The Ukraine crisis has re-started a ‘might is right’ world order, where all are equal but some are more equal than others
The Ukraine crisis has re-started a ‘might is right’ world order, where all are equal but some are more equal than others
The Ukraine crisis has exposed the fragility of international law in general and the hollowness of the principle of sovereign equality in particular. Whether international law is a true law is an important question. British jurist Sir Thomas Erskine Holland famously said that international law is at the “vanishing point of jurisprudence”. It is a twilight zone where the aspects of law and morality are inseparable. Legal theorist John Austin defined law as “the commandment of the sovereign backed by acceptance”. If we apply this principle, the sovereign state system has no authority over and above the states, and international law is not law in the strict sense of the word. States are considered sovereign and equal. Nevertheless, international law has been given the status of a branch of law.
Traditionally, international law consisted of the rules and principles governing the relations and behavior of nations with each other. Recently, the scope of international law has been redefined to include relations between states and individuals, and between international organizations. Despite its quasi-legal nature, there are some basic principles of international law that can be called Grundnorm, Sovereign equality of nations is one of Grundnorm,
Sovereign equality is judicial in nature, that is, all states are equal under international law despite inequalities between them in areas such as military power, geographic and population size, level of industrialization and economic development. Sovereign equality, along with collective security, is a fundamental principle of the United Nations. The United Nations Charter states that the primary objective of the United Nations is to protect future generations from the scourge of war. The principles of sovereign equality and collective security are the source of non-aggression and peaceful settlement of disputes between nations. But the Ukraine crisis has shattered this hope.
an act of aggression
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is aggression and a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty. In international law, aggression is defined as any use of armed force in international relations that is not justified by defensive necessity, the international authority or the consent of the state in which the force is used. It is an act or policy of expansion carried out by one state at the expense of another through an unprovoked military attack. A number of treaties and official declarations since World War I have sought to prohibit acts of aggression to ensure collective security. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter calls upon Member States “to abstain 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.” encourages.”
Aggression is the antithesis of sovereign equity and collective security. Whatever the reason for the invasion, it does not wash Russia’s bloody hands in the Ukraine crisis. The principle of sovereign equality mandates states to respect the sovereignty of fellow states. And the concept of collective security is a promise that the sovereignty of all states will be duly respected. Article 39 of the United Nations Charter includes the principle of collective security: “The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken. International To maintain or restore peace and security in accordance with Articles 41 and 42.
oligarchy in the united nations
The main principle of democracy is equality. But the United Nations system representing the international community is undemocratic and oligarchic. This oligarchy of P5 (China, France, Russia, US and UK) is a chronicler. The Ukraine crisis once again highlights the pathetic state of the United Nations system and underscores the demand for the democratization of the organization.
Russia vetoed a draft UN Security Council resolution condemning Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, while China abstained from the vote. But the support of about 80 countries in favor of Ukraine was in vain on Russia’s veto. This is inconsistent with the principle of sovereign equality.
A rules-based liberal international order has been a long cherished aspiration of the international community. It provides for a secure and fair world order based on sovereign equality and collective security. The United Nations has an important role in building such a world order. Such an order is the only alternative to international coercion by competing great powers, spheres of influence, client states and terrorist organizations. The Ukraine crisis has again ushered in a ‘might is right’ world order, in which all are equal but some are more equal than others. It would be a dystopian one for the “fewer members” in the international community.
Faisal CK is an independent researcher