This paper examines cases of dispute resolution and cross-border cooperation in two regions: the Nordic region and Northeast Asia. The two regions are markedly different. The Nordic region is often described as an area where stable peace has been successfully consolidated, and where borders serve as positive interfaces for cooperation rather than as obstacles. The Norway–Iceland fishery dispute, Hässelö Island, Åland Island, Morokulien Peace Park, Haparanda–Tornio EuroCity, and Oulanka/Paanajärvi national park are examples in this context of peaceful resolution of territorial disputes and/or enhancing cross-border cooperation. In stark contrast, the countries of Northeast Asia continue to be locked in seemingly intractable territorial and maritime disputes that have defied resolution. The aim of this paper is to reflect upon the Nordic experience of dispute resolution and cross-border cooperation and to focus attention on how similar mechanisms could potentially be applied in the case of different territorial disputes or points of tension in Northeast Asia: Dokdo/Takeshima, the Kuril Islands, the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, as well as the Demilitarized Zone and the Yellow Sea on the Korean Peninsula. In sum, in spite of significant limitations and differences, it is hoped that this paper may show how the Nordic countries and its experiences can prove both instructive and, above all, motivational in generating ideas for setting up similarly inspired regimes of peaceful resolution and cooperation in Northeast Asia in the futurehttp://www.isdp.eu/publications/index.php?option=com_jombib&task=showbib&id=5985