Protecting foreign investments in revolution and civil war: critiquing the contemporary arbitral practice

Abstract

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.