top of page
Search
Writer's pictureMichael Shalonov

Drawing the Line Between Russia’s Historical Grievances and Contemporary International Law

Written by: Michael Shalonov

Edited by: Sean Tonra


Thibault Camus / Reuters

The Russian Federation has undertaken the most significant military action on the European continent since World War II, with the intent of overthrowing the Ukrainian government. Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine to demilitarize its neighbor and protect Russia’s security interests. The unprecedented expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into eastern Europe has drawn the Kremlin's recent state of anxiety in light of the perception that the West is attempting to encircle the superpower. Russia’s security concerns have not been completely considered, given the unreasonable demand to exclude Ukraine from western alliances like NATO perpetually. The implication of the historical bond between Russia and Ukraine makes the situation all the more complex. Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and mostly part of its predecessor, the Russian Empire. The language and culture are remarkably similar. Putin, in addition to viewing it as a security threat, sees Ukraine as an illegitimate state that has always belonged to Russia for centuries. As a result of historical emotions running high and an ever-expanding NATO alliance, Putin decided to upend decades of peaceful European security, breaching international law to the fullest extent.

The formation of the United Nations ties to the direct aftermath of World War II, so such an immense conflict never happens again. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates a basic tenet of the body’s charter where, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations” (UN Charter, Article II). Russia has a long record of violating international law ranging from its chemical poisonings to its cyber attacks to now its total takeover of another nation. Putin’s enduring effort to expand influence and restore prestige to Russia runs against basic international norms where human life and territorial borders are valued. By pushing for relevance through its unlawful military and intelligence activities, Russia only finds itself further isolated from the international community. Stubbornly attempting to undo historical grievances leaves Putin going against every aspect of international law, effectively making him a pariah.

Without a doubt, the collapse of the Soviet Union was an embarrassing catastrophe for Russia. The eastern superpower lost its economic prestige, swaths of territory, and influence over half of Europe. Vladimir Putin feels that he has the obligation to restore Russia’s prowess, as it had been throughout centuries (Treisman). The vision is justifiable until it breaches the well-being of other citizens and nation-states. In the 21st century, the United Nations, along with other intergovernmental bodies, have instilled norms that universally preserve peace, stability, and security. People are growing up without ever having to witness major global conflicts. Russia’s unwarranted invasion of Ukraine has shattered that seemingly perpetual reality. In exchange for its violation of international law and expanding territorial influence, Russia has further weakened its economic position while also pushing other eastern European countries farther from its sphere of influence. Kosovo and Moldova have recently ramped up their relations with the European Union and NATO, asking for military support. Russia, itself, has lost all its financing sources from the west while a growing list of multinational companies are moving out of the country. Putin’s miscalculation demonstrates that not addressing regional grievances under the realm of international law undermines a country’s standing through a series of geopolitical and economic consequences.


[The views expressed in this article are those of the author and the author alone; they do not necessarily represent the views of all members of the first RULR Editorial Board and Rutgers University]

30 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page