CIAO DATE: 04/2011
May 2010
Territorial disputes are notoriously difficult to resolve peacefully and enduringly. The outcome of adjudication on border issues is unpredictable, and political leaders are often unwilling to accept the risks of losing territory. Arbitration or mediation (nonbinding arbitration) provide a more flexible and balanced way to reach a satisfactory outcome, but their finality also makes politicians nervous. An award of territory to one nation or another should be consistent with international law, even if the award is the result of negotiations by the parties that have lead to mutually agreed terms. International adjudicative and arbitral bodies usually emphasize the legal determinants of a territorial dispute. Nevertheless, they also sometimes consider equitable factors—either directly at the request of the parties, or in order to apply the relevant law most reasonably and fairly under the circumstances. Other approaches to territorial disputes—including conciliation and other forms of facilitation by third parties—may be more attractive, although they too may be resisted by states with weak claims but strong political interests. Conciliators, facilitators, and often mediators have greater flexibility to design outcomes that are oriented primarily toward reaching a conclusion that might be satisfactory to both sides in a boundary dispute.
Resource link: Approaches to Solving Territorial Conflicts: Sources, Situations, Scenarios, and Suggestions [PDF] - 501K