Question

Can you put this in a paragraph plz
Who should create boundaries and what principles should guide them
- Ideal makers: the states and communities directly affected, working within an international legal framework (UN, UNCLOS for maritime questions, ICJ/arbitration) and supported by impartial mediators. Local populations must have a meaningful voice (through negotiation, referenda or other democratic procedures) so borders do not simply reflect outside imposition.
- Guiding principles: respect for territorial integrity, respect for peoples’ right to self‑determination, uti possidetis juris (the principle used in decolonization that preserves existing administrative boundaries to prevent chaos), protection of minority rights, and practical considerations (geography, economic ties, and security). Uti possidetis has helped stabilize many postcolonial borders in Africa, but it should not be an absolute shield against redress where gross injustices exist.
- Hard vs. soft borders: choose “hard” borders when there are acute security threats, pervasive illicit flows, or irreconcilable governance differences; choose “soft” borders (open crossings, customs/immigration cooperation) when economic integration, shared identity, and trust make cooperation desirable. Examples: the Schengen Area (soft borders) facilitates trade and travel across EU states; by contrast, the militarized border between Armenia and Azerbaijan reflected active armed conflict until the 2020 war and ceasefire. The Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland example shows how political agreements (Good Friday Agreement) can preserve soft borders to sustain peace, while Brexit pressures showed how changing political conditions can reintroduce border friction.

Answer 1

Boundaries should ideally be created by the states and communities directly affected, working within an international legal framework (UN processes, UNCLOS for maritime questions, and ICJ or arbitration where appropriate) and supported by impartial mediators, with local populations given a meaningful voice through negotiation, referenda, or other democratic procedures so borders are not simply imposed from outside. They should be guided by respect for territorial integrity, peoples’ right to self‑determination, uti possidetis juris (the decolonization principle that preserves existing administrative boundaries to prevent chaos) while recognizing that uti possidetis should not be an absolute shield where gross injustices exist, protection of minority rights, and practical considerations such as geography, economic ties, and security. Whether to adopt “hard” or “soft” borders depends on context: hard borders are appropriate where acute security threats, pervasive illicit flows, or irreconcilable governance differences exist, whereas soft borders with open crossings and customs/immigration cooperation are preferable where economic integration, shared identity, and trust make cooperation desirable. Real-world examples include the Schengen Area’s soft-border regime that facilitates trade and travel, the previously militarized Armenia–Azerbaijan boundary during active conflict, and the Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland arrangement—where the Good Friday Agreement helped preserve soft borders to sustain peace but where Brexit-related changes have shown how political shifts can reintroduce border friction.