Is Russia's invasion justified? I'll examine the legal arguments and international response to assess the claims.
Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, launched on 24 February 2022, is presented differently by Russia and by most of the international community.
Russia's Stated Justifications
Russia described the invasion as a "special military operation", claiming it was necessary to:
•protect people who have been subjected to abuse and genocide by the Ukrainian government
•"protect Russia and our people" and achieve the "demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine"
•act in self-defense due to the expansion of NATO eastward, and the increasing military capabilities of Western states posing a security threat to Russia, specifically concern that Ukraine becoming a member of NATO would enable the United States to install military bases neighboring its territory
•defend the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic after recognizing them as independent states and at their request for assistance. Russia argued its use of force was lawful under Article 51 of the UN Charter as collective self-defense.
In his addresses before the invasion, Putin said that Ukraine joining NATO would be a threat, and warned that NATO might use Ukraine to launch a surprise attack on Russia.
International Law Assessment
The UN Charter prohibits the use of force in international relations:
•Article 2(4) provides that members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.
•The only two exceptions enshrined in the UN Charter are self-defense and an authorization by the Security Council.
•Self-defense is the only justification for use of force against another country, according to international law. This condition is found in the U.N. Charter and is binding for all 193 U.N. member countries.
Most international legal experts have concluded:
•Under no scenario is Russia's armed invasion of Ukraine legal under contemporary international law and norms.
•Russia's invasion of Ukraine constitutes aggression prohibited by the United Nations Charter
•Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a clear violation of the United Nations Charter and an act of aggression that is a crime under international law
•An Illegal Invasion violates Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, a central tenet that requires states to refrain from the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state
•The suggestion that Russia's use of force is justified under Article 51 has no support in fact or law.
Reasons experts reject Russia's justifications include:
1.Self-defense / Collective self-defense: Experts argued Russia cannot rely on self-defense because Ukraine has not threatened or attacked any other nation. Ukraine or any NATO member has not threatened or attacked Russia, and even if Ukraine had been planning an attack against Donetsk or Luhansk, those regions are not recognized as separate states under international law and therefore Article 51's collective self-defense does not apply.
2.Genocide / humanitarian intervention: Scholars described Putin's allegations of genocide and comparison of Ukraine to a Nazi state as baseless. Experts have rejected Russia's argument that its invasion is justified on humanitarian grounds to protect Russian-speakers in the Donbas, noting that even if humanitarian intervention were accepted, Russia's claims are widely perceived as a pretext and unsubstantiated by evidence.
3.NATO expansion: Analysis notes that even if Putin's primary concern is NATO, this does not legitimize violating Ukraine's sovereignty, as the UN Charter prohibits unilateral use of force except in self-defense.
4.Comparison to Western interventions: Russia has tried to justify its invasion by comparing its actions to interventions by the US and allies in Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria. These comparisons have been dismissed as irrelevant because one illegal act does not make a different act legal.
Responses at the United Nations and Courts
•Russia's illegal war of aggression blatantly breaches the core principles and rules of the UN Charter, including sovereignty and territorial integrity. It has been described as illegal and unjustified aggression in violation of Article 2(4).
•Member States overwhelmingly adopted a resolution demanding the Russian Federation immediately end its invasion of Ukraine and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces. A UN General Assembly resolution condemning the invasion was passed with an overwhelming 141-5 vote majority, with 35 nations abstaining.
•In the case Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), brought after Russia sought to justify the invasion in part by claims Ukraine was engaged in acts of genocide in Luhansk and Donetsk, the International Court of Justice ordered Russia must "immediately suspend the military operations" in Ukraine, noting there was not enough evidence substantiating Russia's allegations and that acts taken to prevent genocide must be in conformity with the spirit of the United Nations.
Legal experts have also qualified the invasion as a crime of aggression under Article 8bis(1) of the Rome Statute, defined as an act of aggression which constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter.
In summary, Russia asserts the invasion was justified for self-defense against NATO expansion and to protect populations in Donbas from genocide. The overwhelming position of the UN General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, and most international law scholars is that those justifications do not meet the UN Charter's exceptions for the use of force and that the invasion violates Article 2(4) and constitutes an illegal act of aggression.