Critical analysis of international law failures in the Russian invasion of Ukraine: implications for global security
Abstract
This paper offers a critical analysis of the structural deficiencies in international law that Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine revealed in 2022. The study reveals a significant failure of international legal mechanisms, in particular the United Nations, to effectively deter Russian aggression and prevent the escalation of violence. Despite numerous legal actions and international responses – including resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly, proceedings at the International Court of Justice and investigations by the International Criminal Court – these measures have failed to alter Russia’s conduct or prevent further deterioration of the situation in Ukraine.
The study employs a normative juridical approach, analyzing the legality of Russia’s actions considering established international norms and principles. Through this methodology, the research uncovers how Russia’s justifications for its military intervention – based on self-defense, collective self-defense, and allegations of genocide – are legally flawed and inconsistent with international law. Moreover, the research reveals the broader implications of these violations, including the potential erosion of global legal norms and the setting of dangerous precedents that could undermine international peace and security.
The findings of this research highlight the urgent need for reform within the international legal framework to address these deficiencies. The paper concludes by proposing specific reforms, such as expanding the abstention obligation in the United Nations Security Council and clarifying the legal basis for humanitarian intervention, to strengthen the enforcement of international law and better protect state sovereignty. These insights contribute to the ongoing discourse on the role of international law in conflict resolution and the maintenance of global security.
Downloads
References
Arcari, M. (2022). The conflict in Ukraine and the hurdles of collective action. Questions of International Law, 93, 7–25. https://www.qil-qdi.org/the-conflict-in-ukraine-and-the-hurdles-of-collective-action/.
Azarov, D., Koval, D., Nuridzhanian, G., & Venher, V. (2023). Understanding Russia’s Actions in Ukraine as the Crime of Genocide. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 21(2), 233–264. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad018.
Bogdan, A. I. (2022, April 7–8). Putin’s Discourse Analysis during the Russian-Ukrainian War [Conference presentation abstract]. Second Edition of the International Conference “Crisis Communication and Conflict Resolution”, Cluj‐Napoca, Romania. http://www.editura.ubbcluj.ro/bd/ebooks/pdf/3589.pdf.
Brailey, M. (2003). Pre-emption and prevention: an ethical and legal critique of the Bush doctrine and anticipatory use of force in defence of the State. Nanyang Technological University. https://dr.ntu.edu.sg/handle/10220/4453
Carnés Calvo, M. (2023). The (mis) use of the Genocide Convention: Russia’s invasion to Ukraine [Bachelor’s thesis. Faculty of Human and Social Sciences].
Castles, A. C. (1967). Legal status of UN resolutions. Adelaide Law Review, 3, 68–83.
Cavandoli, S., & Wilson, G. (2022). Distorting fundamental norms of international law to resurrect the Soviet Union: The International Law Context of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine. Netherlands International Law Review, 69(3), 383–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40802-022-00219-9.
Combacau, J. (2017). The exception of self-defence in UN practice. In T. Gazzini (Ed.), The Use of Force in International Law (pp. 189–218). Routledge.
Craeghs, E. (2023). The prosecution of Putin before the International Criminal Court. https://documentserver.uhasselt.be/handle/1942/40936.
Demasi, M. A. (2023). Accountability in the Russo-Ukrainian war: Vladimir Putin versus NATO. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 29(3), 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000653.
Demirbaş, Ç. E., & Güneş, B. (2023). Russia’s intervention in ukraine from the perspective of legality and legitimacy dilemma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 21(50), 1227–1245. https://doi.org/10.35408/comuybd.1347215.
Dorosh, L., & Ivasechko, O. (2018). The UN Security Council Permanent Members’ Veto Right Reform in the Context of Conflict in Ukraine. Central European Journal of International & Security Studies, 12(2), 157–185.
Falk, R. A. (2003). What future for the UN Charter system of war prevention? American Journal of International Law, 97(3), 590–598.
Fatalski, M. (2005). US intervention in Iran (1951–1953). Ad Americam, 6. https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/server/api/core/bitstreams/1de1b4ce-5dec-415b-ab76-a42f1d4b7c04/content.
Fink, J. E. (1995). From Peacemaking to Peace Enforcement: The Blurring of the Mandate for the Use of Force in Maintaining International Peace and Security. Maryland Journal of International Law, 19(1). https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mjil/vol19/iss1/3.
Fortuin, E. (2022). “Ukraine commits genocide on Russians”: the term “genocide” in Russian propaganda. Russian Linguistics, 46(3), 313–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-022-09258-5.
Green, J. A. (2024). Collective Self-Defence in International Law. Cambridge University Press.
Hilpold, P. (2023). Justifying the Unjustifiable: Russia’s Aggression against Ukraine, International Law, and Carl Schmitt’s “Theory of the Greater Space” (“Großraumtheorie”). Chinese Journal of International Law, 22(3), 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmad039.
Hoffmann, T. (2022). War or peace? – International legal issues concerning the use of force in the Russia–Ukraine conflict. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 63(3), 206–235. https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2022.00419.
McLeod, A., & Archibald, C. J. (2022). Putin’s Version of History and Claims of Provocation: An International Law Perspective on Russia’s Justifications for the Ukraine War. University of Detroit Mercy Law Review, 100. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/udetmr100&div=23&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals.
Ozubide, A. (2016). Extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors and the transformation of the law of self-defence [Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria].
Pelliconi, A. M. (2024). Self-Defence as Remedial Self-Determination: Continuity in Russian Narratives to Justify Imperialism and the Use of Force. Netherlands International Law Review, 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40802-024-00260-w.
Quénivet, N. (2022). The conflict in Ukraine and Genocide. Journal of International Peacekeeping, 25(2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-25020004.
Raharja, Y. D., & Widoyoko, W. D. (2023). The Characteristics of War Crimes under International Law: A Case Study of the Russia and Ukraine War. Yuris, 2(3), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.56943/jcj.v2i3.391.
Ranjan, P., & Anil, A. (2022). Russia-Ukraine War, ICJ, and the genocide convention. The Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law, 9(1), 101–114.
Sayapin, S., & Tsybulenko, E. (2018). The Use of Force against Ukraine and International Law: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, Jus post Bellum. T. M. C. Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-222-4.
Schmitt. M. (2022). Russia’s “Special Military Operation” and the (Claimed) Right of Self-Defense. Lieber Institute. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/russia-special-military-operation-claimed-right-self-defense/.
Singh, V., & Anand, P. (2022, March 18). Russia-Ukraine Conflict: ICJ’s provisional measures on military operations. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/russia-ukraine-conflict-icjs-provisional-measures-on-military-operations/article65234235.ece.
Thakur, R. (2015). The development and evolution of R2P as international policy. Global Policy, 6(3), 190–200.
White, N. D. (1990). The United Nations and the maintenance of international peace and security. Manchester University Press. https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/0506-7286-1993-4-461.pdf.
Copyright (c) 2024 A. Patel, R. Tiwari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
