CONTEMPORARY EURASIA VIII (2) ContEurVIII2 | Page 11

SAREN ABGARYAN
abroad, due to the possibility of expropriation or confiscation of their
property by the foreign countries’ governments and lack of any remedies
that investors could seek.
In the context of the segregated economic and investment order in
the globe, bilateral and multilateral investment treaties have played and
continue to play an essential role for the protection of investors’ property
rights in foreign states. Usually, those agreements incorporate a number
of substantive treatment standards, resembling Treaties of Friendship,
Commerce, and Navigation, with an essential addition. Bilateral
investment treaties (BITs) and multilateral investment treaties (MITs)
gave investors a direct recourse to bring claims against the host
government in front of an impartial international arbiter. While having a
global MIT has proven to be a challenging task, the countries mainly
focused on creating a complex web of bilateral investment treaties which
currently amount to more than 2,500 in total.
International investment agreements (IIAs) and the jurisprudence
developed around them have created an international investment
protection framework that allows inventors to be confident that their
capital in a foreign country will be protected and in the case of the host
country breaching any of the treatment standards promised in IIAs, the
investors could directly seek redress against the state.
This significant development in international economic law has
stimulated scholars to research this relatively new field of law, and many
scholars have studied the investment treaty practices of different
countries and unions, such asthe US, Canada, the Energy Charter,
European countries, ASEAN, China, etc. These studies try to make sense
of the international investment policymaking practices adopted by
different countries, the treatment standards provided to foreign investors,
and for making recommendations on modifications that should be made
in particular countries’ treaties in order to better reflect recent case law.
Armenia started its bilateral investment treaty (BIT) program in
1992 (it was signed with China), and Armenia currently has 42 signed
BITs (35 of which are currently active) and 7 Treaties with Investment
Provisions (TIPs). 28 This is a robust network of BITs. To put this into
perspective, Armenia is an active BIT maker, with more than two BITs
concluded annually starting from 1992. 29 While there are a number of

28
For further updated details to the BIT statistics of China, refer to the following website:
http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA/CountryBits/9#iiaInnerMenu
29 Germany, according to UNCTAD website currently has 135 signed BITs (129 in force).
11