Abstract
The adoption of mechanisms for pacific settlement of disputes as standards for diplomacy and international relations grew out of the necessity to prevent war and preserve international peace and cordial interrelationship amongst sovereign states. Mediation, that is, the structured and interactive process by which a third party assists the disputing parties in resolving their conflict is a distinctive and confidential dispute resolution tool that has been used to settle international disputes for ages. Generally, the war of aggression is committed by superpowers against less powerful countries; and despite the use of international sanctions, isolation and blockade to weaken nations that engage in the war of aggression, the recent outbreak of war between Russia and Ukraine demonstrates the failure of international sanctions and institutions in totally preventing aggressive tendencies of superpowers. Utilizing the doctrinal approach, the paper looks at the meaning of mediation, its growth and utilization by various international institutions and supranational institutions in settling international disputes. The paper considers the use of mediation generally as a mechanism for dispute settlement in international relations and with particular reference to the Russia-Ukraine war, observes that mediation is most relevant to resolving the lingering issues underlining the war. The paper however finds that even though mediation has been effective in settling international disputes, the fact that mediation is not binding and cannot be imposed on parties constitute a major hindrance to its efficacy.