Russia's invasion of Ukraine is widely debated — I'll gather claims from both sides and the relevant international law to give a neutral overview.
Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, launched on 24 February 2022, is described as a "special military operation" by Moscow. Whether it is justified depends on the legal, political, and security framework used to evaluate it. The main perspectives are:
1. Russia's Stated Justifications
The Kremlin has offered several overlapping justifications:
•Protection of populations in Donetsk and Luhansk: President Vladimir Putin framed the operation as protection for residents of the separatist Donetsk and Luhansk regions and as necessary to "protect people who have been subjected to abuse and genocide" by the Ukrainian government.
•Demilitarisation and "denazification": The overarching aims were stated as to "de-Nazify" and "de-militarize" Ukraine, with a mission to “demilitarise and denazify” Ukraine. This included claims that the Ukrainian government is Nazi or partially-Nazi and that there was a Western-backed fascist coup in 2014.
•Self-defence under the UN Charter: In his speech, President Putin clarified that the basis for the operation is Section 7, Article 51 of the UN Charter, i.e. the right to self-defence.
•Security threat from NATO expansion: Moscow framed the invasion as a response to alleged threats posed by NATO expansion, specifically the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO and possibility of deployment of US/NATO missiles and weapons in Ukraine which borders Russia. Putin has repeatedly argued that Russia was pushed into military action by developments in Ukraine and the broader European security environment, citing NATO expansion and Western support for Ukraine among Moscow's stated security concerns.
From Russia's perspective, NATO's post-Cold War gradual eastward expansion — bringing in countries like Poland, Hungary, and the Baltic states — was perceived as a direct threat to its sphere of influence and as an encroachment upon its sphere of influence. This included recalling informal assurances given in the early 1990s that NATO would not expand "eastward". Putin told French President Emmanuel Macron that the West had ignored Moscow's security concerns over NATO expansion and Ukraine.
2. Ukrainian and International Legal Perspective
Most states, international organizations, and international law scholars reject those justifications:
•Violation of the UN Charter: The EU and other bodies state that Russia’s illegal war of aggression blatantly breaches the core principles and rules of the UN Charter, including the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. The EU reiterates its resolute condemnation of Russia's illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression, which constitutes a manifest violation of international law, including the UN Charter.
•Contemporary international law: Analysts argue that under no scenario is Russia's armed invasion of Ukraine legal under contemporary international law and norms. The 1945 UN Charter sets out the conditions under which UN member states may legally resort to war, and self-defense is the only justification for use of force against another country according to international law as found in the U.N. Charter. Critics argue Ukraine did not initiate any attack that would trigger self-defence.
•Aggression prohibited: Legal analyses describe Russia's invasion as aggression prohibited by the United Nations Charter, and the 2022 invasion can be grasped as illegal precisely because it violated the Charter.
•International Court of Justice: On claims of genocide as a pretext, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a preliminary ruling that determined Russia did not have grounds to attack Ukraine based on claims of genocide and ordered Russia to stop its military operations.
The UN General Assembly passed resolutions condemning the invasion and calling for withdrawal, with support from over 140 member states. Russia, supported by a small number of states, maintains its actions are lawful and necessary for its security.
Summary
In Russian official discourse, the invasion is presented as justified and necessary for national security and protection of Russian-speaking populations.
In the view of Ukraine, most Western governments, the EU, and international legal institutions, it is considered an illegal use of force and a violation of the UN Charter's prohibition on aggression against a sovereign state.
Assessment of "justified" therefore depends on whether primacy is given to Russia's stated security concerns or to the framework of the UN Charter and principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.