درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The peaceful use of the various territories of the international community, including land, sea, air, and outer space, is one of the basic rules of international law, and the prohibition of the use and threat of force based on paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter is one of the mandatory rules.None of the members of the United Nations have the right to resort to force in the seas and non-peaceful maritime activities. Although the 1982 Montego Bay, Convention on the Law of the Sea was drafted for peacetime, this does not mean that the aforementioned convention loses its validity and executive power when armed conflicts occur.In this research, using the analytical descriptive method, a review of the behavior of the United States in the peaceful use of the seas from the point of view of the United Nations Charter and the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea and the authors' analyzes has been done.The findings of this research show that the US government, according to the statements issued by this country, which have been prepared in line with the interests and oceanic policies of this sea power, has provided interpretations or perceptions regarding the maritime activities of the US in relation to the 1982 convention, which can endanger the peaceful use of the seas.The approach of the United States through the seven positions that have been examined in this brief article indicates that this country allows its military activities in order to secure its interests and is not subject to dispute resolution methods and peaceful goals. It does not consider the 1982 Convention as its legal obligation.   Therefore, the US wants absolute freedom of navigation in all sea areas. Naturally, this approach of a maritime power cannot be a suitable basis for guaranteeing the peaceful use of the seas and institutionalizing maritime diplomacy. 

Arbitration, as a method of pacific settlement of disputes, is mentioned in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations, by which parties to any dispute endeavor to find a solution to eliminate their conflict. Yet, article 33 does not include other forms of arbitrations that the United Nations System deals with. International arbitrations are generally referred to as interstate arbitration, international commercial arbitration, and international investment arbitration. Although these arbitration-based methods of international dispute settlement are different, they all observe the same goal: the settlement of disputes by peaceful means and preventing the parties from resorting to adverse behavior. Due to their common goal, it calls the role of the United Nations in promulgating international arbitrations among its member States into question: Has the UN had any bold involvement in promoting and strengthening international arbitrations in the abovementioned fields? It seems that the influence of the UN on interstate arbitration is undeniable because of its main goal and principles; however, this article depicts that the UN policy regarding international arbitrations adheres to the forming and developing international commercial arbitration and international investment arbitration rather than inter-state arbitration. The UN also plays a mediocre role in developing thematic-oriented international arbitrations.