Is Russia's invasion of Ukraine justified?

NoSays it is contested

Is Russia's invasion of Ukraine justified? I'll examine the legal and historical claims from all sides to give you a fact-based answer.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 was justified by Russia on several grounds, which have been overwhelmingly rejected by international bodies and most states as legally invalid.

What Russia claimed

In his 24 February 2022 address announcing a "special military operation," President Vladimir Putin said Russia was launching the operation to defend the Russian-speaking territories in eastern Ukraine — the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic — under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.

Putin claimed:

•that Ukraine had been committing genocide against Russian speakers in the region

•that Ukraine's government were neo-Nazis under Western control

•that Ukraine was developing nuclear weapons and that NATO was building up military infrastructure in Ukraine, threatening Russia

•that its goal was the "demilitarization and denazification" of Ukraine and to protect people who "for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime"

More broadly, Moscow has justified its war through a collection of security arguments: protection of Donbas, threats from NATO expansion, self-defence claims and the stated objective of "denazification". Putin also asserted that Russia's national interests and "very existence" were under threat from the eastward expansion of NATO, and that the situation required decisive action to protect Russia after NATO expansion made the situation "worse and more dangerous".

How international law and international bodies assess those claims

Under the UN Charter, the core rule is: "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". The Charter's only clear exception to prohibiting the use of force is self-defense, "if an armed attack occurs" against a country.

Legal analysis cited in international law commentary concludes:

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

•"Nothing that Ukraine has done to date could be construed as an 'armed attack' on Russia and justify any Russian claim to self-defense", and even if claims about targeting Russian-speakers were true, it would not justify countrywide attacks

Specific Russian legal arguments have been rejected:

•Putin's reference to Article 51 is regarded by a number of lawyers as incorrect, in part because Article 51 allowed one UN member state to give military aid to another member state, but the DPR and LPR were not UN member states and were only recognized as independent by Russia.

•Putin's accusation that Ukraine was committing genocide in the Donbas has been widely rejected as baseless by other countries and international organizations. These allegations were widely rejected as untrue.

•Ukraine brought a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to challenge Russia's claim. The ICJ said it had not seen any evidence of genocide committed by Ukraine and on March 16, 2022 ordered that "the Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations that it commenced on 24 February 2022 in the territory of Ukraine".

Position of the United Nations and most states

•UN Secretary-General António Guterres said Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a sovereign nation, directly conflicts with the United Nations Charter.

•UN General Assembly Resolution ES-11/1, adopted on March 2, 2022, by 141 countries, deplored "in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter".

•The General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution demanding the Russian Federation immediately end its invasion of Ukraine and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces.

•The EU and its Member States have repeatedly described the war as an "illegal, unprovoked and unjustifiable war of aggression against Ukraine, which constitutes a manifest violation of international law including the UN Charter".

The United Nations General Assembly rejected Moscow's legal and political framing in 2022 and overwhelmingly described Russia's action as aggression, demanding withdrawal.

Summary

Whether a war is "justified" can be judged on legal, moral, and security grounds:

•From Russia's stated perspective, the invasion was presented as a defensive, protective action against NATO encroachment, alleged genocide and neo-Nazism in Ukraine.

•From the perspective of international law as interpreted by the UN, the ICJ, and the large majority of states, those justifications have not been accepted as factual or legal, and the invasion is considered a violation of the prohibition on the use of force in the UN Charter — an illegal act of aggression.

Enforcement of that legal judgment remains difficult because Russia holds veto power on the UN Security Council, and there is no standing international police force to enforce international law.

Citations (2)

1wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
Vladimir Putin speech on invading Ukraine - Wikipedia
Backs: “Russia's invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 was justified by Russia on several grounds, which have been overwhelmingly rejected by international bodies and most states as legally invalid. What Russia claimed. In his 24 February 2022 address announcing a "special military operation," President Vladimir Putin said…”
attribution, reference entry, points to yes. Claim: Putin's 24 February 2022 address justified the invasion as defending Russian-speaking Donbas territories, citing Article 51, alleged genocide, and denazification.
2tufts.eduAcademic
International law says Putin’s war against Ukraine is illegal. Does that matter? – Fletcher Russia and Eurasia Program
Backs: “Putin also asserted that Russia's national interests and "very existence" were under threat from the eastward expansion of NATO, and that the situation required decisive action to protect Russia after NATO expansion made the situation "worse and more dangerous". How international law and international bodies assess…”
evidence, article, points to no. Claim: Under the UN Charter and international law analysis, Russia's invasion is illegal and not justified as self-defense.