Belt, Road and (Legal) Suspenders: Entangled Legalities on the 'New Silk Road'

Tomer Broude
{"title":"Belt, Road and (Legal) Suspenders: Entangled Legalities on the 'New Silk Road'","authors":"Tomer Broude","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3489749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Belt and Road Initiative, formerly known as the \"New Silk Road\" is a central part of the People's Republic of China (PRC)'s 13th 5-year plan, an ambitious program of infrastructure project finance in 65 countries, to the tune of 1 Trillion USD invested over 20 years. Geo-politically, this might be the most important global governance initiative since the end of the first cold war. But what does it mean for law? Surely it is an exemplar of entangled legalities. It means very different things to the investment protection lawyer at MOFCOM in Beijing, the public procurement regulator in Greece, the (insert big-law firm name) Associate or Partner in Kazakhstan, or insurgents in Balochistan (Pakistan), and Judges in constitutional courts and indeed the European Court of Human Rights. This paper argues that structures of practice as well as cognitive limitations and sociological factors keep law's engagement with complexity enmeshed but separate, along the lines of (most obviously) national law, but more so along the lines of policy-issues and the object-oriented nature of distinct legal fields. This short paper will narrate – hypothetically, though firmly based in reality – different views of actors engaging with the Belt and Road Initiative, to demonstrate the parallel phenomena of separateness and entangledness, and also demonstrate the inevitable interdependence of entangled legal strands, looking at the case of the Belgrade-Budapest rail modernization project. In addition, it will emphasize the close connection between legal entanglement and empire.","PeriodicalId":137430,"journal":{"name":"Asian Law eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3489749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Belt and Road Initiative, formerly known as the "New Silk Road" is a central part of the People's Republic of China (PRC)'s 13th 5-year plan, an ambitious program of infrastructure project finance in 65 countries, to the tune of 1 Trillion USD invested over 20 years. Geo-politically, this might be the most important global governance initiative since the end of the first cold war. But what does it mean for law? Surely it is an exemplar of entangled legalities. It means very different things to the investment protection lawyer at MOFCOM in Beijing, the public procurement regulator in Greece, the (insert big-law firm name) Associate or Partner in Kazakhstan, or insurgents in Balochistan (Pakistan), and Judges in constitutional courts and indeed the European Court of Human Rights. This paper argues that structures of practice as well as cognitive limitations and sociological factors keep law's engagement with complexity enmeshed but separate, along the lines of (most obviously) national law, but more so along the lines of policy-issues and the object-oriented nature of distinct legal fields. This short paper will narrate – hypothetically, though firmly based in reality – different views of actors engaging with the Belt and Road Initiative, to demonstrate the parallel phenomena of separateness and entangledness, and also demonstrate the inevitable interdependence of entangled legal strands, looking at the case of the Belgrade-Budapest rail modernization project. In addition, it will emphasize the close connection between legal entanglement and empire.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“一带一路”与(法律)吊带:“新丝绸之路”的法律纠缠
“一带一路”倡议,原名“新丝绸之路”,是中华人民共和国“十三五”规划的核心部分。“十三五”规划是一项雄心勃勃的计划,将在20年内向65个国家提供1万亿美元的基础设施项目融资。从地缘政治角度看,这可能是自第一次冷战结束以来最重要的全球治理倡议。但这对法律意味着什么呢?这无疑是法律纠纷的一个典型。对于中国商务部的投资保护律师、希腊的公共采购监管机构、哈萨克斯坦(请插入大律师事务所的名字)的助理或合伙人、俾路支省(巴基斯坦)的叛乱分子、宪法法院的法官,甚至是欧洲人权法院(European Court of Human Rights)的法官来说,这意味着截然不同的东西。本文认为,实践结构以及认知限制和社会学因素使法律与复杂性的接触既相互纠缠又相互分离,沿着(最明显的)国内法的路线,但更沿着政策问题和不同法律领域的面向对象性质的路线。这篇短文将以贝尔格莱德-布达佩斯铁路现代化项目为例,叙述参与“一带一路”倡议的行动者的不同观点(假设,但坚定地基于现实),以展示分离和纠缠的平行现象,并展示纠缠的法律链之间不可避免的相互依存关系。此外,它将强调法律纠葛与帝国之间的密切联系。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Debate on Constitutional Standing and Greater Autonomy for Cities: Lessons from The Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macao Agility Over Stability: China’s Great Reversal in Regulating the Platform Economy The Governance Crisis in Myanmar: An International Law Perspective and International Society Response Towards Myanmar 2021 Coup D’ Etat. Vietnam: Data Privacy in a Communist ASEAN State India's Cartel Penalty Practices, Optimal Restitution and Deterrence
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1