Could I add something to that, but in plain language? What Mr. Van Harten is effectively saying is that because tribunals are not independent, because they're not like Canadian courts, and because arbitrators depend upon having cases referred to them, no arbitrator would decide a case against the United States. Because they understand that the Congress of the United States would not put up with a private international tribunal deciding that something a U.S. government has done would give rise to compensation to a foreign investor. It's that simple.
Those arbitrators also know that Canadian governments will put up with precisely that type of abuse. That explains the asymmetry in the results between cases brought by Canadians against the United States and cases brought by Americans against Canada--in plain language.