لخّصلي

Methods / Techniques/ Instruments of peaceful Settlement of International disputesoThere are a variety of instruments for peaceful settlement, oDiplomatic instruments: including negotiation, commissions of inquiry, Mediation, Conciliation and Good Offices.Judicial settlement

What is an "international conflict"

oTraditionally, the term "international conflict" referred to conflicts between different nation-states and conflicts between people and organizations in different nation-states. ???? ???????... 1 -Negotiation: oIt is the first and simplest method of peaceful settlement of disputes. It is the most common form of dispute resolution. Usually, negotiations are carried out either by the head of state or their appointed authority, following an initial exchange of correspondence to clear up the point of controversy. Negotiation 2 oNegotiation is a non-binding procedure in which discussions between the parties are initiated without the intervention of any third party. oIn the negotiation process, parties should first determine what they want by identifying their own interests, motivations, and perceptions, as distinct from those of their opponents. oThere are four characteristics of a good negotiated settlement: 1.Fairness 2.Efficency 3.Wisdom 4.Stability. ???? ???????... Negotiation 3 oEach party needs to explain its own interests, listen carefully to the opposition's position, and understand its perspective. oThe negotiation should take place without the intervention of a third party. In international disputes, the negotiating parties must consider national interests and public opinion. oNegotiation develops cordial future relations and maintains friendly relations among states, as issues are settled with mutual understanding. oAlthough negotiation may not fully resolve a dispute, it serves to reduce tensions between states. Negotiation 4 oNegotiations took place between India and Pakistan when the Indian prime minister Mr. Vajpayee and Pakistan President Mr. Peruez Musharraf met at Agar (India) to settle all the disputes pending between India and Pakistan including Kashmir. oNegotiations took place in the French city of Evian-les-Bains, on the border with Switzerland. The Evian Accords were a set of peace treaties signed on 18 March 1962 by France and the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic that sought Algeria's independence from France. o The Accords ended the 1954-1962 Algerian War with a formal cease-fire proclaimed for 19 March and formalized the idea of cooperative exchanges between the two countries. Continue- oThe Camp David Accords were a pair of political agreements signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin on 17 September 1978,[1] following twelve days of secret negotiations at Camp David, the country retreat of the President of the United States in Maryland.[2] The two framework agreements were signed at the White House and were witnessed by President Jimmy Carter. - Continue The Oil-for-Food Program (OIP), oEstablished by the United Nations in 1995 under Security Council Resolution 986, the program was enacted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, making it legally binding. The purpose is to allow Iraq to sell oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs for ordinary Iraqi citizens, without allowing Iraq to boost its military. oIn May 1996, after long negotiations with the United Nations Secretariat, Iraq signed a memorandum of understanding, outlining the arrangements made to implement the Security Council resolution. oResolution 2390 was unanimously adopted by the Security Council on 8 December 2017. In it, the Council concluded that the measures imposed under Chapter VII had been fully implemented. The resolution confirmed the end of Iraq's obligations under Chapter VII regarding the Oil-for-Food Program after its full implementation. In the Case concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (1984), oThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that there is no requirement in international law for successful negotiations to be conducted as a requirement for the Court's jurisdiction. o This principle was affirmed when the U.S. objected to Nicaragua's case on the grounds that direct negotiations had not been pursued, 2 - Mediation oThe term mediation is sometimes used as a synonym for intervention, but mediation differs from it in being purely a friendly act. oMediation is a method under which a third party, either at its own initiative or at the request of the disputant parties, assumes responsibility for the settlement of the dispute. oTo mediate is to act as a neutral third party who helps conflicting parties find a mutually acceptable agreement. oThe mediator proposes a basis for the agreement and works to make it acceptable to all sides. ???? ???????... Mediation 2 oMediation is a non-binding procedure in which an impartial and neutral third party, (the mediator) assists (to help) the parties to a dispute in reaching a mutually satisfactory and agreed settlement of the dispute. oThe mediation process is informal and an assisted negotiation of a dispute settlement. o The mediator actively participates in the dispute. However, the suggestions made by the mediator are not binding on the parties. . oMediation Examples: Tashkant agreement between India and Pakistan in 1965-66. oThe soviet Union took initiative steps to reduce the conflicts between India and Pakistan and created a propitious atmosphere for settlement. oThe mediation of the United States in the Israeli-Egyptian negotiations that led to the Camp David agreement of 1979. In this regard, the United States played the role of the sole mediator in the so-called peace process oThe refusal to mediate is not considered a violation of international law, even if the refusal is considered an unfriendly act. For example: the Netherlands rejected the mediation of China in the dispute between it and Indonesia in 1947. oIn 1950, India rejected Australia's mediation to end the dispute between it and Pakistan over Kashmir, and Morocco rejected Egypt's mediation in the dispute between it and Algeria over the border in 1961. Norway's mediation in the Oslo Accords oNorway played a mediating role as a small state between vastly unequal parties oNorway was a small, neutral country with no direct stake in the conflict. This was crucial, as both parties distrusted the major powers oIt acted as a facilitator--providing a confidential, neutral space--rather than a forceful mediator imposing solutions. The benefits of mediation include 1- Cost: While a mediator may charge a fee comparable to that of an attorney, the mediation process generally takes much less time than moving a case through standard legal channels. While a case in the hands of a lawyer or a court may take months or years to resolve, mediation usually achieves a resolution in a matter of hours. 2-Confidentiality: While court hearings are public, mediation remains strictly confidential. Only the parties to the dispute and the mediator or mediators know what happened. Confidentiality in mediation has such importance that in most cases the legal system cannot force a mediator to testify in court as to the content or progress of mediation. 3- Control: Mediation increases the control the parties have over the resolution. In a court case, the parties obtain a resolution, but control resides with the judge or jury. Often, a judge or jury cannot legally provide solutions that emerge in mediation. Thus, mediation is more likely to produce a result that is mutually agreeable for the parties. The benefits of mediation 2: o4- Compliance: Because the result is attained by the parties working together and is mutually agreeable, compliance with the mediated agreement is usually high. This further reduces costs, because the parties do not have to employ an attorney to force compliance with the agreement. o5-Mutuality: Parties to mediation are typically ready to work mutually toward a resolution. In most circumstances, the mere fact that parties are willing to mediate means that they are ready to "move" their position.good offices examples 2: oThe best example of the successful endeavor undertaken by the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States in 1977 AD, to end the conflict between the Tunisian and Libyan governments, which culminated in the agreement of the two parties on the appropriate means to resolve their differences over the continental shelf, and the extraction of oil from the Gulf of kabes.The two Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 established commissions of inquiry as formal institutions for the pacific settlement of international disputes oCommissions of inquiry conduct hearings for witnesses or field visits to the area in which the conflict took place.oBroad Sense: It covers a wide variety of methods whereby a dispute is amicably settled with the help of other states or impartial bodies, such as commissions of inquiry or advisory committees.oIt issued a non-binding report suggesting compromise solutions, which helped de-escalate relations and paved the way for subsequent agreements that improved political cooperation.oThis illustrates how conciliation functions as a tool for defusing tensions and suggesting balanced settlements, without imposing binding obligations.5 - Enquiry oOne of the common obstacles preventing the successful settlement of a dispute by negotiation is the difficulty of examining the facts that resulted in the differences between the parties.Good Offices: 2 oThe function of the third party is to act as a link, transmitting messages and suggestions to create or restore a suitable atmosphere for the parties to agree to negotiate or resume negotiation..???????????...

Methods / Techniques/ Instruments of peaceful Settlement of International disputes•There are a variety of instruments for peaceful settlement,
•Diplomatic instruments: including negotiation, commissions of inquiry, Mediation, Conciliation and Good Offices.
•Judicial Methods of Dispute Settlement:
● Arbitration
● Judicial settlement

What is an "international conflict"

•Traditionally, the term "international conflict" referred to conflicts between different nation-states and conflicts between people and organizations in different nation-states.
يجري التحميل…
1 -Negotiation:
•It is the first and simplest method of peaceful settlement of disputes. It is the most common form of dispute resolution. Usually, negotiations are carried out either by the head of state or their appointed authority, following an initial exchange of correspondence to clear up the point of controversy.
Negotiation 2
•Negotiation is a non-binding procedure in which discussions between the parties are initiated without the intervention of any third party.
•In the negotiation process, parties should first determine what they want by identifying their own interests, motivations, and perceptions, as distinct from those of their opponents.
•There are four characteristics of a good negotiated settlement:
1.Fairness 2.Efficency 3.Wisdom 4.Stability.
يجري التحميل…
Negotiation 3
•Each party needs to explain its own interests, listen carefully to the opposition's position, and understand its perspective.
•The negotiation should take place without the intervention of a third party. In international disputes, the negotiating parties must consider national interests and public opinion.
•Negotiation develops cordial future relations and maintains friendly relations among states, as issues are settled with mutual understanding.
•Although negotiation may not fully resolve a dispute, it serves to reduce tensions between states.
Negotiation 4
•Negotiations took place between India and Pakistan when the Indian prime minister Mr. Vajpayee and Pakistan President Mr. Peruez Musharraf met at Agar (India) to settle all the disputes pending between India and Pakistan including Kashmir.
•Negotiations took place in the French city of Évian-les-Bains, on the border with Switzerland. The Evian Accords were a set of peace treaties signed on 18 March 1962 by France and the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic that sought Algeria's independence from France.
• The Accords ended the 1954–1962 Algerian War with a formal cease-fire proclaimed for 19 March and formalized the idea of cooperative exchanges between the two countries.
Continue-
•The Camp David Accords were a pair of political agreements signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin on 17 September 1978,[1] following twelve days of secret negotiations at Camp David, the country retreat of the President of the United States in Maryland.[2] The two framework agreements were signed at the White House and were witnessed by President Jimmy Carter.

• Continue
  The Oil-for-Food Program (OIP),
  •Established by the United Nations in 1995 under Security Council Resolution 986, the program was enacted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, making it legally binding. The purpose is to allow Iraq to sell oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs for ordinary Iraqi citizens, without allowing Iraq to boost its military.
  •In May 1996, after long negotiations with the United Nations Secretariat, Iraq signed a memorandum of understanding, outlining the arrangements made to implement the Security Council resolution.
  •Resolution 2390 was unanimously adopted by the Security Council on 8 December 2017. In it, the Council concluded that the measures imposed under Chapter VII had been fully implemented. The resolution confirmed the end of Iraq's obligations under Chapter VII regarding the Oil-for-Food Program after its full implementation.

In the Case concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (1984),
•The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that there is no requirement in international law for successful negotiations to be conducted as a requirement for the Court's jurisdiction.

• This principle was affirmed when the U.S. objected to Nicaragua's case on the grounds that direct negotiations had not been pursued,
2 - Mediation
•The term mediation is sometimes used as a synonym for intervention, but mediation differs from it in being purely a friendly act.
•Mediation is a method under which a third party, either at its own initiative or at the request of the disputant parties, assumes responsibility for the settlement of the dispute.
•To mediate is to act as a neutral third party who helps conflicting parties find a mutually acceptable agreement.
•The mediator proposes a basis for the agreement and works to make it acceptable to all sides.
يجري التحميل…
Mediation 2
•Mediation is a non-binding procedure in which an impartial and neutral third party, (the mediator) assists (to help) the parties to a dispute in reaching a mutually satisfactory and agreed settlement of the dispute.
•The mediation process is informal and an assisted negotiation of a dispute settlement.
• The mediator actively participates in the dispute. However, the suggestions made by the mediator are not binding on the parties.
.

•Mediation Examples: Tashkant agreement between India and Pakistan in 1965-66.
•The soviet Union took initiative steps to reduce the conflicts between India and Pakistan and created a propitious atmosphere for settlement.
•The mediation of the United States in the Israeli-Egyptian negotiations that led to the Camp David agreement of 1979. In this regard, the United States played the role of the sole mediator in the so-called peace process
•The refusal to mediate is not considered a violation of international law, even if the refusal is considered an unfriendly act. For example: the Netherlands rejected the mediation of China in the dispute between it and Indonesia in 1947.
•In 1950, India rejected Australia's mediation to end the dispute between it and Pakistan over Kashmir, and Morocco rejected Egypt's mediation in the dispute between it and Algeria over the border in 1961.
Norway's mediation in the Oslo Accords
•Norway played a mediating role as a small state between vastly unequal parties
•Norway was a small, neutral country with no direct stake in the conflict. This was crucial, as both parties distrusted the major powers
•It acted as a facilitator—providing a confidential, neutral space—rather than a forceful mediator imposing solutions.

The benefits of mediation include
1- Cost: While a mediator may charge a fee comparable to that of an attorney, the mediation process generally takes much less time than moving a case through standard legal channels. While a case in the hands of a lawyer or a court may take months or years to resolve, mediation usually achieves a resolution in a matter of hours.
2-Confidentiality: While court hearings are public, mediation remains strictly confidential. Only the parties to the dispute and the mediator or mediators know what happened. Confidentiality in mediation has such importance that in most cases the legal system cannot force a mediator to testify in court as to the content or progress of mediation.
3- Control: Mediation increases the control the parties have over the resolution. In a court case, the parties obtain a resolution, but control resides with the judge or jury. Often, a judge or jury cannot legally provide solutions that emerge in mediation. Thus, mediation is more likely to produce a result that is mutually agreeable for the parties.
The benefits of mediation 2:
•4- Compliance: Because the result is attained by the parties working together and is mutually agreeable, compliance with the mediated agreement is usually high. This further reduces costs, because the parties do not have to employ an attorney to force compliance with the agreement.
•5-Mutuality: Parties to mediation are typically ready to work mutually toward a resolution. In most circumstances, the mere fact that parties are willing to mediate means that they are ready to "move" their position.
•6-Support: Mediators are trained in working with difficult situations. The mediator acts as a neutral facilitator and guides the parties through the process. The mediator helps the parties think "outside of the box" for possible solutions.
3 - Conciliation:لجنة التوفيق
•The United Nations (U.N.) Charter mentions conciliation as a method for the peaceful settlement of disputes. The term "conciliation" is used in both a broad and a narrow sense.
•Broad Sense: It covers a wide variety of methods whereby a dispute is amicably settled with the help of other states or impartial bodies, such as commissions of inquiry or advisory committees.
•Narrow Sense: It refers specifically to the process of referring a dispute to an established commission or committee. This body investigates the facts and makes a formal report with proposals for settlement to the parties involved.

.
Conciliation is a formal process where a commission investigates the facts and formulates settlement proposals for the parties, who are free to accept or reject them.

Key Characteristics of Conciliation:
•The parties are not bound to accept the proposals.
•Historically, it was often used interchangeably with mediation.
•It is generally more formal and structured than mediation.
•It is often a rights-based process (focused on legal principles) rather than an interest-based one (focused on underlying needs).
Example: the 1905 Franco–Italian dispute over colonial issues in North Africa.
•A Franco–Italian Conciliation Commission was established by agreement between the two countries.
•The Commission examined the claims of both sides and worked to ease tensions arising from colonial expansion.
•It issued a non-binding report suggesting compromise solutions, which helped de-escalate relations and paved the way for subsequent agreements that improved political cooperation.
•This illustrates how conciliation functions as a tool for defusing tensions and suggesting balanced settlements, without imposing binding obligations.

Advantages of conciliation:
1.It offers a flexible alternative for a wide variety of disputes, both small and large.
2.It avoids the need for the parties to resort to force.
3.Proceedings are held in complete secrecy, with a commitment to maintaining confidentiality throughout.
4.There is no obligation to accept the commission's proposals, and no loss of rights or abandonment of position results from the process.

Advantages of conciliation: 2
1)It takes full account of the sensitivity, susceptibility and prestige of governments in that it is easier to accept a third party's solution than that offered by the opponent.

2)It produces a quicker resolution of disputes.

3)t reserves the parties' freedom to withdraw from the conciliation process at any time.

4 - Good Offices:
•When the parties to a dispute reach the point of not being able to solve it by negotiation, or the point where they have broken off diplomatic relations, the utilization of the technique of good offices may be helpful.
•Good offices may be utilized only with the agreement or the consent of both disputing parties.
•A third party attempts to bring the disputants together in order to make it possible for them to find an appropriate settlement to their differences through their negotiations.
Good Offices: 2
•The function of the third party is to act as a link, transmitting messages and suggestions to create or restore a suitable atmosphere for the parties to agree to negotiate or resume negotiation.
•When the negotiations start, the functions of the good offices come to an end.
•The procedure of good offices, in contrast to mediation, has a limited function, which is simply bringing the disputants together. Whereas, in mediation, the mediator takes an active role in the negotiations between the disputants and may even suggest terms of settlement to them.
good offices examples:
•The United States of America made good offices in order to end the crisis and conflict between Tunisia and France in 1908.
•As well as the good offices carried out by Sweden in the conflict between Iraq and Iran.
•This also includes the Islamic Good Offices Committee, which was formed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference meeting in a city in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1983. This committee made efforts to put an end to the Iran-Iraq war that erupted as a result of the border dispute between the countries in 1980, but it reached a deadlocked path in 1983.
good offices examples 2:
•The best example of the successful endeavor undertaken by the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States in 1977 AD, to end the conflict between the Tunisian and Libyan governments, which culminated in the agreement of the two parties on the appropriate means to resolve their differences over the continental shelf, and the extraction of oil from the Gulf of kabes.

5 - Enquiry
•One of the common obstacles preventing the successful settlement of a dispute by negotiation is the difficulty of examining the facts that resulted in the differences between the parties.
•Most international disputes involve an inability or unwillingness of the parties to agree on points of fact.
•From here comes the significance of the procedure of inquiry
•The use of Enquiry as a separate method of dispute settlement has decreased.
•It has been used as part of other methods of dispute settlement.
Enquiry – 2
•Its purpose is to produce impartial findings of disputed facts and thus to prepare the way for the settlement of disputes by other peaceful methods.
•The procedure of enquiry has found expression in treaties for the pacific settlement of disputes. The two Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 established commissions of inquiry as formal institutions for the pacific settlement of international disputes
•Commissions of inquiry conduct hearings for witnesses or field visits to the area in which the conflict took place. They may be established by the United Nations or its agencies.
• The parties are not obliged to accept the findings of the enquiry.
difference between conciliation - enquiry - mediation
•conciliation differs from enquiry in that the main objective of the enquiry is the explanation of the facts to enable the parties, through their own efforts, to settle their dispute
•But the main objective of conciliation is to propose a solution to a dispute and to win the acceptance of the parties to such a solution.
•Also, conciliation differs from mediation in that it is more formal and less flexible than mediation
•If a mediator’s proposal is not accepted, he can present new proposals, whereas a conciliator usually presents a single report.
Judicial Methods of Dispute Settlement:

•Judicial means of dispute settlement involve a third party issuing a binding ruling on an international dispute based on existing legal rules.
•Recourse to these judicial means is optional. Due to the principle of state sovereignty, states cannot be compelled to submit to an international judiciary without their consent. This contrasts with the situation in domestic law, where parties can be forced to appear before a court.
•The awards issued by arbitral tribunals are binding. Consequently, the parties to the dispute are obliged to respect and implement the decision in good faith.

1 – Arbitration:
•Arbitration was defined in the 1899 Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes as the settlement of differences between states by judges of their choice and based on respect for law.
• This same definition was repeated in the 1907 Hague Convention.

يجري التحميل…
International Arbitration: 2
•It has been in place for the last several centuries. A dispute between two nations is referred to arbitrators whom they appoint with their mutual consent. The arbitrator hears both sides and gives his decision, which is called an AWARD.
•As John Parris defines it, arbitration is "A settlement of a dispute by an arbitrator who has absolute control and who is chosen by the parties to decide disputes".
•Arbitration is the judging of a dispute between states by someone not involved in it, whose decision both parties agree to accept.

International Arbitration: 3
•The arbitrator will conduct a hearing where all parties present evidence through documents and testimony. The parties may agree to, in some instances, establish their own procedure, or an administering organization may provide procedures.
•An arbitration hearing is usually held in offices or other meeting rooms.
•The result can be binding if all parties have previously agreed to be bound by the decision. In that case, the right to appeal the arbitrator’s decision is very limited.
• An arbitrator’s award can be reduced to judgment in a court and thus be enforceable.
International Arbitration: 4
•The League of Nations made arbitration compulsory in all cases. It permitted the permanent court of arbitration set up under The Hague -convention of 1899 to continue.
•The UN charter has mentioned arbitration as a method of Pacific settlement of disputes. Under the UN (United Nations Organization) Charter, the Permanent Court of Arbitration was replaced by the Court of International Justice.
International Arbitration: examples
•Abitrator can succeed only when both the parties have been able to find a yardstick acceptable to both as a valid basis for settlement.
•The Kutch arbitration award 1968 there was an armed conflict between India and Pakistan. Pakistan claimed 3500 sq. miles of land situated at the Rann of Kutch. India & Pakistan agreed to cease-fire, & to refer the matter to arbitration.
•Trial Smelter case between the United States and Canada,
•The two disputing parties agreed to refer the dispute to an arbitral tribunal, which issued its ruling in 1941, and the ruling included an affirmation of the principles of customary international law, especially the principle of inadmissibility of causing harm.
Advantages of Arbitration:
•Arbitration can be used voluntarily
•May be less formal and structured than going to court,
•It is more appropriate to technical disputes.
•Usually quicker and less expensive than going to court
• Its procedure is flexible. Enough to be combined with the fact-finding processes.
•Each party will have the opportunity to present evidence and make arguments
•May have a right to choose an arbitrator with specialized expertise
•Arbitrator’s award can be enforced in a court

2 - Judicial settlements
•the international court of Justice was established by the charter of UN The states may settle their dispute through the international court of justice. Article 92 to 96 of the charter of U.N.O. explains about the international court of justice. Each member of the UN is obliged to comply with the decision of the court in any case to which it is a party. It is situated in Hague; it has permanent body of U.N.O.
Key Differences Between