From the Lena Goldfields Case to the Yukos Shareholders Cases: State Control over Strategic Subsoil Vs Protection of Foreign Investors' Interests

International investment law and arbitration have become attractive to solve expropriation cases between a state and foreign investors. Such evolution is mainly based on key cases. The 1930 Lena Goldfields, Ltd vs USSR case directly contributed to the recognition of arbitration and the definition of several international legal principles that have gradually been acknowledged as the minimum standards of international investment law. Moreover, the Lena Goldfields case has clearly showed that legal considerations and enforcement of the arbitration award are influenced by geopolitical matters, especially when strategic subsoil is involved. If societies with different (ideological) references are in latent conflict, arbitration in international investment law turns out to be a weapon. Such approach continues to be valid when capitalism prevails and private entities gain economical strength in a weakened state. The 2000's Yukos Shareholders vs Russian Federation cases further illustrate it, as the geopolitical force of a country is notably defined by its standing on the energy market. To fully grasp the way in which the above-mentioned cases have contributed to the international jurisprudence, the two parts of the current manuscript will follow the same structure. First, will be presented the global historical context and the local history. Then, will be described the chronological phases of the cases and briefly analyzed the key legal aspects of the cases