International Law exists to protect the weak from the strong.

In Mediation, the International Rule of Law is therefore a tool for neutralising a power imbalance between the Participants.

That is why bullies fear and despise the International Rule of Law, and seek to dispense with it altogether, by undermining it.

Rogue state actors who are bullies, are therefore the enemies of Civilization. That is because in order to achieve dominance, their aim is to dismantle and destroy the International Legal Order, i.e. World Order built upon Co-Operation between Nations coexisting with each other in Peace.

In other words, rogue state actors who are bullies, and those who ‘pull their strings’, i.e. their financial puppet-masters, are the agents and profiteers of international chaos, war, death and unimaginable human suffering on a potentially global scale.

Cultural Heritage Disputes often involve complex, emotive contests over ownership, restitution, and indigenous rights.

A Mediator can apply the International Rule of Law to create a ‘structured framework’ in order to encourage compliance with ‘Legal Norms’, while facilitating a creative compromise.

Invoking the International Rule of Law, a Mediator can balance competing interests by transforming legal ‘rights’, into ‘interest-focused’ negotiations, that respect – ethical, cultural, and historical contexts. 

In other words, a Mediator can use the International Rule of Law to create a respectful, legally informed, and confidential environment in which the Participants are empowered to reach solutions that balance legal rights with cultural, ethical, and historical realities.

Mediator Strategies include:

(a) Integrating International Legal Frameworks (The ‘Shadow of the Law’).

Rather than ignoring legal complexities, the Mediator uses relevant international conventions (e.g., 1970 UNESCO, 1995 UNIDROIT) as a foundation for negotiation, ensuring the final agreement is grounded in established legal principles regarding illicitly acquired property. 

(b) ‘Shadow of the Law’ Negotiation.

The Mediator uses the ‘shadow of the law’ to bring parties to the table, making them aware of the risks of losing in litigation while encouraging them to find a more tailored, and voluntary solution.

(c) Balancing Public Interest.

The Mediator ensures that the settlement, although private, aligns with the public interest in preserving cultural heritage. 

(ii) Tailoring Solutions to Respect Cultural and Moral Interests.

The International Rule of Law in this context includes recognizing the ‘moral, financial, reputational, and ethical’ concerns that traditional litigation often ignores. 

(iii) Customary Law Incorporation.

Mediators can facilitate the incorporation of indigenous customary laws, protocols, and ethical standards into the Mediation, ensuring that the ‘spirit’ of the law is applied rather than just the letter of property law.

(iv) Creative Compromise.

A Mediator can guide parties towards solutions that go beyond binary ownership, such as:

(a) Shared Ownership/Custodianship – Sharing legal rights over an object.

(b) Long-term Loans – Returning physical possession while acknowledging legal ownership.

(b) Digital/Physical Reproductions – Providing replicas for exhibition while returning the original. 

(v) Upholding Due Process and Procedural Fairness. 

The Mediator ensures that the process itself respects the principles of fairness, impartiality, and equality, which are core tenets of the International Rule of Law. 

(a) Procedural Fairness.

The Mediator maintains a neutral, confidential, and safe environment (often using ‘shuttle diplomacy’) that allows both sides to feel heard and respected.

(b) Informed Consent.

By providing a structured, voluntary process, the Mediator ensures that all participants, including minority groups or indigenous communities, are making informed, uncoerced decisions. 

(vi) Facilitating the joint-devlopment of a ‘New Paradigm of Restitution’. 

Mediators often work to shift the focus from a rigid ‘possession v. ownership’ dispute to a ‘New Paradigm of Restitution’ that fosters future collaboration. 

(a) Reframing Challenges as Opportunities.

The Mediator uses tools like ‘Reframing’ to turn apparent legal constraints (e.g., statute of limitations) into opportunities for creative, non-adversarial settlements.

(b) Future-Focused Solutions.

By focusing on the future rather than purely on historical grievances, the Mediator helps institutions and communities build long-term, positive relationships, such as establishing capacity-building programs in exchange for the return of an object. 

Thus, a Mediator can use the Interntional Rule of Law to create a respectful, legally informed, and confidential environment in which the Participants are empowered to reach solutions that balance ‘legal rights’ with ‘cultural, ethical, and historical realities’.

These Mediator strategies are discussed in my recent Talk on YouTube – ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’

Link to the Video Recording of the Talk on YouTube:

“The Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes”

See also the ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

Notes added:

Two quotations about the dangers of appeasement:

‘We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom – and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.’ (John Fitgerald Kennedy, Inaugural Adress, January 20th 1961).

‘Appeasers believe that if you keep on throwing steaks to a tiger, the tiger will become a vegetarian.’ (Heywood Broun, in Robert Drennan, ed., ‘The Algonquin Wits’).