When Courts Cannot End a Conflict: The Limits of International Arbitration at Sea

Imagine two countries fighting for shared water. A judge decides where the border lies, but one side disagrees with the decision. It means the ruling came from the conflict that still continues the same thing happening in the South China Sea.

China and the Philippines have the same interest in these waters which are very important for fishing trade and security.In 2016, an international tribunal ruled in a case brought by the Philippines under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.It rejected the legal basis for China's expansive historic-rights claims within its nine-dash line. China rejected the ruling.

This case shows that laws can clear the rights but not totally end the conflict. International arbitration has little power to comply with States decisions when they refuse to accept it.

So what's the next step? Countries should open their diplomatic communication, agree on rules for encounters at sea, and also use joint talk to prevent conflict becoming violent. These steps cannot totally end territorial disputes but it can't fully help conflict to become more violent and it can also build trust.

Although laws and courts are powerful tools of conflict settlement. But the lasting impact needs powerful diplomacy, practical solutions and the willingness to manage any conflict without force.