ABSTRACT
Few people believe that states are likely soon to agree to settle all of their armed conflicts by referring them to international courts. But there may be more scope for the effective use of judicial techniques than is presently assumed, particularly in a post-Cold War and Persian Gulf crisis era. Relatively more powerful states should be expected to be more reluctant to submit use-of-force cases to adjudication than less powerful states. The agreement also should provide procedures facilitating the waiver of any "use-of-force" exclusion in cases where states are in fact prepared to accept adjudication. The concept of "use of force" presumably describes some type of use by a state of armed force or organized military power to coerce another state. The United States has suggested on numerous occasions that the Court faces enormous difficulties in determining the facts in a situation of ongoing armed conflict.
