{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018083182640144666, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.709090909090909, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
International Dispute Settlement

This chapter studies Asian participation in international dispute settlement, revealing three thematic characteristics of the region. The first is the diversity of state practice within Asia. Intersecting this sub-regional diversity is the diversity of approaches within any given state towards different areas of concern. Thus, participation in international dispute settlement varies not only according to sub-region, but also according to the area of law. The second characteristic is that Asian states on the whole are generally quite willing to substantively engage with international dispute resolution. Finally, notwithstanding the above, the third characteristic is that there remains in Asia a cautious hesitation towards open commitments to international dispute-resolution mechanisms. The most glaring omission is that of any regional dispute settlement body. Whereas Africa, Europe, and Latin America all have regional human rights courts and sub-regional courts of different varieties, only the Central Asian states participate in any standing regional court.