Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2022
Publication Information
2022 Revue Belge de Droit International 55.
Abstract
In the days following the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, (1) international law organization leaders issued unprecedented statements of condemnation. (2) No other world event has led to so many consistent expressions from these groups respecting a violation of international law. The occasion merited the response. Russia's invasion was only the second time a member of the United Nations has attempted to conquer and eliminate another UN member since the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. The first time was in August 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. (3) At that time, the world came together to demand that Iraq withdraw. Nearly every member of the UN joined in condemning the violation of the prohibition on the use of force. No international law organization needed to issue a statement confirming that the Charter had been breached. It was obvious. Kuwait was liberated seven months later after only 100 hours of combat that began on 24 February 1991, an effort involving nearly the entire international community. The reaction to Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been quite different. A significant portion of UN members refused to condemn Russia. (4) A smaller contingent continued normal economic relations. A still smaller group chose to provide military assistance. Despite a valiant and costly effort, as the invasion neared the second anniversary, almost 20 percent of Ukraine remains under occupation. (1) In this case international law organizations needed to speak. It is no longer clear that even an attempt to conquer a UN member is unlawful.
The essay begins with a comparison of world reaction in 2022 to 1990. The decline in respect for the prohibition on force between the two invasions is striking. Given the contrast, the international law organizations acted appropriately in issuing statements at a time of confusion and even cynicism about the very existence of legal restraints on resort to force. The statements serve as a barrier to the further minimization of an essential norm. The statements also indicate in what they say and what they do not say how this low point in international law has been reached. They reflect a wide-spread sense of a double-standard on the use of force - strict rules for some and barely any for others. The statements on Russia's invasion of Ukraine are a starting place toward re-educating the international community on the authentic law on the use of force. To reach the goal of a single standard for all states on the prohibition of force, however, will require the continuing, dedicated efforts of international lawyers and their organizations.
Recommended Citation
Mary E. O'Connell,
Understating the Double-Standard on the Use of Force,
2022 Revue Belge de Droit International 55..
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1602