TREATY.
It is inevitable that disputes should arise between nations. International law recog nizes three ways in which these disputes may be settled,—by amicable methods, by forcible methods falling short of war, and by war. When negotiations between the for eign offices of the two states have failed to settle a dispute it is not uncommon for the states to have recourse to arbitration. The practice of arbitration hits come to be more and more general during the past one hun dred years, and it is significant of the growth of international law, both in definoite ness and in comprehension, that nations have been willing to submit questions of the high est importance to a decision based upon its principles. The Hague Tribunal (q. v.) rep resents a permanent court for the settle ment, by arbitration, of disputes between nations. See INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION.
When friendly negotiations between states have failed to settle a dispute between two states, international law recognizes that a third state may offer its good offices and mediation. Special rules were laid down at The Hague Conference of 1907 defining the conditions of such mediation. See MEDIA TION.
Apart from these amicable methods of set tling international disputes, there are cer tain measures, such as retorsion (q. v.), re prisals (q. v.), embargo •(q. v.), and pacific blockade (q. v.), by which one state endeav ors to exercise compulsion over another state without having recourse to actual war.
War is the status of armed conflict be tween two or more states. However im proper a means of settling international dis putes it may be from the standpoint of morality and justice, it is recognized by in ternational law as a legal means of coercing an alleged offender. In the course of centu ries certain rules have developed defining the rights of the belligerent parties and the limits within which armed forces may be employed, as well as the relations between belligerent powers and third parties not in volved in the war.
At the First Hague Conference a CI:inven tion concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land was adopted in which definite rules are laid down concerning the qualifica tions of belligerents, prisoners of war, the sick and wounded, the means of injuring the enemy, sieges and bombardments, spies, flags of truce, capitulations, armistices, military authority over the territory of the hostile state, and the internment of belligerents and the care of the wounded in neutral coun tries. A convention was also adopted provid
ing for the adaptation of the principles of the Geneva Convention to maritime war. At the Second Hague Peace Conference, held in 1907, other conventions were adopted dealing with the commencement of hostilities, the status of enemy merchant-ships at the out break of hostilities, the conversion of mer chant-ships into war-ships, the laying of au tomatic submarine contact mines, bombard ment by naval forces in time of war, re strictions on the exercise of the right of capture in maritime war, and the establish ment of an International Prize Court. Be sides these conventions certain declarations were adopted prohibiting the discharge of projectiles, etc., frcIna balloons, the use of as phyxiating gases, and the use of bullets with a hard envelope. See WAR.
In recognizing that the state of war con fers certain rights and imposes certain re strictions upon the belligerent parties, in-' ternational law at the same time recognizes the existence of new rules governing the re lations between the belligerents and other states not parties to the conflict. The princi ple upon which these rules are based is that the successful prosecution of war makes it necessary for the belligerents to impose cer tain restrictions, such as the establishment of blockades (q. v.) and the prohibition of traffic in contraband (q. v.), upon the inter course between neutral states and the ene my. These restrictions are imposed in virtue of the rights of belligerents as against neu trals. On the other hand, if third parties wish to remain neutral in a contest between two or more states, it is incumbent upon them to abstain absolutely from all partici pation in the conflict. This abstention im poses both active and passive duties. The passive duties are fulfilled if the nation re frains, in its corporate capacity, from giv ing either direct or indirect assistance to either belligerent. The active duties require the neutral state to prevent any use of its territory for the purposes of either belliger ent, whether such use be made by the bellig erents themselves or by citizens of the neu tral state in the interest of the belligerents.