My point would be yes. That's the point: the contract includes agreements to go to commercial arbitration. That's entirely appropriate. But the treaty arbitrators have not done what courts would typically do, which is show deference to party autonomy based on the contract. They don't use forum non conveniens principles, for example, to show deference, to allow the contractually agreed forum to run its course.
If there's a problem and the state tries to override that forum and won't enforce the award, then fine, the treaty arbitrators can become involved.