Law and Diplomacy, Sovereignty and Consent

This article reflects on the first-ever compulsory conciliation under the law of the sea and its significance to international law and diplomacy. The conditions for ending the dispute between Timor-Leste and Australia were only created through a genuine combination of both law and diplomacy as facilitated by an expert commission. Through successive milestones, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) conciliation framework and the conciliation commission itself, was able to successfully shift the reluctant State (Australia) from resistance, to engagement, and ultimately, to resolution. The conciliation also showed how Timor-Leste’s sovereign interpretation of maritime rights under international law was a compelling argument in the context of historical factors and its self-determination. Ultimately, a treaty was agreed through the conciliation despite competing views of international law’s relationship to diplomacy and indeed on maritime boundary delimitation methodology itself. A reflection on this triumph of the liberal international order is beneficial for both Timor-Leste and Australia as they seek further cooperation under the new treaty, and for other States facing entrenched disputes as well.