1. Introduction:

   Conflicts are related to foreign affairs inextricably. These conflicts are largely no longer solely between states, but also other groups, such as international organisations and other non-state entities, and jointly between them. The Charter of the United Nations (UN) plays an important role in this sense, especially with regard to conflicts between nations. International dispute means a disagreement on a point of law or fact a conflict of legal views or of interest between the States. This dispute can arise on legal or political grounds between the parties. Non-peaceful measures are the compulsive or coercive way of resolving an international conflict. These tactics require coercion or intimidation on a conflict to be settled by a nation. However, the use of compulsive/coercive interventions in such situations does not entail the use of the armed services. Its not really possible to describe the term dispute exactly. In a general context, it can mean a disagreement between two parties on a point of law or fact, a clash of legal opinions or interests. In order to decide whether a dispute occurs, it must be shown that one partys argument is rejected by the other. If an international conflict persists, though, is a matter for impartial assessment.

2. According to UN charter:

Article 2, paragraph 3 of the UN Charter[1] requires that:

All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. The UN General Assembly, in adopting its 1982 Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, emphasized the need to exert utmost efforts to settle any conflicts and disputes between States exclusively by peaceful means'' and that'' the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes should represent one of the concerns for States and the United Nations''. In the age of nuclear weapons, the importance of the principle of peaceful settlement of international disputes is apparent.

3. International Dispute:

The fundamental resolution of the United Nations is to preserve world peace and stability and to take steps such that violations of peace can be avoided. Towards this effect, the UN will take preventive steps to eliminate violations or violations of peace and acts of violence. The Charter of the United Nations has provided for the resolution of international disputes amongst nations by negotiated means, and that these settlements should not threaten international stability and justice. Through different perspectives, disputes can be deemed to be international or transnational. Mentioning only a handful is important for present purposes. For instance, because of the diversity of the nationalities of the parties to the dispute, a dispute can be defined as international. Namely, there are at least three separate types of diplomatic conflicts with respect to personalities alone.[2]

1. Disputes between States represent the first dimension of international disputes specifically regulated by international law, but this does not exclude domestic law or the relevant laws of international private law from being applicable.
2. Disputes amongst individuals or private organizations of various nationalities, including matters relating to the applicable law and the preference of authority, dispute laws, or to the rules of international private law.
3. Disputes among States and citizens of other States, such as, but not limited to, investment disputes which represent third-dimensional international disputes and are usually ruled by bilateral arrangements governed by general international law or by particular standards of Private International lawor by differences of laws governed by national law.

3. Coercive Method:

The sense of the terms themselves coercive, indicates that non-peaceful ways of resolving a conflict. Often, this approach can also require force and effort to address the problem posed. In this strategy, force does not reflect the extent of the fighting forces, but tactics that are short of a battle.[3] An act of aggression does not contravene the possibility of establishing a situation that would have a detrimental effect on international peace and security.[4]

In establishing the International Court of Justice, the United Nations holds the beacons of justice and law before a war-torn world and offers the possibilities of replacing orderly judicial proceedings with the vicissitudes of war and the reign of brutal force With the establishment of the ICJ by the United Nations, it became clear that the international community as a whole opposed the use of violence.

1. Retorsion:

   Retorsion in the international arena is the practical term that describes retaliation against a derogatory act of a state. To a certain degree, it is based on the concept of tit for tat. If an act is committed by a state identical to that performed by another state before, it is called Retorsion. The object of retribution is to retaliate.

2. Reprisals:

   If Retorsion does not address the problem, the States have the right to return to Reprisal. The state will launch such a case in retribution, where the matter will be settled. Reprisal, however, is one such tool and can only be used against a State if it has participated in an immoral or improper practise. Its a head that encompasses all sorts of vigorous steps that a state normally takes. It is also the definition of revenge but hangs over an eye for an eyes values. In relation to the current situation, traditionally, reprisals were more associated with the seizing of property and individuals, where it typically means compulsive actions used by one state against the other to resolve a conflict resulting from the latters unjustified or unlawful behaviour.

3. Embargo:

   Embargos are a means of reprisal that acts primarily as an instrument of economic aggression that can be used to satisfy different political goals, such as showing determination, transmitting a political message, compelling reform in the actions of other nations, discouraging other states unwanted practises. Normally, it means detention. Yet internationally, the technical sense of the entails detention of ships in port. If a ship belongs to a State which has violated an international tort or has committed any other international misconduct and is accessible in the territorial waters of the State against which tort or misconduct has been committed, the other State may, as a matter of law, prohibit such vessels from travelling through that area.

4. Pacific Blockade:

   If a nation blocks the coast of anotherstate in order to prohibit the entry of vessels from all nations by the usage of warships and other instruments to exert economic and political leverage on that state, the action is specifically referred to as a blockade. The conditions for a peaceful blockade are equivalent to those required during wartime for a regular blockade. A pacific blockade is a barrier used without actual intervention to put pressure imposed by a great power to bear on a weakened state.

5. Intervention:

   Another compulsive way of resolving conflicts between states outside of conflict is intervention. According to Professor Oppenheim, it is the autocratic intervention by a State in the activities of another State for the purpose of preserving or changing the real status of events. This is further divided into three classes, i.e., Internal, External, and Punitive Interference by Professor Winfield. It is necessary to remember that a state has been significantly discouraged from taking compulsive steps to address foreign conflicts since the creation of the United Nations.

4. Conclusion:

Peace will not be established in the world until governments are not willing to settle conflicts as independent bodies from their people. As the size of a dispute between states is several times greater than that of a dispute between individuals, the outcome of its settlement is, therefore, several times greater than that of a dispute between individuals being settled. diplomatic means are friendlier and less hostile than adjudication.[5] Global stability and prosperity is a pre-requisite for the growth of the world as a whole. States can achieve temporary relief using Coercive means, but this doesnt automatically translate into permanent and sustainable peace.

The worlds power centres need to unite with the rest of the nations, both strong and weak, rich and poor, to create a world without warlike tendencies. Such a framework will need to abandon the use of Coercive means to ensure the creation of a stable World Order.

• Citation :

[1] Charter of the United Nations,1945

[2] Sucharitkul, Sompong. A Choice of Means of Dispute Settlement in International Practice: Thailands Experience. Asia Pacific Law Review, vol. 17, no. Special on Mediation, 2009, p. 139-150. HeinOnline.

[3] Rai, Diva. Settlement of Disputes in International Law. IPleaders, 29 Apr. 2020, blog.ipleaders.in/settlement-of-disputes-in-international-law/#Compulsive_or_coercive_means.

[4] Dhar, Samarth. Settlement of International Disputes Using Coercive Means. Legal Service India Law, Lawyers and Legal Resources, n.d.

[5]Hamza, Abdualla Mohamed, and Miomir Todorovic. Peaceful settlement of disputes. Global Journal of Commerce Management Perspective, Global Institute for Research Education (2017).