nation state a and nation state b share a border. the two nation-states are arguing over immigration policies regarding the border. what are two ways that the nation-sates could resolve their dispute?

One or both nations could increase their border security.

They could form a union, like the European Union, and do away with all border checks.

someone please help explain or provide examples

I don't ask my teachers because they take too long to answer and I'm homeschooled so that's why I asked on here :/

I don't know if you'll find a specific answer here, but you'll more about the topic:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=immigration+disputes+between+adjacent+states&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4VRHB_enUS648US649&q=immigration+disputes+between+adjacent+states&gs_l=hp....0.0.1.3955665...........0.zoWlSgN9oiw

Nations usually have immigration policies that attempt to control who can and cannot come in, and under what circumstances. Those policies may include temporary workers, students, permanent immigrants, etc., and may apply differently to various nations. For many years the United States prohibited immigrants from China, for example. The same policies usually apply to adjacent nations as well as those far away, but special arrangements may be made between any two nations, adjacent or not.

Actually, I work at the on-line school where this question that Maya posted is an actual test question...verbatim. Maya would not get help from a teacher in this case because it is a test question. I came to this website because I am grading a student's answer (not Maya) that I believe is plagiarized and simply copied and pasted the question in hopes of finding the student's verbatim answer. Please don't help them. Thank you.

i like cheese

The two nation-states, A and B, can resolve their dispute over immigration policies regarding the shared border in the following ways:

1. Diplomatic negotiations: They can engage in direct diplomatic negotiations to find a mutually acceptable solution. This involves conducting formal talks or meetings between representatives from both countries to discuss and negotiate their positions, priorities, concerns, and possible compromises. Diplomatic negotiations provide an opportunity for open dialogue, transparency, and understanding between the involved parties, helping them move toward a resolution that takes into account the interests of both nations.

To initiate diplomatic negotiations, the heads of state or government of both nation-states can appoint skilled diplomats or representatives to form negotiation teams. These negotiation teams can then meet privately or in facilitated settings, like international conferences or mediation sessions, to explore potential solutions. The negotiations may involve finding common ground, considering expert opinions, studying best practices from other countries, and evaluating the impacts of different policy options. Eventually, through a process of compromise and consensus-building, the nation-states can arrive at an agreement on immigration policies that satisfies both parties.

2. Mediation or arbitration: If direct negotiations between nation-states A and B prove challenging or reach a stalemate, they may consider engaging a neutral third party to facilitate the resolution process. Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process in which a neutral mediator assists the parties in finding a mutually acceptable solution. The mediator helps the parties understand each other's concerns, improves communication, and promotes creative problem-solving.

Arbitration, on the other hand, involves referring the dispute to an impartial arbitrator or panel who listens to the arguments and evidence presented by both sides and provides a binding decision or award. This process usually follows predetermined rules and procedures agreed upon by both nations.

By engaging in mediation or arbitration, nation-states A and B can benefit from the expertise and neutrality of the third party, ensuring a fair and objective approach to resolving their dispute. It can help overcome impasses, bridge gaps, and generate innovative solutions that may have been difficult to achieve through direct negotiations alone.

It is important to note that the actual resolution of the dispute may vary depending on the specific context, political considerations, and the willingness of the involved parties to find a compromise.