The law of unneutral service deals with those acts of neutral vessels which constitute assistance to a belligerent, significant enough in consequences to give the offender a hostile character. It must be emphasized that, contrary to the inferences of some writers, unneutral service has nothing to do with acts committed by a hostile state. There are rules dealing with such acts, but they are not comprehended within the meaning of the term which is the subject of this discussion.

The International Conference of American States on Conciliation and Arbitration, which met in Washington from December 10, 1928, to January 5, 1929, was characterized by one of the delegates to the conference as the Locarno of the New World. Shortly after the signing of the General Pact for the Renunciation of War, we find the nations of the Western Hemisphere taking the logical next step of providing machinery for the pacific settlement of all international disputes. “ It is quite obvious that it is not sufficient to renounce war, unless we are ready to have recourse to the processes of peace.” Here is concrete evidence of the good faith of the American Republics to provide a clean-cut substitute for war as an instrument of national policy. The necessity for the development of machinery for international pacific settlement has been demonstrated to the present generation by the fact that the whole nature of the institution of war changed whenman became a scientist, an engineer, and a mechanic. Mass production, under the stimulus of intensive research, has madepossible the production of instruments of destruction which threaten to destroy civilization, unless international social relations can be brought within the control of law. While President-elect Hoover was making his good-will, personal-relations tour in South America, eminent jurists from twenty of the American Republics were meeting in Washington to set up the framework for the stabilization of international relations.

On April 3, 2015, the ICSID tribunal in Venoklim Holding B. V. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela issued the first public decision to consider the effect of a state’s denunciation of the ICSID Convention (Convention). The tribunal decided that Venezuela’s denunciation on January 24, 2012, did not preclude jurisdiction over a claim submitted in the period after notification of the denunciation but before its effective date. Yet the tribunal also held that Venezuela’s domestic statute was insufficient as an autonomous offer of consent to ICSID arbitration, and that the conjunction of the statute with an investment treaty did not confer such consent where the conditions in the statute were not fulfilled. The award was notable too because of the majority’s holding that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction owing to the Venezuelan nationality of the underlying beneficial owners of the Dutch corporation that was the claimant in the ICSID arbitration. The Tribunal held that, because the claimant was effectively owned by Venezuelan nationals, the requirement of foreign ownership or control was not satisfied for the purposes of the applicable Venezuelan investment statute and the ICSID Convention.

The International Labor Organization (hereafter referred to as the ILO) was established by the peace treaties concluded at the close of World War I as an autonomous part of the League of Nations for the purpose of promoting social justice.

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its third session at Geneva, Switzerland, from May 16 to July 27, 1951. In the course of fifty-three meetings, the Commission completed its work on the following items: (1) reservations to multilateral conventions; (2) question of defining aggression; and (3) preparation of a draft code of offenses against the peace and security of mankind. It also concluded the first phase of a review of its Statute. In the field of the codification of international law, the Commission undertook further consideration of the topics of (1) law of treaties and (2) regime of the high seas. It also decided to initiate work on the topics of “nationality, including statelessness” and “regime of territorial waters,” and appointed Judge Manley 0. Hudson and Professor J. P. A. Frangois special rapporteurs, respectively, for these topics. The actions (including some of an administrative character) taken by the Commission are set forth in a report to the General Assembly.

Over the summer of 2018, trade relations between the United States and many of its trading partners continued to be marked by tensions. The United States and China ratcheted up their use of tariffs against each other. The United States both received and initiated requests for consultation with various countries at the World Trade Organization (WTO) related to its earlier steel and aluminum tariffs and to tariffs imposed in response by other countries. President Trump has continued to pursue the possibility of further tariffs, including with respect to automobile and uranium imports. The United States also escalated trade tensions with Turkey through various measures, explicitly linking some of these measures to Turkey's detainment of an American pastor. Despite the broader theme of tensions, negotiations have proved productive between the United States and two of its major trading partners—the European Union and Mexico—paving a way for future settlements. With the European Union, the Trump administration has reached a tentative understanding and agreed not to impose new tariffs while the parties negotiate toward finalizing this understanding. As to Mexico, in late August 2018 the Trump administration announced that the two countries had reached agreement with respect to many issues underlying their ongoing North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) negotiations.