International Law: Peaceful Settlement and Coercive Means

Introduction

International Law is viewed by the global community as a key instrument for establishing and maintaining world peace and security. Ensuring international peace has always been a central objective of International Law, underpinning the creation of the League of Nations in 1919 and the United Nations in 1945. Some of the most significant treaties in this regard include the 1899 Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, which was later revised at the Second Hague Peace Conference in 1907, and the 1928 General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, concluded under the League of Nations. Additionally, regional agreements, such as the 1948 American Treaty on Pacific Settlement, the 1957 European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, and the 1964 Protocol of the Commission of Mediation and Arbitration of the Organization of African Unity, play crucial roles. Beyond these general treaties, many bilateral and multilateral agreements contain specific provisions for dispute resolution.

All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace, security, and justice are not threatened. The UN General Assembly, in its 1982 Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, stressed the importance of resolving conflicts and disputes between States exclusively by peaceful means, emphasizing that peaceful dispute resolution should be a primary concern for States and the United Nations. The principle of peaceful settlement of disputes is especially critical in the nuclear age.

The UN Charter does not dictate a specific method or means for dispute resolution, allowing parties the freedom to choose their preferred mechanism. Article 33 of the UN Charter offers several options for resolving disputes within the context of international peace and security, including negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial settlement. The Draft Declaration of the Rights and Duties of States under Article 8 also affirms that every state has a duty to resolve its disputes with other States by peaceful means, ensuring that international peace, security, and justice are preserved.

Peaceful means of dispute resolution can be broadly categorized into two groups:

• Extra-Judicial Modes of Settlement: These include methods such as Negotiations, Good Offices, Mediation, Conciliation, Inquiry, and resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly or Security Council.
• Judicial Settlement: This includes Arbitration and proceedings in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Compulsive or Coercive Means

Compulsive or coercive methods for settling disputes are non-peaceful and often considered harsh or aggressive. These methods involve forcing a state to resolve the conflict, though they do not always involve the use of military force. Generally, these methods are precursors to more severe actions like war.

Retorsion

Retorsion is a form of retaliation based on the principle of "tit for tat." It involves a state responding to another state's unfriendly act by taking similar actions. Retorsion is not illegal; in fact, it is permitted under international law. Although it can be seen as a hostile act, it is sometimes an effective tool for enforcing legal obligations. International conventions may allow such retaliatory actions in response to violations. An example of retorsion would be when one state imposes strict passport regulations on another state's citizens in response to similar treatment of its own citizens.

For instance, in December 1992, when India declared two Pakistani High Commission officials persona non grata, Pakistan retaliated by expelling three Indian officials and declaring them persona non grata. This action by Pakistan is an example of retorsion.

Reprisals

Reprisals involve taking coercive measures against a state to compel it to rectify or cease wrongful actions. The primary goal is to force the offending state to stop its illegal behavior or to compensate for any harm caused. Historically, reprisals were limited to the seizure of property or persons but have since expanded to include actions like bombing, occupying territory, seizing ships, freezing assets, and other measures. Reprisals can be directed not only against the state but also against its citizens.

However, reprisals are subject to legal limitations. In the Naulilaa Incident (Portugal v. F.R.G.), legal conditions were established for the use of reprisals. After the establishment of the United Nations, the use of force in reprisals has generally been prohibited under Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter. Additionally, Article 33 of the Geneva Convention forbids reprisals against protected persons.

Embargo

The term "embargo" originally comes from Spain and refers to the detention of ships in port. In international law, it generally means the detention of ships or other property within a state's territory to apply economic or political pressure on another state. A "civil" or "pacific" embargo is when a state restricts its own vessels to disrupt trade with another state. In contrast, a "hostile" embargo targets the vessels of another state as a form of reprisal for violations of international law.

Embargoes can be applied individually by a state or collectively under the authority of the United Nations. If an embargo threatens international peace and security, it is considered unlawful. However, collective embargoes sanctioned by the Security Council, such as the one applied against Iraq in 1990, are legal.

Pacific Blockade

A pacific blockade involves blocking a state's coastline with warships to prevent the entry or exit of vessels, applying economic and political pressure without resorting to war. It is a form of coercion used during peacetime. For a blockade to be lawful, it must be declared, notified, and effective.

The legality of pacific blockades in international law has been debated. However, after the formation of the United Nations, pacific blockades are generally considered unlawful because they threaten peace and security. They violate the definition of aggression as outlined in the UN General Assembly's resolutions.

Intervention

Intervention is another form of coercion used to resolve disputes between states without resorting to war. According to Professor Oppenheim, it involves one state intervening in the affairs of another to preserve or change the existing conditions. Professor Winfield categorizes intervention into three types: internal, external, and punitive.

Conclusion

Peace cannot be sustained in the world unless states are willing to resolve their disputes. The stakes in conflicts between states are much higher than those in disputes between individuals, making their resolution far more significant. Therefore, it is crucial for states to address their differences through peaceful or cooperative means. This approach is essential for maintaining global peace, especially as legal and factual complexities continue to increase the number of disputes.