OVERVIEW

Throughout this volume may be seen U.S. practice in various fora for the settlement of disputes, ranging from cases before the International Court of Justice, to cases before World Trade Organization and North American Free Trade Agreement dispute resolution tribunals, to cases in U.S. courts. This chapter briefly seeks to highlight some of the more important ad hoc initiatives of the United States during 1999–2001 to promote the pacific settlement of disputes through mediation, arbitration, and brokered bilateral agreement. Further, this chapter surveys important decisions rendered by the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in this period, including decisions on challenges to the judges brought by both Iran and the United States.

SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES GENERALLY

Brčko Arbitration

The 1995 Dayton Accords establishing peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina tabled for later international arbitration, on the basis of “relevant legal and equitable principles,” the issue of which entity should govern the municipality of Brčko—the Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina or the Republika Srpska. Located in northeastern Bosnia on the border with Croatia, Brčko sits at a narrow stretch of land connecting the two principal portions of the Republika Srpska, astride Bosnia-Herzegovina's rail link to the rest of Europe. The Croats and Muslims that predominated the population of Brčko before the Bosnian war were driven out by Bosnian Serb forces during the war. In the aftermath of the Dayton Accords, Brčko remained under the de facto control of Bosnian Serbs.

For the arbitration, the Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska each appointed an arbitrator.