Velazquez 1Juan VelazquezBenjamin Fordham, Josh WhaleyPLSC 11718 November 2014A Question of Sovereignty: Behrain, Qatar, and the ICJFor almost ten years, the International Court of Justice had been handling a historic event dealing with the case of two Arab countries, Bahrain and Qatar. This case was a very special one in the sense that it dealt with whether or not the resource-enriched and soon to be tourist destination of Hawar Islands would remain sovereign. The reason these two countries and their leaders, Emir Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain and Emir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani ofQatar were now before the ICJ was the result of over sixty years worth of border disputes and now awaited a verdict. Several months after al-Khalifa came to power, al-Thani had gone to visithim in hopes of strengthening their political relations.Both the Thani family and Khalifas’ of Bahrain had occupied their respective countries for centuries, beginning with the Khalifas’ of Bahrain in 1783 who were from Zubarah which was part of the Qatari peninsula. Bahrain in 1913 had said they would need to obtain approval of Britain before they would sign any concession dealing with oil. In that same year, the Anglo-Ottoman Empire had also recognized that the Qatar Peninsula was ruled by the Thani family. When the Thani and Ottoman agreement ended, three years after, Abdullah bin Jasim al-Thani entered into an agreement with Great Britain which stated that the Thani family was the prominent political party in Qatar as long as the Qatari emir would consult with the BritishVelazquez 2government when any new political transactions or relations took place with another state. Then in 1935, Jasim al-Thani would sign a concession over the Hawar Islands in regards to oil. This would bring upon the quick reaction of Bahrain who in 1937 would set up an outpost on the largest island.Saudi Arabia would yet again mediate as they had just six years prior. Unfortunately Qatar said that Bahrain had violated an agreement set in 1977 by the Saudis stating that neither the Thanis’ or Bahrainis would occupy the Fasht ad-Dibal reef. The Qatari would then seize twenty-nine Bahraini workers that were believed to have been constructing a coast guard station on the reef, the Bahraini denied these claims and instead persisted with their defense of that they were actually building a Gulf Cooperation Council facility to monitor the tanker traffic. Once thetensions from this event had settled, both the Bahraini and Qatari agreed to the continued assistance from the Saudi’s regarding their differences and the settling of them.The International Court of Justice is the premier function to the United Nation which had been founded in 1945 which is comprised of fifteen different judges all from different nationalities. Being a part of international law, the ICJ is to be the deciding factor “in accordancewith international law such disputes as are submitted to it”. This court is expected to follows a set of rules in which they use to find justice and equality. In the end, any ruling set by the ICJ is to be both legal and in the best effort to keep peace between whomever is at disagreement and the judgement is to be accepted without appeal.What this article paper and study of interaction between Bahrain and Qatar comes down to is the fact they, the emirs, had both chosen a diplomatic and democratic way of handling theirVelazquez 3differences. This was very interesting to observe on the international level mostly because both of these states were quite small in size and had a rather ‘mature’ response to handle their dispute. Yes they had in earlier decades and centuries used force and violence but then again most if not all surviving states have and even during more recents years when the Qatari had taken hold of the Bahraini workers. However, both the parties in dispute would come to agreement with the ICJ and continue to strengthen their relationships over the years following the initial