International Procedure in Interstate Litigation and Arbitration

The settlement of interstate disputes through recourse to courts and tribunals has grown gradually over the years, not only through the creation of new mechanisms to that effect, but also by using existing courts and tribunals. How these different international dispute settlement mechanisms operate in theory and practice is the subject of this comparative analysis by academic and practicing lawyers. The book takes stock of the procedure applicable in various interstate dispute settlement bodies, including international and regional courts and tribunals, and arbitration. This comparative view is essential to a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the various procedural rules and regulations and the practical operation of international litigation. This book is aimed not only at scholars, but also at the courts and tribunals themselves, assisting them in revising their procedures, and at States and organisations developing future international legal mechanisms.

Disparity and Diversion: Domestic Economic Inequality and MID Initiation

Scholarship has demonstrated that domestic economic inequality is related to a number of forms of intrastate conflict, such as civil wars and rebellions. There are good reasons to believe that it also has an impact on the initiation of militarized interstate disputes for diversionary reasons. Such use of external force may refocus popular attention and may reinforce the strong nationalist sentiment that tends to prevail in societies with substantial economic inequality. Our empirical results support this contention in democracies but, as expected, not in autocracies. At a time when domestic economic inequality is rising across the world, our findings may be timely.

A Liberal Peace?: The Growth of Liberal Norms and the Decline of Interstate Violence

How have understandings of fundamental norms of international society changed over time? How does this relate to the decline of interstate violence since 1945? Previous explanations have focused on regime type, domestic institutions, economic interdependence, relative power, and nuclear weapons, I argue that a crucial and underexplored part of the puzzle is the change in understanding of sovereignty over the same period. In this article, I propose a novel means of examining change in these norms between 1970 and 2014 by analyzing the content of UN Security Council resolutions. This analysis is then utilized in quantitative analysis of the level of violence dispute participants resorted to in all Militarized Interstate Disputes in the period. I find that as liberal understandings of fundamental norms have increased, that the average level of violence used has decreased. This points to a crucial missing component in the existing literature: that institutions can only constrain when political actors share the right norms.

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is an umbrella term to describe an array of social and institutional methods for resolving disputes. These methods offer individual and collective disputants a panoply of forum shopping options, each taking place in different intrinsic, inherited, and constructed cultural contexts. While not immediately apparent to lawyers or anthropologists, different ADR methods, including arbitration and mediation, in fact constitute the principal global tools utilized to resolve most international and interstate disputes concerning matters of investment, commerce, and industry. To grasp the magnitude of this necessarily requires both lawyers and anthropologists to break the barriers of habitual thinking about the nature and extent of their disciplinary and interdisciplinary work. This chapter outlines the prevalence and pervasiveness of ADR processes and practices both past and present, using ADR as an interface for reconceptualizing interdisciplinary boundaries, appraising the relationship between theory and practice, and understanding emerging social and legal practices.

Training Foreign Militaries for Peace – U.S. IMET and Militarized Interstate Disputes 1976-2007

How do U.S. International Military Education and Training programs affect the recipient states` behavior in militarized interstate disputes? While the relationship between U.S. military aid in the form of arms and equipment transfer and MID involvement has been studied extensively in international relations literature the effects of U.S. IMET programs on the same phenomena has been largely ignored. This study intends to fill some of this gap. This paper proposes that American educated and trained foreign military personnel return home with a better understanding about the role of the military as an instrument of national power, civil-military relations, and the cost of war. These military personnel advise their political masters against the use of military force during international disputes leading to a decreased probability of both MID initiation and escalation. To test this argument the analysis employs a merged dataset from the Correlates of War Projects and the most prominent U.S. IMET and coups data. Using logistic regression analysis this study finds that more U.S. IMET support a country receives the less likely it initiates MIDs. The analysis also finds that countries that receive U.S. IMET support are less likely to escalate ongoing MIDs to higher levels of hostility.

Spying from Space: Reconnaissance Satellites and Interstate Disputes

Despite considerable interest and debate, it has proven surprisingly difficult to demonstrate a systematic link between technological change and patterns of war and peace. At least part of the challenge may reside in finding the right place to “look” for such relationships. Technological change alters what nations can do to one another (capabilities), but in ways that are typically reflected by deals (diplomatic bargains) rather than actions. We theorize that reconnaissance satellites have revolutionized the use of information gleaned from spying in ways that discourage states from engaging in serious conflicts with one another. We analyze the impact of reconnaissance satellites on high-casualty militarized interstate disputes (MIDS) between dyads from 1950 to 2010. We find that when either the potential aggressor or target in a dyad possess reconnaissance satellites, they are significantly less likely to become involved in serious MIDs. This effect is especially powerful when both states possess reconnaissance satellites.

Ideology, Institutions, Power, and Militarized Disputes

This chapter examines if and how intergovernmental organization (IGO) memberships shape participation in militarized interstate disputes. Theorists have argued that IGOs solve informational problems, socialize states, or constitute democratic communities that prevent a resort to violence. The distributive ideological approach suggests that IGOs institutionalize ideologically cohesive coalitions that ameliorate conflicts with insiders but can exacerbate conflict with outsiders. The effect of IGOs on militarized disputes should be present only if the distributional stakes have global ideological implications as opposed to when disputes are purely over particularistic stakes, such as territory. Regression analyses support this insight. Both ideological differences and IGO membership patterns affect dispute participation in dyads that include a major power but not among neighboring states or states involved in a territorial dispute. One implication is that IGO memberships affect the distribution of militarized disputes, but it is unclear whether IGOs in the aggregate reduce militarized conflict.