225 Years to the Jay Treaty: Interstate Arbitration Between Progress and Stagnation

The article challenges the contemporary judicialized conception of interstate arbitration, arguing that it has strayed from its traditional purpose of effectively resolving disputes that are not suitable for judicial settlement. It advocates for a return to the hybrid nature of arbitration, which combines both legal and political dimensions, as reflected in the Jay Treaty. The article contends that a narrow, legalistic approach to arbitration often fails to address the complex, intertwined legal and political issues present in interstate disputes, such as territorial conflicts. It highlights the importance of arbitration as a flexible and effective mechanism for resolving such disputes, emphasizing the need for arbitrators to act as both judges and diplomats, considering equitable principles and broader contextual factors.