What does international law offer in the face of Vladimir Putin’s actions?

“A serious violation of international law.” Announcement of Vladimir Putina Military operations In UkraineOn Thursday, February 24th, the international community unanimously criticized us. Many countries, including France, have believed that the actions of the President of Russia, in particular, ignore the main principles governing relations between nations. “We never accept the brutal violations of international law, as we now see in the Ukrainian aggression.”NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltemberg, After an emergency meeting of Alliance Ambassadors.

>> War in Ukraine: Follow the evolution of the situation with our live concert

Dispatch of Russian troops three days after republic approval Self-proclaimed of Luhansk When Donetsk, “Insults Russia Holds international law and the United Nations. “Blame the French ambassador to the United Nations for his part, Nicholas of river. Franceinfo appreciates what international law on Russia’s actions says.

Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations, to which Russia is a member, specifically provides for UN member states. “We must refrain from resorting to intimidation or the use of force (…) in any other way, contrary to territorial integrity or political independence of the state, or in any other way that contradicts the purposes of the United Nations.” So he puts “Principle of Invasion of Outlaw State”Decoding of franceinfo Olivier Schmitt, Director of Research and Research at the Institute of Advanced Defense (IHEDN).

“There we are clearly within the framework of aggression, infringement of Ukraine’s sovereignty, and its integrity.”

Olivier Schmidt, Defense Specialist

on franceinfo

Principle of “The Charter of the United Nations is not an à la carte menu.” And Russia has to “Apply them all” He blamed UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Tuesday for Ukraine. “All Member States accept them and must apply them all.”He insisted.

As part of that, Ukraine has invoked Article 51 of the Charter, which regulates self-defense in the event of aggression. “To justify the use of force” In response to the Russian attack, Olivier Schmidt continues. It was in this same article that Vladimir Putin shook to explain the trigger for a military operation in Ukraine, claiming to have responded to the call of the separatist “republic” of Donbus. “VSA complete reversal of the reality of the situation, Wipe out Olivier Schmidt. The self-proclaimed republic was not so recognized by Ukrainian law, and the Russians did not have the right to answer their call. ”

Russia’s decision is also “Fatal blow to the Minsk agreement approved by the Security Council”, According to the head of the United Nations. The Minsk Protocol, signed in 2014 (Minsk I) and 2015 (Minsk II) between Russia, Ukraine, and the two separatist “republics”, specifically provided for an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons.Many points including Election organization in the separatist region, However, it has never been applied and emphasizes the Robert Schuman Foundation, the center of European research and research.In addition, officially, these texts Less accurate and less binding status than protocols and international agreements.

Vladimir Putin’s actions also constitute a breach of the Budapest Memorandum of Understanding, explaining to Carol Grimaud Potter of France Amfo, a professor of Russian geopolitics at the University of Montpellier and the Institute for Foreign Affairs of Paris. This text was signed in 1994 and signed between Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and Ukraine. “Guarantee the protection of the Ukrainian border”, Researchers explain. Nevertheless, Not included in the Budapest Memorandum of Understanding “Non-binding parties”.. “The signatories promise to guarantee security.” Ukrainian, but this principle is based above all on their integrity.

This is not the first time Vladimir Putin has violated the principles of international law. In 2008, the Kremlin recognized the independence of two pro-Russian separatist “republics” in Georgia. Abkhazia and South OsetiaAfter the lightning war against this former Soviet Republic, which aims to join NATO, like Ukraine. January 2021, 13 years after the event, The European Court of Human Rights recalls admitting that Russia violated the treaty Le Parisien (subscriber link).

UN resolution during the 2014 Crimean annexation Declare “invalid” The referendum on Russia’s support for the Autonomous Republic was rejected by Moscow, a permanent member of the Security Council. At the General Assembly, of the 193 members, the resolution collected 100 votes. However, unlike the resolution verified by the Security Council, the resolution adopted by Parliament does not have a binding legal character in international law. Olivier Schmidt suggests that this scenario is likely to occur again.

“The UN Security Council is paralyzed and unable to play its role in maintaining international peace and security.”

Olivier Schmidt, Defense Specialist

on franceinfo

International law “It wasn’t a miracle so far, it’s the result of political consensus.”,Callback Parisian Jean-Marc Soler, Professor of Public Law at Sorbonne University Law School. “”The law cannot change the world. “He presses.

Ultimately, the cost to Russia “Mainly political”, Engage with Olivier Schmidt. Experts recall that the annexation of Crimea, as well as the occupation of Abkhazia and South Osetia, was not permitted in some countries. “But there is no state criminal court, so beyond the statement of state condemnation, there is no court they can go to.”, He adds. On the other hand, from a legal point of view, the invasion of Ukraine, as defined in the Charter of the United Nations, gives countries the following rights: “To help, in every way that exists”, Including military.