Abstract
This paper presents the special international peace zone as both an observed and ideal institution. Such a zone quells military conflict in an area over which sovereigns make conflicting territorial claims. It operates through an interim administration, governed by its own rules, independent of any single sovereign. Past examples include the Free City of Danzig (1920-39), the Free Territory of Trieste (1947-54), and United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (1999-2008). Despite proven successes, these zones have suffered from an undue reliance on multi-national organizations—first the League of Nations and now the United Nations. Warring sovereigns seldom agree about the moral and legal authority of any standing assembly of states. Special international peace zones created by the contesting powers offer a decentralized and party-centered way around that roadblock. This paper describes a model zone combining best practices from diplomatic relations and alternative dispute resolution. It borrows a practice used in international agreements dating to the 1794 Jay Treaty and used in commercial arbitration daily: a panel of judges chosen by direct and derivative consent. From that minimum viable agreement, parties can progress to demilitarizing contested areas, administering transitional governance, and settling claims. An appendix to the paper demonstrates application of the theory in a Model Treaty of Peace and Reconciliation Between the Russian Federation and Ukraine. Through means such as these, special international peace zones can help states resolve their disputes not by the rule of force but by the rule of law.
Recommended Citation
Bell, Tom W.
(2025)
"The Special International Peace Zone: From History, Through Practice, Toward an End to Armed Conflict in Ukraine,"
Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law: Vol. 15:
Iss.
1, Article 3.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjicl/vol15/iss1/3
Included in
Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, International Humanitarian Law Commons, International Law Commons, Military, War, and Peace Commons, Rule of Law Commons, Transnational Law Commons