This article offers a stratagem theory to explain the legal nature of the" non-binding principles " of investment regulation in APEC. Teleologically, it is based on the idea of systematic algorithms chosen to achieve the goals set, but practically it is significant because it allows us to understand the relative non-necessity of these principles. In the context of APEC, this relativity is expressed by the fact that the tactical goals of investment regulation may imply broad discretion in the application of these principles, while strategic goals may be incompatible with the absence of restrictions on such freedom. As you know, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) unites countries with different levels of cultural, political, economic and legal development, and foreign policy structure (i.e., industrialized, developing, newly industrialized countries, as well as countries with economies in transition). According to the Bogor (Indonesia, November 1994), Osaka (Japan, November 1995) and Manila (Philippines, November 1996) Declarations, the main objective of such an association is to create a free trade and investment zone in the Asia - Pacific region by 2010-2020. From the point of view of the theoretical basis of the regional integration policy used in Western Europe, an Asian association of this kind can cause inconsistency in the integration process or slow down the coordination of a common platform within this organization. Moreover, at the Seattle Summit in 1993, it was suggested that APEC would never become a customs union like the EU, nor a free trade zone like NAFTA. If APEC becomes a free trade area, it will be a new form of free trade area. Regarding the future issue of binding decisions, in particular on documents, principles and other acts adopted within the APEC framework, it was stated: first, APEC should develop towards acquiring the characteristics of a closed-type international regional organization with a binding nature of its decisions; secon ... Read more