Left Out in The Cold?

Judicial Settlement of Disputes During The Cold War

Abstract

International Law and the Cold War is an invitation to study some of the forgotten discourses related to this period, many times unfairly associated with the idea of decay. The historical experience is often summarized with the assertion that “the Cold War period saw a decline in the commitment to international adjudication”. An examination of the judicial practice in the period is carried out, namely arbitration and decisions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). We shall also briefly scrutinize the appearance of jurisdictional clauses in international treaties signed between 1947 and 1990. The second part of the article presents a specific instance of judicial settlement of disputes, outlining the American Treaty for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes and the fundamental choices of the “Pact of Bogota” in relation to judicial settlement.  In the third part, we zoom in on some ideas regarding international adjudication in Latin America and on the writings of some Brazilian authors – such as Haroldo Valladão – to demonstrate their perception of the phenomenon. The present analysis proves that the judicial settlement of international disputes did not depend on the collapse of the Soviet Union for coming into operation. Interstate arbitrations were very much present during the Cold War years. Jurisdictional clauses remained in vogue, a great number of treaties still being adopted that referred their disputes to the International Court of Justice. The Pact of Bogota was a groundbreaking initiative to support the jurisdiction of an international court through collective recognition, consolidating regional practice on compulsory adjudication.

KEYWORDS: Cold War; settlement of disputes; interstate arbitration; International Court of Justice; Pact of Bogota.