The Global South cannot afford to let its maritime border disputes fester
The ocean looks like peace from afar and truth up close, they say. But beneath the waves, the map of the world’s oceans is far less settled than it looks. Today, dozens of sea borders remain unresolved. Like so many conflicts, they owe their origins to complicated questions of where one country’s territory ends, and another’s begins. Many involve overlapping claims to areas rich in resources; and…
The ocean appears peaceful from a distance, but beneath the surface, the world's oceanic boundaries are far from settled, particularly for the nations of the Global South. For decades, many sea borders have remained unresolved due to complex questions of territorial demarcation and overlapping claims to resource-rich waters. These unresolved disputes, especially in Africa, pose significant vulnerabilities, especially given the Middle East's energy market turmoil.
In the face of this instability, governments in the Global South cannot afford to let these maritime disputes remain unaddressed. The need for governments to address these issues has never been more urgent, as the legal framework of maritime security depends on resolving these disputes. Recent developments in the Gulf of Thailand demonstrate how compulsory conciliation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) can lead to a peaceful resolution of maritime disputes.
In May, Thailand withdrew from a 25-year-old memorandum with Cambodia to resolve their maritime boundary and develop undersea energy resources. Cambodia, the smaller nation, initiated compulsory conciliation proceedings, which led to the formation of a commission of international legal experts to hear the dispute. Thailand accepted the offer in June, highlighting the benefits of conciliation in preserving relationships and providing a framework for compromise.
Meanwhile, Ghana and Ivory Coast recently turned to UNCLOS arbitration to settle their maritime boundary dispute, demonstrating the range of tools available for resolving international disputes. These cases underscore the importance of engaging with international law and its mechanisms, even in sensitive contexts. Conciliation offers a non-binding, consensus-building approach that can preserve relationships and facilitate negotiations over shared resources, while litigation can be used for more urgent issues.
As global instability persists, there is a clear incentive for the Global South to utilize these tools to secure their interests and demonstrate the viability of international law. The Cambodia-Thailand conciliation case serves as a hopeful example of how peaceful resolution of maritime disputes can unlock economic opportunities and strengthen the rule of law at the ocean's edges.
Written by urgent.news from South China Morning Post's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
