Laurel Utterback Blog 3

 Why international law hasn’t stopped Russia in its attacks on Ukraine


The recent Russian attacks on Ukraine have demonstrated not only the power role that is at play, but have greatly violated the rules of international law. Even though the attacks are violating laws in a variety of ways, Russia is depending on international law to defend its actions. Though Putin is trying to justify his decision by using Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, which states that an attacked U.N. nation has the right to attack for self-defense purposes, Ukraine did not attack Russia, so Putin’s claims are invalid. In his speech, Putin gave a multitude of examples of when the West violated international law- Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, and Seria- but international law is not meant to defend parallel attacks of old ones.  Although Russia has commonly been seen as “the bad guy” over the course of the last month, it is important to recognize that they hold great power, both militarily and politically. This political power enabled them, as a member of the U.N. security council, to veto the resolution that would have required Russia to withdraw from Ukraine. Due to this veto, which on their part is understandable, Russia remains to take military action in Ukraine. 

The International Criminal Court (ICC) can take further action in order to punish respective officials for their actions. This would consist of Ukraine filing proceedings against Russia, but because Russia is not part of the ICC, this jurisdiction would not apply to Putin or other involved parties. The ongoing war also limits the ICC’s ability to really do anything. The court, which arguably tries to accommodate Western interests more than anything, has little authority in a war zone and ultimately creates structural issues. Though the ICC is there to protect and defend international law interests through its complex systematic setup (as a court is supposed to do), there are ultimately always winners and losers. We aren’t able to rely on the ICC in general given its judge bias and due processes deficiencies, so expecting the ICC to follow through on punishing Russia is unrealistic. Russia is a militarily strong country, hence it does not need to rely on international law to protect it because it can just take further military actions to ultimately get what it wants, which in this case is Ukraine. These attacks are a prime example of “the strong do what they want, and the weak do what they must.” But, because breaking international law doesn’t result in the same consequences as domestic law, like the cops coming to get you, it is a very weak type of law. International law is not prosecutorial and is anarchy in a sense, hence why Russia is getting away with its actions.

Comments

  1. Matthew PaddockMarch 29, 2022 at 10:56 AM

    I agree with your argument regarding the weaknesses of international organizations like the ICC and the UN. I think that for such institutions to be important and have legitimacy, all nations have to buy into their arguments, laws and codes and ultimately play by "the rules of the game." Since Russia is not a part of the ICC and has used its vote in the security council, it has upended any hope for peace or diplomatic legal action at the current moment. No matter the case, Russia will certainly not have the same reputation after this conflict and their own legitimacy within these entities will be affected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Laurel UtterbackMay 2, 2022 at 10:44 AM

      I definitely agree that Russia will not have the same reputation after this conflict. Those that were previously skeptical of Russia seem to have turned to very anti-Russia (it seems). I believe that playing by the rules, like you said, is the biggest barrier for these institutions to have legitimacy.

      Delete
  2. AnonymousMay 4, 2022 at 4:27 PM

    I agree with you that ICC will not be able to follow through with punishing Russia. The point you made about Russia still having military and political power is a good one because it shows why things cannot be solved easily. I do agree that International Law is weak at best and can't do much of anything to stop Russia.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Matthew Paddock Blog Post #2

Blog Post #2 In recent days, Russian President Vladimir Putin has tested the resolve of the United States and other Western powers after he officially recognized separatist regions of Ukraine and subsequently launched a full scale invasion. Though this move is a large gamble for Putin, I believe he is confident that the reward of a “successful” mission will certainly outweigh the potential risks including sanctions and international condemnation. While Putin has stated that he ordered military intervention to protect Russians from persecution, I disagree with this propagated notion that has virtually no corroborating evidence. Rather, I argue that Putin aims to upend the current liberal world order and transform the balance of power established between nations.  In the face of threats from rising powers including China, Russia, Iran, and others, the United States has still managed to remain the dominant global hegemon that always maintains an influential presence concerning inter...
Read more

Laurel Utterback Blog Post #2

President Putin is now facing a serious dilemma following his decision to order Russian troops to invade Ukraine after deciding to recognize the Donbas region, made up of Donetsk and Luhansk, as an independent. I strongly believe that ultimately, Putin will be faced with a choice of following his imperialistic agenda or listening to his crippled nation and economy that are facing the immediate impacts of the developing conflict. Just because the United States isn’t directly putting troops on the ground in Ukraine does not mean that sanctions are a less effective measure. In some ways, Putin is daring the West as he is continuing to order Russian troops to continue their route into Ukraine while the Russian economy has already started to tank, a trend that we have seen historically that I will elaborate on later in this post.   As we talked about in class, the impacts of necessary goods, such as oil and gas, are large gambles in the crisis. Germany took the first step to cut of...
Read more

Wankollie Barbara, Blog Post #2

     Our recent lectures in class concerning Russia's invasion of Ukraine while the USA, Nato, and,  EU, on the other hand, trying to " help" Ukraine from being invaded got me thinking about a scene from a book that I'm currently reading, called A Tempest, written by Aime Cesaire. In this book, one of the characters is perceived as a monster and is under the spell of the king called Prospero. Caliban(the monster), welcomes Prospero on his island, but Prospero having magical power took Caliban's land, turns him into a monster, and later curses him because he believed Caliban tried to rape his daughter. Caliban is trying to rebel against his master, to get his island back, but it’s not working because Prospero is way too powerful. But that’s not the point or scene I’m driving at. Fast forward, new people arrive on the island and are also admiring the things they see and they want to take over. So Caliban sees this as an opportunity to merge with these ...
Read more