Is Russia's invasion of Ukraine justified?

Is Russia's invasion justified? I'll examine the legal arguments and international response to give you a balanced answer.

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 is widely considered unjustified under international law, though Russia has offered several justifications for it. Whether it is "justified" depends on what standard is used - legal, moral, or strategic.

1. Russia's stated justifications

President Vladimir Putin framed the operation as:

•protection for residents of the separatist Donetsk and Luhansk regions, a mission to "demilitarise and denazify" Ukraine, and a response to alleged threats posed by NATO expansion

•"demilitarization", "denazification" of Ukraine and "liberation of Donbas" as the main goals of the "special operation"

In legal terms, Russia has argued that its use of force aligns with Article 51 of the UN Charter, which safeguards self-defense rights when faced with an "armed attack" and permits "collective self-defense," contending it was justified in employing force to safeguard the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic

Other goals cited by analysts and in Russian statements include preventing Ukraine from joining NATO, ensuring its neutral status, and securing a land bridge to Crimea.

2. The international law framework

The core rule on the use of force is in the U.N. Charter, which states, "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"

Countries cannot avoid their international obligations by pretending their actions are peacekeeping missions, as Putin has said

There are two accepted exceptions when use of force can be legal:

•self-defense "if an armed attack occurs"

•authorization by the UN Security Council

Therefore, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine can be legal only if it falls within one of those exceptions

3. How international bodies and legal scholars assessed the invasion

•Violation of the UN Charter: The invasion is a violation of the United Nations Charter, Article 2(4), which prohibits the "threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state." It cannot be justified as an act of self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter

•No valid self-defense claim: Legal analyses conclude there is no basis for claiming that the invasion will prevent "genocide", and that nothing that Ukraine has done to date could be construed as an "armed attack" on Russia and justify any Russian claim to self-defense

•Even humanitarian claims rejected: Even if Putin's claim that Ukraine is targeting Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine were true, it would not justify the countrywide attacks he has unleashed

•General legal consensus: Under no scenario is Russia's armed invasion of Ukraine legal under contemporary international law and norms

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said Russia's invasion directly conflicts with the United Nations Charter, stating "The use of force by one country against another is the repudiation of the principles that every country committed to uphold"

The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution demanding the Russian Federation immediately end its invasion of Ukraine and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces. The draft resolution condemning Russian aggression passed with 141 affirmative votes to five, with 35 abstentions, specifically the resolution was approved by 141 votes in favor, 5 votes against and 35 abstentions.

The Assembly President stated the UN Charter, the Secretary-General, and the Assembly itself had been clear - Russia's invasion, and attempted annexation of Ukrainian territory by force, "is illegal"

The invasion is also described as an act of aggression under general international law and the Rome Statute, which defines a state act of aggression as "the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations"

4. The counter-argument about security concerns

Some analyses acknowledge that several US and NATO actions in relation to Russia since the mid-1990s, in particular opening the door to Ukraine's membership in NATO in 2008, were unwise and even reckless in their disregard of the security concerns of Russia

However, the same sources conclude that in no way, legally or morally, does that serve to justify Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine

In summary, from the perspective of the UN Charter and the overwhelming majority of states and international lawyers, Russia's justifications - collective self-defense of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics, prevention of alleged genocide, demilitarization/denazification, and countering NATO expansion - do not meet the legal criteria for lawful use of force, because no armed attack by Ukraine on Russia occurred and there was no Security Council authorization. From Russia's own domestic and strategic perspective, the government presents the invasion as necessary for protecting Russian speakers and national security.

The enforcement of international law remains limited - there is no standing international police force to enforce international law, and Russia holds veto power on the Security Council, so the primary responses have been General Assembly resolutions, International Court of Justice proceedings, and economic and diplomatic sanctions.

Citations (2)

1tufts.eduAcademic
International law says Putin’s war against Ukraine is illegal. Does that matter? – Fletcher Russia and Eurasia Program
Backs: “Other goals cited by analysts and in Russian statements include preventing Ukraine from joining NATO, ensuring its neutral status, and securing a land bridge to Crimea. 2. The international law framework. The core rule on the use of force is in the U.N. Charter, which states, "All Members shall refrain in their…”
2lcnp.orgNot yet classified
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: An Illegal War of Aggression — Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy
Backs: “Therefore, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine can be legal only if it falls within one of those exceptions. 3. How international bodies and legal scholars assessed the invasion. Violation of the UN Charter: The invasion is a violation of the United Nations Charter, Article 2(4), which prohibits the "threat or use of force…”