The purpose of this book is to describe the problems posed in the formulation of international rules for bays at the present time, to investigate the history of the several interests that have influenced the development of such rules, to trace the efforts that have been made to codify the rules, and to suggest a further refinement of the rules. This book seeks to combine the fruits of the writer's experience as a navigator with those of his studies in international law, geography, history and economics. Although, after study and thought upon the subject, there is likely to arise an initial desire to write a work that is truly definitive, one must resign himself to something of lesser scope. That being so, there is, if anything, an increased demand upon the writer to exercise careful judgment in his research, and in his exposition of the subject. This writer can only hope that he has discharged this responsi bility to the degree that his efforts will have clarified some issues and that what he has set on paper may be of some assistance to others. This writer has attempted to be as objective as possible in his inter pretations, and he has made no attempt to defend the policy of any State. In so doing, he is weil aware of the fact that for broader policy reasons, some of the views expressed herein cannot be officiaily accept ed as bases for action.

The issue of historic rights and historic waters has long been a problematic area in the law of the sea where even basic definitions have been vague and interchangeably used in the past. The first edition of this book was entitled Historic Waters in the Law of the Sea: A Modern Re-Appraisal, and concentrated, as the title implies, on the doctrine of historic waters. The title of this expanded new edition has been broadened to take account of the important clarifications as to the doctrine of historic maritime claims generally—particularly 'historic rights' in the narrow sense which fall short of sovereignty claims. These latter rights—such as they now are—are discussed in depth in the new text. This development has come about, of course, because of the Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in Philippines v. China in 2016. This decision has, for the first time in a judicial setting, rationalised the terminology in this area of the law of the sea; and, most importantly, has clarified the close interaction of historic rights with the Law of the Sea Convention. This new edition discusses the latter issue passim, showing that much of the former customary law doctrine has now been overridden by the Convention.

This first work in the new Oxford Monographs in International Law Series to be edited by Ian Brownlie, QC, FBA, is a study of juridical bays. In 1958, against a backdrop of increasing international tensions regarding rights to and control of waters enclosed by coastal indentations, the world community, in a historic compromise reached under United Nations auspices, adopted Article 7 of the Geneva Convention "On the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone". Recognizing the need to balance the self-protective interests of coastal states and the international interests of a harmonious world community, the signatories to Article 7 decided, in effect, that once the water enclosed within a coastal indentation met the requirements set out under Article 7, an irrebutable presumption had been raised that the claimant state owned these waters as a matter of right against all other states. Well-drafted and remarkably unambiguous, Article 7 should have resolved the issue of unreasonably expansive bay claims forever, but, in fact, it did not. Disputes continued to arise. In the twenty years since its adoption, despite continuing national and international disputes, Article 7 has not received the analysis necessary to help it become a more reliable basis for conflict resolution in cases involving complex coastal configurations. This study, the first major examination of Article 7, interprets both its text and context and more importantly, offers solutions to some of the problems that continue to make the question of coastal bay-type waters sources of national and international conflict.

Baselines under the International Law of the Sea brings together two reports produced by the International Law Association (ILA) Committee on Baselines under the International Law of the Sea between 2008 – 2018. The Sofia Report (2012) is organized around the interpretation of Article 5 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) concerning the normal baseline. The Sydney Report (2018) is organized around a common methodology in assessing Articles 7, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 47 of the LOSC concerning straight baselines, closing lines, and straight archipelagic baselines.

This monograph considers the application of general rules of international law to islands, as well as special rules focused on islands, notably Article 121 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Such rules have been applied in several landmark cases in recent years, including the International Court of Justice’s judgments in Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), and arbitral awards in the Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration (Mauritius v. United Kingdom) and the South China Sea Arbitration (Philippines v. China). Among other things, this monograph explores: the legal concepts of “islands”, “rocks” and “low-tide elevations”; methods of securing sovereignty over and the maritime zones generated by islands; islands and historic titles, bays and rights; problems of delimitation in the presence of islands; legal issues arising from changes in islands over time (notably from climate change); and contemporary techniques for resolving disputes over islands.

Every year, states negotiate, conclude, sign, and give effect to hundreds of new international agreements. Koremenos argues that the detailed design provisions of such agreements matter for phenomena that scholars, policymakers, and the public care about: when and how international cooperation occurs and is maintained. Theoretically, Koremenos develops hypotheses regarding how cooperation problems like incentives to cheat can be confronted and moderated through law's detailed design provisions. Empirically, she exploits her data set composed of a random sample of international agreements in economics, the environment, human rights and security. Her theory and testing lead to a consequential discovery: considering the vagaries of international politics, international cooperation looks more law-like than anarchical, with the detailed provisions of international law chosen in ways that increase the prospects and robustness of cooperation. This nuanced and sophisticated 'continent of international law' can speak to scholars in any discipline where institutions, and thus institutional design, matter.