论文部分内容阅读
研究“主权淡化论者”的两面性有助于更好地维护经济主权原则。在以往同发展中国家签订的双边投资协定中,美国从资本输出国的角度极力主张扩大对本国投资者的保护,极力限制缔约对方国家主权的行使。然而,在NAFTA体制内,美国作为资本输入国面临的投资仲裁压力日益显现。为此,美国在NAFTA体制内开始强调从资本输入国的立场上考虑保护本国利益,并从“事前”、“事中”保护东道国权益设置了若干“机关”。以往被美国视为“不合时宜”的发展中国家的主张,反而被美国用来质疑NAFTA投资争端解决机制的合理性。美国对国际投资仲裁态度的转变有力地表明了“主权淡化论”的虚伪性。
Studying the two sides of Sovereign Dilutionists helps to better safeguard the principle of economic sovereignty. In the past bilateral investment agreements signed with developing countries, the United States strongly advocated the protection of domestic investors from the perspective of capital-exporting countries and severely restricted the exercise of the national sovereignty of the other party. However, in the NAFTA system, the United States is increasingly facing pressure on investment arbitration as a capital-importing country. To this end, the United States has begun to emphasize in the NAFTA system that the interests of its own country should be considered from the perspective of the capital-importing countries and that a number of “organs” should be set up to protect the rights and interests of the host country “beforehand ” and “things ”. The ideas of developing countries that the United States regarded as “outdated” in the past were instead used by the United States to question the rationality of the NAFTA investment dispute settlement mechanism. The change of the U.S. attitude toward international investment arbitration has strongly demonstrated the hypocrisy of “the theory of the desalination of sovereignty.”