scholarly journals STRATEGIC ROLE OF POLITICAL AND LEGAL VALUES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF THE MODERN HYBRID WARFARE ERA

2020 ◽  
pp. 147-157
Author(s):  
Serhii Zubchenko
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
Yugoslav Wars ◽  
Russian Military

The relevance of the article determines by urgent problems of the global diplomatic agenda, in particular, concerning the international legal response to the Russian military aggression against Ukraine and acts of state terrorism all around the world carried out by Russia within its doctrine of hybrid war. After the end of Yugoslav wars and up until 2014, the threat of full-scale military conflict in European continent was mistakenly evaluated as low, while the other threats (in particular, associated with globalization) considered to be more dangerous. However, the permission to use armed force in Ukraine, unanimously given to V. Putin by the Federation council of Russia on March 1, 2014 and the following events in Ukrainian Crimea and Donbas regions crushed the global order established after the fall of USSR and opened a horrifying terroristic «Pandora’s box» in the very heart of Europe. As a result of the study, political and legal proposals and recommendations were determined. Considerations regarding the role of trust as a vital element of interstate relations, the lack of which provokes conflicts, leads to the encapsulation of states, making it impossible for them to achieve sustain and progressive development and to solve important common problems, are substantiated. As a conclusion in this context, the necessity to ensure strict adherence of the principles of international law as the «rules of the game» of the geopolitical club and the «red lines», violating of which activates uncontrolled global scale processes, is highlighted. It is also necessary to ensure prompt response to apparent violations of international law that threaten international peace and global security. In addition, the urgent need to preserve international sanctions against the aggressor country — Russian Federation — and entities, individuals and groups, affiliated with the Putin’s regime, is insisted.

scholarly journals “Red Lines” of Modern Geopolitical Confrontations: Role of Political and Legal Values in Hybrid Warfare Era

2018 ◽  
pp. 656-665
Author(s):  
Serhii Zubchenko
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
State Terror ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
The World ◽  
Hybrid War ◽  
Russian Military

The article analyses the place of political and legal values (in particular, the principles of international law) in the modern system of international relations. It is stated that Russia artificially creates hotbeds of instability and terrorism around the world to put pressure on certain states. Russia’s unlawful actions have also created a notable international precedent which goes beyond regional or continental security concerns. The author defines three main points: which state became the victim of aggression, who was the aggressor and how other states acted. Some current topical problems on the global diplomatic agenda, notably, concerning the international legal response to the Russian military aggression against Ukraine and acts of state terror-ism all around the world, carried out by Russia within the framework of the hybrid war, are highlighted. Considerations regarding the importance of trust as a vital element of interstate relations, the lack of which provokes conflicts, leads to the encapsulation of states, making it impossible for them to achieve sustainable and progressive development and to solve urgent common issues, are studied. It is noted that by the fourth year of the Russian-Ukrainian War some Western diplomatic circles have started to gradually analyze the Russian question, in particular, regarding the revision of the methodology for responding to Russian actions. The author stresses out that the issue of annexation of Crimea and Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine cannot be removed from the international agenda until the territorial integrity of Ukraine and the just punishment of the aggressor are restored. To prevent the escalation of current negative geopolitical tendencies to the level of uncontrolled, it is necessary to follow a number of fundamental points, in particular the inviolability of the principles of international law, prompt response to obvious violations of this law, the inevitability of legal liability of violators of international law. In this context, the author asserts the necessity to ensure absolute adherence to the principles of international law as “rules of the game” of the geopolitical club and “red lines”, going beyond which generates uncontrolled processes of global scale, as well as the need to maintain international sanctions against the aggressor country – the Russian Federation – and entities, individuals and groups, affiliated with the Putin regime. Keywords: Russian military aggression against Ukraine, international law, political and legal values, principles of international law, diplomacy, foreign policy, national security, geopolitics, hybrid war.

Customary International Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Dupuy ◽  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Complex Relationship ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
The World ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

International custom “as evidence of a general practice accepted as law”, is considered one of the two main sources of international law as it primarily derives from the conduct of sovereign States, but is also closely connected with the role of the international judge when identifying the applicable customary rule, a function it shares with the bodies in charge of its codification (and progressive development), starting with the International Law Commission. Though mainly considered to be general international law, international custom has a complex relationship with many specific fields of law and specific regions of the world. The editor provides comprehensive research published in the last seven decades, invaluable to everyone interested in the field of customary international law.

Part I Assessing the UN Institutional Structure for Global Ocean Governance: The UN’s Role in Global Ocean Governance, 5 The Role of International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Global Ocean Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Golitsyn Vladimir
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Advisory Opinions

This chapter focuses on the role of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in global ocean governance. Established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the jurisdiction of the ITLOS comprises all disputes and all applications concerning interpretation or application of the Convention and all matters specifically provided for in any other agreement which confers jurisdiction on the Tribunal. In the performance of its responsibilities, ITLOS has accumulated a body of jurisprudence which constitutes its contribution to the progressive development of international law of the sea and thus global ocean governance. The chapter discusses the most important examples of the ITLOS's contribution to the global ocean governance, such as dealing with contentious cases, requests for provisional measures, and prompt release cases as well as providing advisory opinions.

Precedents: Lawmaking Through International Adjudication

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1005-1032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Jacob
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Judicial Lawmaking ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Restraining Force

This paper deals with the role of judicial decisions in international adjudication. It is impossible to fail to notice the abundance of prior cases invoked in decisions of international tribunals and that, in order to find out what the law actually is, reference to previous cases is all but inevitable in practice. In some areas of international law, judicial or arbitral decisions have even been said to be the centre of progressive development. Nevertheless, there is an undeniable and deeply-rooted professional trepidation in many parts of the world regarding this enduring phenomenon. Even absent a fully articulated theory of adjudication or legal reasoning, the very idea of “judicial lawmaking” tends to arouse instinctive suspicion, especially when coupled with a denial of any restraining force of prior cases. Be that as it may, observations to the extent that judicial decisions are not veritable sources of international law or only binding between the parties in a particular dispute are only the beginning, and far from the end, of the present inquiry. Several interrelated and intricate questions need to be disentangled and dealt with in order to get a better grasp on what is commonly, and often rather unhelpfully, lumped together loosely under the vague label of “judicial precedent.” The paper is hence partly descriptive and partly revisionary. I do not however intend to rehash general criticisms or defences of precedent. Instead, I aim to present precedent as a general and omnipresent jurisprudential concept that enables and constrains judicial decision-making even in seemingly ordinary cases and to then showcase the specificities of one particular legal system in this respect, namely public international law. Hopefully this provides some of the methodological groundwork for other questions central to the present project, not least concerning the legitimacy of judicial lawmaking.

Review of the Rôle of the International Court of Justice

1972 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Gross
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The stagnation in the functioning of the International Court of Justice is only one of several indicators of the neglect by Members of the United Nations of the development and modernization of adjective law. There has been gratifying progress in the codification and progressive development of substantive law through the International Law Commission and other bodies, but substantive law without an adequate adjective law is bound to lack in effectiveness and uniform and predictable application.

scholarly journals The Role of the UN International Law Commission in the Codification of International Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 1384-1387
Author(s):  
Pedro Keil
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The creation of the International Law Commission arouses from the necessity imposed by the text of the UN Charter. According to article 13 paragraph 1 (a) of the Charter of the United Nations, the General Assembly is responsible for the promotion of the progressive development of international law and codification of such. In this regard, the Resolution 174 (II) of 21 November 1947 came with this purpose. So, the Commission’s nature is of an institutional and permanent subsidiary organ to the General Assembly of the UN, serving the purpose of perfecting the sources of law in the international ambit.

International Environmental Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald K. Anton
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Complex Relationship ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
The World ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

International custom “as evidence of a general practice accepted as law”, is considered one of the two main sources of international law as it primarily derives from the conduct of sovereign States, but is also closely connected with the role of the international judge when identifying the applicable customary rule, a function it shares with the bodies in charge of its codification (and progressive development), starting with the International Law Commission. Though mainly considered to be general international law, international custom has a complex relationship with many specific fields of law and specific regions of the world. The editor provides comprehensive research published in the last seven decades, invaluable to everyone interested in the field of customary international law.

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND UN INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE IN RESOLVING AEGEAN DISPUTE

2021 ◽  
pp. 132-138
Author(s):  
E. R. Akhmedova
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
International Law ◽  
Aegean Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Boundary ◽  
Maritime Disputes

 The articles states that the delimitation of the continental shelf in the Aegean has been the main contentious issue between Greece and Turkey for the past 50 years. It has been unsuccessfully brought before the International Court of Justice, has been repeatedly discussed in the Security Council and has given rise to at least one delimitation agreement. The key problem is Greece would like to resolve the Aegean Sea dispute by the International Court of Justice but if Turkey accepts Greek offer, which is to refer the Aegean Sea dispute before the International Court of Justice, it may not only impair the Turkish sovereignty over her territorial sea and continental shelf but also endanger the Turkish mainland security because of the Greek re-militarized operations. The purpose of this article is to study the practice of resolving maritime disputes by the international judicial bodies. Turkey is one of the 16 countries which have not signed or ratified the Convention on the Law of the Sea. International law offers various means which Greece and Turkey can employ in order to deal with the Aegean Sea dispute. The parties can establish an international boundary via delimitation, agree on a moratorium of petroleum operations or enter into a Joint Development Agreement. However, reality often imposes obstacles which law cannot surmount. All options require good faith and a mutual spirit of compromise between the concerned parties. Without an agreement, unilateral acts or claims have no legal value. The International Court of Justice has settled a number of maritime disputes in the course of its work. Despite its decisions on some cases were made not in favor of the disputing parties the role of the UN International Court of Justice in resolving interstate disputes and maintaining international law and order is quite significant. The procedure in the UN International Court of Justice is quite effective and allows it to perform the tasks set by the world community based on international legal instruments governing interstate relations in the field of international maritime law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document