                              

Relationships: Towards a New Leadership in Global Investment Governance is a timely book that
contributes to understanding the current EU and China investment agreement negotiations (especially
as the negotiations recently entered into a critical stage). The book includes a collection of essays that
explore the current laws and policies (both internationally and internally) between the EU and China.
This book is edited by the award-winning Professor Julien Chaisse with essays written by sixteen con-
tributors, which provide comprehensive, in-depth, and captivating insights into the EU and China
investment relationships. As the editor, Professor Julien Chaisse, mentions in the first chapter, the
book is “the result of considerable collective effort, which started with the Asia FDI Forum III
held in Hong Kong on May –, , an event jointly organized by the CUHK Law Faculty,
Columbia University Centre for Sustainable Investment (CCSI) and the World Economic Forum
(WEF)” (p. ). This tome casts a net at once wide and deep enough to appeal to both a general read-
ership and specialists.
The main theme of the book, as stated in its foreword, “provides readers with comprehensive and
updated information, as well as critical analysis on key issues in the debate in the context of the cur-
rent China-EU CAI [Comprehensive Agreement on Investment] negotiations’’ (p. xviii). The book
also provides accessible and succinct information on the legal, economic, and political issues that
are related to the negotiations. As both the EU and China are the biggest traders in the world, under-
standing the key issues in the debate, in the context of the comprehensive EU and China investment
agreement, is crucial for the better understanding of global investment governance. The book is
divided into three parts, with sixteen chapters. Essays in Part I address the drivers and issues of invest-
ment relationships between the EU and China. The second part focuses on anticipated innovation in
the upcoming comprehensive agreement on investment. Part III of the book reveals the reform of the
investor-state dispute settlement mechanism in the context of the comprehensive agreement on
investment.
Furthermore, readers might find this book exceeds their expectations. Primarily, this book
addresses the investment relationships between the EU and China; however, it also considers
human rights and environmental law and policy. Hence, this book is not only comprehensive in
its coverage on the investment relationships between the EU and China, but also their relationship
in general.
I have no hesitation in recommending this book to those international legal practitioners who are
dealing with issues related to the EU’s and China’s investment and those who are interested in the
EU’s and China’s relationship in general. This book is practical, informative, innovative, and reader-
friendly. To conclude, I think this book will hugely benefit those readers who want to know about the
legal positions of both parties in the comprehensive agreement on investment negotiations.

reviewed by Charles Ho Wang MAK

University of Glasgow

The Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) Standard in International Investment Arbitration:
Developing Countries in Context
by Rumana ISLAM.
Singapore: Springer, . xxxiii +  pp. Hardcover: €..
doi:./S

Fair and equitable treatment [FET] is an indispensable element of the bilateral investment treaty
[BIT], a standard of investment protection that is the most invoked provision against host countries.
The book provides a comprehensive understanding of the FET standard and highlights how it creates
inequity and imbalance against developing countries. The scholarship problematizes the arbitral tri-
bunals’ interpretation of FET provision in favour of foreign investors without considering the differ-
ent contexts of developing countries. Within eight chapters, the book suggests that the sociopolitical

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Carleton University Library, on 22 Nov 2020 at 14:53:07, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251320000119
   

and economic conditions of developing countries should be considered in the BIT negotiations and in
determination of FET obligations.
Most of the recent BITs have incorporated FET provisions without any precise definition and uni-
form approach. The standard continues to differ in scholars’ views and tribunals’ interpretation.
However, Dr Islam categorizes FET as FET minus, Simple FET, and FET plus in Chapter , and sug-
gests that developing countries should assume that a tribunal will interpret the FET standard as an
independent and autonomous standard which gives more freedom for discretionary interpretation.
The fourth chapter investigates the country classification and, rightly said, classifications do not
give images of the economic and social levels of development, and the disparity within them.
Hence, arbitral tribunals need to accommodate the developmental issues and challenges of host
developing countries. Chapters  and  discuss the arbitral tribunals’ practices relating to political,
sociopolitical, and economic crises of the host developing countries. However, although tribunals
refer to the crisis and acknowledge political instability and sociopolitical consequences, they do
not give enough weight in their determination of liability. The Tecmed and GAMI Tribunals did
not consider the context in their award, while the Mamidoil v. Albania Tribunal found public policy
was relevant to the FET obligation and held no violation. Similarly, tribunals did not consider an eco-
nomic crisis as an exemption of liability. For instance, the AWG and CMS v. Argentina Tribunals
acknowledged the economic crisis but found that this was not an exemption from liability, while
the Enron Corp. vs. Argentina Tribunal totally discarded any defence of necessity. The author con-
cludes that tribunals were overly enthusiastic to protect the interest of foreign investors but ignored
the economic crises of host developing countries, but here the reviewer differs in opinion. The book
analyzes tribunals’ decisions and finds inconsistent interpretations (p. ) and an inadequate
approach to FET (p. ) in addressing host developing countries’ concerns, and that impacts a
developing countries’ trust in the arbitration mechanism. The author rightly says that reconceptuali-
zation is required to provide clear guidance to address disputes against host developing countries and
to ensure greater certainty of the FET standard. However, it may not be true that tribunals only inter-
pret FET to favour investors; rather they apply discretionary power and interpret as they deem fit.
This book fills gaps in the literature regarding challenges for host developing countries in investor-
state dispute settlement and the problems therein. Further, this scholarship may help to interpret the
FET standard in the context of developing countries’ crises.

reviewed by Mafruza SULTANA

South Asian University

Law of Armed Conflict

Evolving Patterns of Peacekeeping: International Cooperation at Work

by Hikaru YAMASHITA.
Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, . ix +  pp. Hardcover: US$..
doi:./S

Hikaru Yamashita’s book is a sincere effort to study three fundamental aspects of peacekeeping: “i)
why peacekeepers states and organisation engage in cooperative endeavour, ii) forms of cooperation
and iii) implications of evolving peacekeeping cooperation” (p. ). Chapter  provides a short delib-
eration on the primary working definition of peacekeepers. Further, the author argues that the term
“peacekeeping” should reflect the diversity of actors without undermining the essence of evolving
practice. Chapter  examines the contextual factors that have triggered co-operation, where
Yamashita opines that “post-cold war peacekeeping has evolved into a multidimensional conflict
management endeavour; this is because of the nature of the conflict which is more regional”

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Carleton University Library, on 22 Nov 2020 at 14:53:07, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251320000119