International Law and Territorial Disputes in Africa: A Case Study of Ethiopia and Eritrea Border Dispute

This paper examines the role of international law in resolving territorial disputes in Africa, with a specific focus on the Ethiopia-Eritrea border conflict and comparative case studies across the continent. The persistence of territorial conflicts on the continent highlights a significant problem: the frequent noncompliance with international legal rulings. This problem is often driven by political resistance, national interests, and weak enforcement mechanisms, which undermine the effectiveness of legal resolutions. Despite the existence of legal frameworks designed to facilitate peaceful dispute resolution, the gap between legal rulings and their practical implementation remains a critical issue. Through a qualitative research approach and the analysis of secondary data, including legal documents, official reports, and historical accounts, the study investigates this gap and the factors contributing to it. By drawing on examples such as the Bakassi Peninsula dispute, the Sudan-South Sudan border negotiations, and the Burkina Faso-Niger border demarcation, the paper highlights the importance of regional representation and diverse perspectives. The findings reveal that while international law provides legal clarity and legitimacy, its effectiveness often depends on political will, regional cooperation, and the capacity of legal institutions. This paper addresses the gap between legal principles and their enforcement, advocating for strengthening enforcement mechanisms, enhancing regional legal frameworks, promoting political dialogue, and engaging influential non-state actors. In doing so, it offers recommendations for fostering peace and stability through more effective and collaborative conflict resolution efforts across Africa.