Support for World Court

The United States and the Soviet Union are pursuing discussions aimed at giving the International Court of Justice a role in settling disputes between the two nations over interpretations of treaties. It is a constructive proposal that could, at least, reverse some of the setbacks suffered by the court in recent years.

State Department officials have given few details of the negotiations beyond confirming an initial report in the New York Times that the initiative has been taken. The negotiations grow out of a proposal from Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the Soviet president, that the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council accept compulsory jurisdiction of the World Court.

At best, the American response appears limited, if not timid, falling far short of accepting, as it had from 1946 until 1985, the compulsory jurisdiction of the court. In confirming the negotiations, the State Department emphasized the Reagan Administration’s opposition to any court authority over issues involving national security and the use of force. Furthermore, the United States is continuing to challenge the court’s jurisdiction in the actions brought by Nicaragua flowing out of U.S. military action against Nicaragua, including the clandestine mining of a port. That case will move soon to oral arguments over the damage to be assessed against the United States following earlier findings that the United States had violated the U.N. Charter.

The United States is a party to about 60 treaties that provide for World Court adjudication, according to Abraham D. Sofaer, State Department legal adviser. One of those, with Italy, will result in oral arguments before the court in February, and the United States is committed to accepting the court’s verdict, even though it could result in payment of millions of dollars. But the Soviet Union has not yet agreed to be bound by court decisions on the treaties to which it also is a party. And it is on that issue that the United States is urging agreement.

In addition, the United States would like to win agreement from Moscow to use a special World Court procedure utilizing only five of the 15 justices, selected by the parties to the dispute. The procedure can increase national confidence in the outcome by excluding justices viewed as hostile to one side or the other.

The movement by the United States away from acceptance of court jurisdiction, dramatized in the rejection of the Nicaraguan case in 1985, has been facilitated by the fact that the Soviet bloc and about three-fourths of all the other nations have also refused to accept binding jurisdiction. That has weakened the efforts to construct a rule of law among nations. Now, there are at least some steps to reverse direction, to modify the posture that has undermined the authority of the court. The steps are inadequate. But they are in the correct direction.