2022年俄罗斯对乌克兰的干预:它对反战争法的解释有什么影响?

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Olivier Corten, Vaios Koutroulis
{"title":"2022年俄罗斯对乌克兰的干预:它对反战争法的解释有什么影响?","authors":"Olivier Corten, Vaios Koutroulis","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines the precedential value of Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in February 2022 for the purpose of interpreting the rules of jus contra bellum. Following the methodology set down by the ICJ in its Nicaragua judgment, self-defence is identified as the legal basis explicitly invoked by Russia in order to justify its operation in Ukraine. The authors then examine closely the reactions by third states with respect to the legality of Russia’s military operation and establish that the legal arguments put forth by Russia – including, more specifically, an innovative reading of the right to self-defence of entities unilaterally recognized as states – have been overwhelmingly rejected by third states. On that basis, the authors conclude that this precedent does not challenge the established understanding of the prohibition to use force in international relations and of its exceptions.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The 2022 Russian intervention in Ukraine: What is its impact on the interpretation of jus contra bellum?\",\"authors\":\"Olivier Corten, Vaios Koutroulis\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0922156523000249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article examines the precedential value of Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in February 2022 for the purpose of interpreting the rules of jus contra bellum. Following the methodology set down by the ICJ in its Nicaragua judgment, self-defence is identified as the legal basis explicitly invoked by Russia in order to justify its operation in Ukraine. The authors then examine closely the reactions by third states with respect to the legality of Russia’s military operation and establish that the legal arguments put forth by Russia – including, more specifically, an innovative reading of the right to self-defence of entities unilaterally recognized as states – have been overwhelmingly rejected by third states. On that basis, the authors conclude that this precedent does not challenge the established understanding of the prohibition to use force in international relations and of its exceptions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46816,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leiden Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leiden Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000249\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leiden Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000249","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了2022年2月俄罗斯对乌克兰的“特别军事行动”的先例价值,以解释战争反法规则。根据国际法院在其尼加拉瓜判决中规定的方法,自卫被认定为俄罗斯明确援引的法律依据,以证明其在乌克兰的行动是正当的。然后,作者仔细研究了第三国对俄罗斯军事行动合法性的反应,并确定俄罗斯提出的法律论点——更具体地说,包括对单方面承认为国家的实体的自卫权的创新解读——已被第三国绝大多数拒绝。在此基础上,提交人得出结论,这一先例并不挑战对国际关系中禁止使用武力及其例外情况的既定理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The 2022 Russian intervention in Ukraine: What is its impact on the interpretation of jus contra bellum?
This article examines the precedential value of Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in February 2022 for the purpose of interpreting the rules of jus contra bellum. Following the methodology set down by the ICJ in its Nicaragua judgment, self-defence is identified as the legal basis explicitly invoked by Russia in order to justify its operation in Ukraine. The authors then examine closely the reactions by third states with respect to the legality of Russia’s military operation and establish that the legal arguments put forth by Russia – including, more specifically, an innovative reading of the right to self-defence of entities unilaterally recognized as states – have been overwhelmingly rejected by third states. On that basis, the authors conclude that this precedent does not challenge the established understanding of the prohibition to use force in international relations and of its exceptions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
67
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信