适应。它认为,首先,关于革命和内战期间投资保护的当代仲裁实践鼓励了一种特定类型的安全国家——以及一种特殊类型的国家暴力——沿着性别和种族化的路线;其次,它将革命本土化,并抑制了对主流经济秩序的革命争夺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Protecting foreign investments in revolution and civil war: critiquing the contemporary arbitral practice
The protection of foreign investment during times of revolution and civil war, and especially against acts of non-state forces, has a history—both recent and longer past. The issue has re-emerged as a result of the series of revolutions and civil wars, known as the Arab Spring. This is demonstrated by several recent awards against Libya, Egypt and Syria, as well as a number of pending claims. This article considers what a critique of this practice might look like and how it might fit in with existing critiques of international investment law. It argues first, that the contemporary arbitral practice concerning investment protection during revolution and civil war encourages a particular type of security state—and a particular type of state violence—along gendered and racialised lines and second, that it domesticates revolution and restrains revolutionary contestation of the prevailing economic order.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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