Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06GUANGZHOU30120
2006-09-15 05:11:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Consulate Guangzhou
Cable title:  

APEC Workshop on Non-discrimination in Investment

Tags:  ECON PGOV PREL CH 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO3914
RR RUEHCN RUEHGH RUEHVC
DE RUEHGZ #0120/01 2580511
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 150511Z SEP 06
FM AMCONSUL GUANGZHOU
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3351
INFO RUEHOO/CHINA POSTS COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/DIA WASHDC
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 GUANGZHOU 030120 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/CM
USDOC FOR 4420/ITA/MAC/MCQUEEN, CELICO, DAS LEVINE
STATE PASS USTR
STATE PASS FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD FOR SCHINDLER
USPACOM FOR FPA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON PGOV PREL CH
SUBJECT: APEC Workshop on Non-discrimination in Investment
Agreements, September 1-3


(U) THIS DOCUMENT IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE
PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. NOT FOR RELEASE OUTSIDE U.S.
GOVERNMENT CHANNELS. NOT FOR INTERNET PUBLICATION.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 GUANGZHOU 030120

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/CM
USDOC FOR 4420/ITA/MAC/MCQUEEN, CELICO, DAS LEVINE
STATE PASS USTR
STATE PASS FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD FOR SCHINDLER
USPACOM FOR FPA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON PGOV PREL CH
SUBJECT: APEC Workshop on Non-discrimination in Investment
Agreements, September 1-3


(U) THIS DOCUMENT IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE
PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. NOT FOR RELEASE OUTSIDE U.S.
GOVERNMENT CHANNELS. NOT FOR INTERNET PUBLICATION.


1. (U) Summary: Developing country representatives meeting
at a September 1-3 APEC workshop in Xiamen on "Non-
discrimination Treatment in Investment Agreements" expressed
some concerns about new U.S. free-trade agreements in
Southeast Asia. The nine APEC countries attending the
meeting focused on three investment issues: most-favored
nation status (MFN),national treatment in host countries
and "fair and equitable treatment" clauses. Most of the
workshop discussions focused on information sharing, with
participants generally agreeing on the necessity of non-
discrimination treatment. End summary.

Outline of the Workshop
--------------


2. (U) The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
Workshop on "Non-discrimination Treatment in Investment
Agreements was sponsored by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce
(MOFCOM). In addition to the nine participating countries,
experts from the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD) also attended. The term non-
discrimination was used in workshop to refer to laws created
to ensure a legal "level playing field" for investment in
foreign countries.

MFN
---


3. (U) According to UNCTAD Consultant Roberto Enchandi, MFN
is "a standard that entitles investment or investors of a
Contracting Party to a treatment by other Contracting
Parties which is no less favorable than the treatment the
latter grants to investments or investors of any other third
State." Therefore, MFN is the highest level of investment
protection and is a core clause in international investment
agreements (IIAs),though the scope can vary significantly
among different IIAs. For example, MFN can be granted
negatively (top-down) or positively (bottom-up). The
negative approach means that MFN is granted in all
situations unless there are exceptions or reservations. In

the positive approach, MFN is granted only if a specific
individual commitment is made.


4. (U) Enchandi also distinguished between pre- and post-
establishment investment phases of MFN. Pre-establishment
referred to market access provided an "investor", while post-
establishment connoted the treatment an "investment"
received after entering the country. Currently only the
United States and Canada have pushed for the more liberal
pre-establishment phase MFN. Even if MFN were granted in
the post-establishment phase, many exceptions and
reservations could be made on a general (public order or
national security),subject-specific (taxation and
intellectual property rights) or county-specific basis.


5. (U) Conference participants agreed that countries needed
to clarify their policy towards MFN prior to entering
negotiations. Additionally, many participants complained
that the MFN clause could be widely interpreted and the
vagueness of the term necessitated the addition by drafters
of more annexes to ensure clarity of meaning.


6. (U) One example of vagueness in MFN clauses was the use
of the term "like circumstances". Essentially the term
means that an agreement between country "A" and "B" should
also apply to country "C", if country "A" and "C" have an
agreement of "like circumstances". Thus, a country cannot
borrow from human rights treaty and attach it to an
investment treaty.

The Drawbacks of FTAs
--------------


7. (U) Ms. Deunden Nikomborirak, an academic from the
Thailand Development Research Institute, warned that free
trade agreements (FTA),which are currently popular in
Southeast Asia, could be detrimental to developing

GUANGZHOU 00030120 002 OF 003


countries. For example, if a developing country has a
national policy protecting telecommunication services and
suddenly signs an FTA with a developed country that would
open all service sectors, the developing country would be
handing over a "monopoly" opportunity to the developed
country.


8. (SBU) Moreover, she warned that the fierce struggle
among the major economies in ASEAN (Singapore, Malaysia and
Thailand) to become Southeast Asia's economic "hub" would
end up to the detriment of the region, and for the benefit
of the United States. All three of the ASEAN economies
above currently have or are aggressively pursuing FTAs with
the United States. Nikomborirak predicted that MNCs based
in the U.S. or with U.S. branches would simply increase
their investments in the U.S.-based branches, where
investment access was easy and transparent; they could gain
better access to ASEAN markets through the United States.
In essence, the United States would be the real hub for the
region, with ASEAN nations as the spokes.

Dispute Settlement
--------------


9. (U) As for dispute settlement of investment conflicts,
one participant said "this could be a whole workshop by
itself." In other words, how does one apply MFN in dispute
settlement? In some cases, such as Maffezini vs. Spain and
Siemens vs. Argentina, international tribunals have ruled in
favor of MFN applicability in a dispute settlement. In
other cases, such as Salini vs. Jordan, a bilateral
investment treaty (BIT) referred explicitly to investors
going through domestic courts to resolve disputes. UNCTAD's
Enchandi said that the use of dispute settlement depends
greatly on the wording of the MFN clause. More importantly,
as one participant said, "it doesn't matter what you put in
the treaty, it matters what the tribunal thought you put in
the treaty."

National Treatment
--------------


10. (U) As for national treatment, Anthony Hinton from the
Australian Treasury Ministry noted that a host country is
obliged to extend to foreign investors treatment that is at
least as favorable as the treatment that it accords to
national investors in like circumstances." Like MFN,
national treatment contains exceptions and reservations,
especially relating to national security, health and public
order. IIAs differ in particular whether the national
treatment principle extends to the pre-establishment phase.


11. (U) UNCTAD's Enchandi emphasized the importance of
treaty annexes in the interpretation of national treatment.
Enchandi noted that the U.S.-Singapore FTA specifically
explained the national laws on which it was based and thus
favored U.S. companies. However the U.S.-Chile FTA simply
referred to Chile's interpretation of national treatment.

"Fair and Equitable Treatment"
--------------


12. (U) Joachim Karl from UNCTAD said that an important
part of fair and equitable treatment is the adherence to an
international minimum standard, i.e., that there are certain
international basic standards that must be ensured in all
international agreements (something akin to the UN
Declaration on Human Rights, but for investment). Karl
listed four core principles that might define the
international minimum standard:
-- transparency and the protection of investor's legitimate
expectations;
-- freedom from coercion and harassment;
-- procedural propriety and due process; and
-- good faith.
According to Karl, because the notion of fair and equitable
treatment is so controversial, it is likely that more BITs
will include detailed explanations of its meaning, as in
the U.S.-Uruguay BIT.

Developing Country Concerns

GUANGZHOU 00030120 003 OF 003


--------------


13. (U) This final session of the conference provided the
liveliest response from participants. Many of the
developing country representatives (Malaysia, Thailand and
China),raised objections to the definition of fair and
equitable treatment and the use of "customary international
law". Lu Tao, the Chinese representative from the Ministry
of Commerce, said that fair and equitable treatment is a
very broad term that could include accusing the justice
system of an entire country to be unfair. The Chinese and
other countries are cautious using this term. Furthermore,
Lu said that customary international law is "only practiced
by 10-20 countries in the world, most of which are capital
exporting countries;" these countries have an interest in
working to improve investment climates. Developing
countries "were never involved with making these laws, yet
are now bound by such laws." Lu also said he had read many
articles by American law professors who had actually argued
against the notion of customary international law.


14. (U) UNCTAD's Enchandi, however, responded that
"customary international law" actually provided better
protection for developing countries because countries can
drawn from the entire legal corpus of international
investment agreements.

Case Study: China's Investment Strategy
--------------


15. (U) In its presentation about its investment policy,
the Chinese representative noted that China does not have a
reciprocal promotion and protection of investment agreement
(RPPIA, essentially the Chinese BIT) with any North American
country. China's first generation of RPPIAs was negotiated
between 1982 and 1997. From 1997 onward, the Chinese have
begun negotiating new agreements with updated mechanisms,
such as national treatment and some dispute settlement
mechanisms. China has reservations about a number of issues
including, pre-establishment phase investment protection,
minimum standard of treatment in accordance with customary
international law, transparency, performance requirement,
intellectual property rights (IPR),environment, competition
policy and labor standards. Specifically, on IPR, the
representative said that IPR "does not directly relate to
investment" and China would seek a specific treaty on the
issue.


16. (U) The Australian representative asked why the Chinese
government was "so uncomfortable" with pre-establishment
phase investment? Lu Tao replied that China's lack of
international dispute experience for China accounted for its
hesitancy. Moreover, the Chinese prefer working through the
WTO, which only deals with government-to-government issues
rather than international tribunals, where any investor or
investment could raise a claim.

Comment
--------------


17. (SBU) Since the workshop focused on the background and
basic issues of non-discrimination, the bulk of the
discussion was on legal definitions and IIA process. Only
towards the end of each session did the comments become more
focused and heated, most noticeably on the issue of
"international customary law," about which we expect to hear
more in the future.

Goldberg