Law and Diplomacy, Sovereignty and Consent

Abstract 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.