PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
International Law
1. Traditional Definition – The body of rules and principles of
action binding upon civilized states in their relation to one
another. It only covers public international law.
2. Modern Definition – The word transnational law has been
suggested as a more appropriate term to denote all laws which
regulate actions or events that transcend national frontiers. It
would embrace not only public international law but also the
rules of private international law. It is the body of rules and
principles which are recognized as legally binding and which
govern the relations of states and other entities invested with
international legal personality.
Fathers of Public International Law – Alberico Gentili,
Francisco de Vitoria, and Hugo Grotius
3 Major Parts of Public International Law
1. Laws of Peace – Normal relations between states in the
absence of war.
2. Laws of War – Relations between hostile or belligerent
states during wartime.
3. Law of Neutrality – Relations between a non-participant
state and a participant state during wartime. This also refers to
the relations among non-participating states.
Theories of International Law
1. Command Theory – From John Austin; law consists of
commands originating from a sovereign and backed up by
threats of sanction is disobeyed. In this view, international law
is not law because there is no command sovereign. This theory
has been generally discredited.
2. Consensual Theory – International law is binding because of
the consent of the states, like treaties and customary law.
However, there are many binding rules which do not derive
from consent.
3. Natural Law Theory – Law is derived by reason from the
nature of man. International law is the application of natural
reason to the nature of the state-person. The theory finds little
support but much of customary law and what are regarded as
general principles of international law are expressions of
natural law.
Basis of Public International Law
1. The Naturalist – Under this theory, there is a natural and
universal principle of right and wrong, independent of any
mutual intercourse or compact, which is supposed to be
discovered and recognized by every individual through the use
of his reason and his conscience. The law of nations is binding
upon states because it is a branch of the great law of nature,
that is, the sum of those principles which ought to control
human conduct, because founded in the very nature of man as
a rational and social being. Natural law is said to be ideal and
universal, derived from universal reason.
2. The Positivist – Under this theory, the binding force of
international law is derived from the agreement of sovereign
states to be bound by it. It is not a law of subordination but of
coordination. The basis of obligation in international law is to
be found only in the consent of States forming the community
of nations, which might be manifested tacitly in case of the
customary law of nations, expressly in case of the conventional
law of nations, and be presumed in case of the general law of
nations. For positivists, international law is a law between
nations, rather than a law over nations.
3. The Eclectics or Groatians – This theory offers both the law
of nature and the consent of states as the basis of international
law. It contends that the system of international law is based
on the “dictate of right reason” as well as “the practice of
states.”
Public International Law vs. Private International Law
Private international is that part of the law of each States
which determines whether in dealing with a factual situation
involving a foreign element, the law of some other States will
be recognized.
Public international law is international in nature while private
international law is national or municipal in character.
However, it admits of an exception since rules of private
international law may become truly international when
embodied in a treaty or convention.
In case of a dispute or conflict in public international law,
recourse is had to international modes of settlement while in
private international law, recourse is to municipal tribunals.
Traditionalist would also put forward at least two more
distinctions: 1. Public international law deals with states while
private international law deals with individuals; and public
international law regulates relations between states whereas
private international law is concerned with transactions which
are strictly private in nature and in which the state as such
generally has no interest.
International Law vs. Other Disciplines
1. International morality or ethics – It embodies the principles
which govern international relations from the higher
standpoint of conscience, morality, justice, and humanity.
2. International comity – Though having a limited meaning in
private international law, refers to those rules of politeness
and courtesy observed by States in their mutual intercourse.
Violations of international morality or ethics and international
comity do not constitute formal grounds for complaint but
violation of international law constitutes grounds for legal,
justiciable claims.
3. Diplomacy – As defined by Satow, is the application of
intelligence and tact to the conduct of official relations
between independent States. International diplomacy is
generally based on considerations of expediency or national
interest rather than those of courtesy, humanity, and
sometimes even antagonistic to recognized rules and
principles.
4. International administrative law – It includes: 1. the body
of rules laid down by international conventions relating to such
matters as postal services, telecoms, rail and road transport,
aviation, traffic on international rivers, sanitation and health,
 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
prevention of crime, literary and artistic rights, etc.; and 2. the
body of rules applicable to the internal legal relations of
international organizations.
Public International Law vs. Municipal Law
Public International Law Municipal Law
Not imposed upon but Issued by a political superior
simply adopted by states as for observance by those
a common rule of action under its authority
among themselves
Derived not from any Consists mainly of
particular legislation but enactments from the law-
from such sources as making authority of each
international customs, state
international conventions
and the general principles of
law
Applies to the relations inter Regulates the relations of
se of states and other individuals among
international persons themselves or with their
own states
Questions are resolved Violations are redressed
through state-to-state through local administrative
transactions ranging from and judicial processes
peaceful methods like
negotiation and arbitration
to the hostile arbitrament of
force like reprisals and even
war
Responsibility of infractions Breaches generally entail
is usually collective in the only individual responsibility
sense that it attaches
directly to the state and not
to its nationals.
Relation between International Law and Municipal Law
There are two schools of legal theory concerning such relation
and distinction: dualist and monist.
1. Dualists – According to them, international law and
municipal law are essentially different from each other. Firstly,
the sources of international law are customs grown up among
states and treaties concluded by them while the sources of
municipal law are customs grown within the States’
jurisdiction and legislation enacted by the states’ lawmaking
authority. Secondly, international law regulates relations
between states while municipal law is concerned with
individuals in their relations with each other and with the
states. Thirdly, international law is not a law above but
between sovereign states whereas municipal law is a law of a
sovereign over individuals subject to its authority. Hence,
international law can never operate as the law of the land save
through municipal custom or legislative enactment.
2. Monists – They deny that the subjects of the two systems of
law are essentially different and maintain that in both
instances, it is individual persons who in the ultimate analysis
are regulated by the law. International law and municipal law
must be regarded as parts of the same juristic conception.
International law is superior to municipal wherein the former
determines the jurisdictional limits of the personal and
territorial competence of states. A state cannot adduce against
another state its own constitution in order to evade
obligations incumbent upon it under international law.
Is International Law, a True Law? The answer depends on
what one conceives law to be. Austin and his followers, who
conceived law to be a body of rules established and enforced
by a sovereign political authority, would deny to international
law the character of true law. Since, as observed by Austin, the
so-called law of nations consists of opinions or sentiments
current among nations generally, it cannot properly be called
law.
The Austinian concept, however, has been widely challenged.
The concept of law as a command emanating from a
determinate authority is narrow and does not give an
adequate explanation in the modern state. In the first place,
the essence of law is its function, rather than the form in which
it is created or the method by which it is enforced. In the
second place, Austin’s view that there must be sanction in the
sense of a definite threat by a determinate person before a
rule may be called law, ignores the fact that there are today
many rules of law without sanctions. Much of law is enabling
or permissive, not restrictive or prohibitive.
Turning from doctrine to practice, it cannot be denied that
international law is constantly recognized as law.
Governments of states, in their mutual relations, regard the
rules of international law as not merely morally, but legally
binding.
Conflict between International Law and Municipal Law
Some states follow the doctrine of transformation wherein
each rule of international law must be individually
incorporated in municipal law, since law is by its nature
inapplicable in the municipal sphere. Transformation is
effected by a legislative act which becomes the basis of the
validity in the municipal sphere of each individual rule of
international law.
Other states adopt the doctrine of incorporation which
provides that the rules of international law form part of the
law of the land. While the principle of incorporation has been
widely adopted, significant differences exist in the practice of
various states, particularly as regards: 1. The question as to
what extent treaties may be regarded as directly enforceable
in the municipal sphere; and 2. The problem of how any
conflict that may arise between the rules of international law
and that of municipal law should be resolved.
It has been said that municipal law which is in conflict with
international law will often be given effect in municipal courts,
the reason being that such courts are organs of municipal law
and are accordingly bound by it in all circumstances. Under
the doctrine of incorporation as applied in most countries,
international law is not given primacy but rather, a standing
equal to national legislative enactments. Thus, a treaty may
 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
repeal a statute and a statute may repeal a treaty depending
on which of the two was enacted later.
Other countries would uphold the primacy of municipal
legislative enactments over the rules of customary
international law. International law is law only so far as the
States adopt it and like all common or statute law, it bends to
the will of the Congress.
Sources of International Law
Classification of Sources
1. Formal/Primary/Direct Sources – May refer to various
processes by which rules come into existence, e.g., legislation,
treaty-making, judicial decision-making, state practice.
2. Material/Secondary/Indirect Sources – Concerned with the
identification, substance and content of the obligation; also
called “evidence” or international law.
Formal/Primary/Direct Sources
1. Treaties/Conventions – These are formal, legally binding
written international agreements between actors in
international law. These include pacts, covenants, charters,
protocols, concordat, modus vivendi, etc. It is the most
deliberate form of commitment through which governments
cooperate with one another. They are convenient tools
through which states show common intent, in the absence of
international legislative. The following are its elements: In
writing; reflective of the intention of the parties to be bound;
and governed by international law. Treaties may be
terminated due to material breach, impossible
performance/supervening performance, or rebus sic stantibus
(fundamental change in circumstance).
2. International Customs/Customary Law – A general and
consistent practice of states followed by them from a sense of
legal obligation. It contains the basic elements of custom: the
material factor (how states behave: duration, consistency,
uniformity/generality) and the psychological or subjective
factor (why states behave the way they do: opinion juris – the
belief that a certain form of behavior is obligatory makes
practice an international rule; otherwise, practice is not law).
3. General Principles of Law – The general principles of law are
mostly derived from the law of nature and observed by the
majority of states because they believed to be good and just.
It references municipal law principles common to legal
systems of the world and are evidence of the fundamental
unity of law, most of them incorporated into conventional
international law. The significance of general principles has
undoubtedly been lessened by the increased intensity of
treaty and institutional relations between states.
Nevertheless, the concepts of estoppel and equity have been
employed in the adjudication of international disputes.
Material/Secondary/Indirect Sources
The decisions of international and municipal courts and the
publications of academics can be referred to, not as a source
of law as such, but as a means of recognizing the law
established in other sources.
1. Decisions of Courts –In practice, the International Court of
Justice does not refer to domestic decisions although it does
invoke its previous case-law. There is no rule of stare decisis in
international law. The decision of the Court has no binding
force except between the parties and in respect of that
particular case. Nevertheless, often the Court would refer to
its past decisions and advisory opinions to support its
explanation of a present case.
2. Writings of Publicists – In cases of first impression, the court
reluctantly makes reference to writers since they are the only
available sources. These include state-empowered entities,
expert groups, and ordinary writers.
Historical Development of International Law
1. Ancient Law to Post-WWI
Ancient international law governed exchange of diplomatic
emissaries, peace treaties. The progressive rules of jus
gentium or law “common to all men” became the law of the
Roman Empire.
Modern international law began with the birth of nation-
states in the Medieval Age. It was governed by Roman or
Canon Law, which drew heavily from natural law.
Hugh Grotius is the father of modern international law;
authored the De Jure Belli ac Pacis, which discussed the “law
of nations” (later named “international law” by British
philosopher Jeremy Bentham.) He was preceded by largely
natural law theorists.
Positivist approach reinterpreted international law on the
basis of what actually happened in the conflict between states
and not from concepts derived from reason.
Notion of sovereignty gave rise to the Austin’s command
theory.
Pacta sunt servanda arose in light of the Peace of Westphalia
which ended the Thirty Years War (1618- 1648) and
established a treaty-based framework for peace cooperation.
Congress of Vienna (1815) ended the Napoleonic Wars and
created a sophisticated system of multilateral political and
economic cooperation.
League of Nations (from the Treaty of Versailles): Arose after
the culmination of World War I, as an institution set up by the
victors of the war to prevent the recurrence of world
conflagration. It was originally composed of 43 states. The
United States did not join. The League of Nations created the
Permanent Court of International Justice
2. End of WWI to End of the Cold War
United Nations (UN): Because the League of Nations failed to
prevent the occurrence of World War II, the victors then set up
the UN in 1945 as a new avenue for peace. This marked a shift
of power away from Europe and the beginning of a truly
universal institution.
Decolonization: The universalization began by the
establishment of the UN was advanced by decolonization,
resulting in an expansion of membership in the UN composing
of formerly colonies, now newly recognized states.
 PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Grouping of States during the Cold War:
Western States (United States, etc.) were not of one mind but
insisted on two general points—that legal provisions must be
clear and precise, and that any substantive rule must be
accompanied by an implementation mechanism that can spot
and correct violations. Some remained satisfied with the status
quo but some were more open to Third World demands and
were supportive of social and legal changes
Socialist states were led by the Soviet Union, which sought to
avert Western intrusion into domestic affairs even as they
sought relatively good relations with the West for the sake of
economic and commercial interchange. They also sought to
convert developing nations to their ideology.
Developing countries formed the overwhelming majority and
were mostly former colonies suffering underdevelopment
with newly industrializing countries like the Philippines,
Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore and South Korea who earned
their independence through armed or political struggle while
remaining under the influence of Western or socialist ideas.
3. Post-Cold War Period
Dissolution of the Soviet Union led to the reemergence of
international relations being based on multiple sources of
power and not on ideology. The Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania) were restored to statehood and the newly born
Russian Federation did not inherit the Soviet Union’s position
as a superpower.
United States: The last remaining superpower, politically and
ideologically leading the Western States. It acts as both world
politician (in a selective manner) and global mediator.
Socialist countries are no longer united; some depend on
support from Western states.
Developing countries have veered away from ideological
orientation and towards market orientation as well as fighting
poverty and backwardness.
The UN has declined as the international agency for the
maintenance of peace.
 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, STATES, AND THE UNITED NATIONS
International Community – It is the body of juridical entities
which are governed by the law of nation. Under the modern
concept, it is composed not only of states but also of such
other international persons, and they are generally recognized
subjects of international law.
Subject of International Law – It is the entity that has rights
and responsibilities under that law. It has an international
personality in that it can directly assert rights and be held
directly responsible under the law of nations. Example: States
and international organizations.
Object of International Law – It is the person or thing in
respect of which rights are held and obligations assumed by
the subject. Example: Citizens (although some persons may
properly become subjects of international law).
States – A group of people living together in a definite territory
under the independent government organized for political
ends and capable of entering into international relations.
Elements of States
1. Permanent Population – A community of persons sufficient
in number, capable of maintaining permanent existence of the
community and held together by a common bond of law. There
is no minimum population required, nor are they required to
have racial, cultural or economic similarities.
2. Defined Territory – It is the fixed portion of the surface of
the earth inhabited by the people of the state. It must be big
enough to provide for the needs of the population but should
not be so extensive as to be difficult to administer or defend
from external aggression.
3. Government – Institution by which an independent society
makes and carries out rules of action necessary to enable men
to live in a social state, or which are imposed upon people
forming that society by those who possess the power or
authority of prescribing them.
4. Sovereignty – Independence from outside control. It is the
supreme legitimate authority over some polity and means that
a state possesses full control over affairs within a territorial or
geographical area or limit.
Classification of States
1. Independent – It is one which is not subject to dictation
from others in this respect.
a. Simple States – It is one which is placed under a
single and centralized government exercising power
over both its internal and external affairs.
b. Composite States – It is two or more states, each
with its own separate government but bound under a
central authority exercising, to a greater or less
degree, control over their external relations.
i. Real Union – It is created when two or
more states are merged under a unified authority so
that they form a single international person through
which they act as one entity.
ii. Federal Union – It is a combination of two
or more sovereign states which upon merger cease to
be states, resulting in the creation of a new state with
full international personality to represent them in
their external relations as well as a certain degree of
power over their domestic affairs and their
inhabitants.
iii. Confederation – It is an organization of
states which retain their internal sovereignty and, to
some degree, their external sovereignty, while
delegating to the collective body power to represent
them as a whole for certain limited and specified
purposes.
iv. Personal Union – It comes into being
when two or more independent states are brought
together under the rule of the same monarch, who
nevertheless does not become one international
persons for the purpose of representing any or all of
them.
v. Incorporate Union – It is two or more
states under a central authority empowered to direct
both their external and internal affairs and possessed
of a separate international personality.
2. Neutralized – An independent state, whether it be simple or
composite, may be neutralized through the agreement with
other states by virtue of which the latter will guarantee its
integrity and independence provided it refrains from taking
any act that will involve it in war or other hostile activity except
for defensive purposes.
3. Dependent – It is an entity which, although theoretically a
state, does not have full freedom in the direction of its external
affairs.
a. Protectorate – It is established at the request of the
weaker state for the protection by string power.
b. Suzerainty – It is a result of a concession from a
state to a former colony that is allowed to be
independent subject to the retention by the former
sovereign of certain power over the external affairs of
the latter.
c. Colonies and Dependencies – A colony or a
dependency is part and parcel of the parent state,
through which all its external relations are transacted
with other states. As such, therefore, it has no legal
standing in the family of nations. Nevertheless, such
entities have been allowed on occasion to participate
in their own right in international undertaking and
granted practically the status of a sovereign state.
d. Trust Territories – It includes: 1) Those held under
the mandate of the League of Nations; 2) Those
territories detached from the defeated states after
WWII; and 3) Those voluntarily placed under the
system by the states responsible for their
administration.
Modes of Creation of States
 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, STATES, AND THE UNITED NATIONS
1. Revolution – It is a change in the political power and
organization that happens when the population revolts against
the government.
2. Unification – It is the unification of 2 or more states.
3. Secession – It is the division of a state, a separation of a part
of the state, or a withdrawal of a group from a larger entity in
order to form a new state.
4. Assertion of Independence – It is when a country gains
independence and possesses its own government free from
the rule of another country.
5. Agreement and Attainment of Civilization – It is when a
group of civilized people agree to form a large
community/entity which results into the creation of a new
state.
Components of Territory
1. Terrestrial Domain – The land mass. It refers to the land
whether agricultural, forest, and national parks under the
jurisdiction of a country.
2. Maritime and Fluvial Domain – Bodies of water within the
land mass and the waters adjacent to the coasts of the state
up to a specified limit. Simply put, it refers to internal or
national waters and external or territorial waters.
a. Territorial Sea – A belt of sea twelve (12) nautical
miles (nm) from the baseline of the coastal State.
b. Contiguous Zone – Area of water not exceeding
24nm from the baseline; it exceeds 12nm from the
edge of the territorial sea.
c. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) –The waters 200nm
from the baseline. It is an area of the sea in which a
state has sovereign rights regarding the exploration
and use of marine resources, including the oil and
natural gas. A state has no sovereignty over the EEZ.
d. High Seas – All parts of the sea that are not
included in the territorial sea or in the internal waters
of a State. Subject to 6 freedoms: navigation,
overflight, fishing, laying of submarine cables and
pipelines, construction of artificial islands and
structures, and scientific research.
3. Aerial Domain – The air space above the territorial lands and
waters of the country but excluding the outer space.
Modes of Acquisition of Territory
1. Occupation – Acquisition of terra nullius (territory which
belonged to no one, or was effectively abandoned without
intent of returning prior to occupation).
2. Prescription – A recognized mode of acquisition requiring
effective control, but the object of prescription is not terra
nullius. This makes the required length of effective control
longer than that of occupation. Prescription may be negated
by a lack of acquiescence by the prior occupant.
3. Cession – The acquisition of property through treaty. A
treaty of cession imposed by a conqueror is invalid, making
what prevails merely a de facto regime.
4. Conquest – Taking possession of territory through armed
force. For acquisition of conquered territory, it is necessary
that war had already ended either by treaty or by indication of
surrender. The conqueror must have intended to acquire the
territory indefinitely and not just occupy it temporarily.
5. Accretion or Avulsion – A kind of sovereignty by operation
of nature. Accretion is the gradual increase of territory by the
action of nature while avulsion is a sudden change.
Modes of Losing Territory
1. Abandonment or Dereliction – There is an act of withdrawal
and the intention to abandon.
2. Cession – It is a method by which territory is transferred by
one state to another by voluntary agreement between them.
Cession may be in the form of sale, donation, barter or
exchange, and even by testamentary disposition.
3. Subjugation – It is when, having been previously conquered
or occupied in the course of war by the enemy, it is formally
annexed to it at the end of the war.
4. Revolution – It happens when there is an overthrow or
repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established
government in certain territories of the state.
5. Natural Causes – It happens when land is detached suddenly
or diminished over time through natural causes.
Recognition of Governments
The recognition of the new government of a state which has
been already recognized is the free act by which one or several
states acknowledge that a person or a group of persons are
capable of binding the state which they claim to represent and
witness their intention to enter into relations with them.
Kinds of Governments
1. De Facto – Three kinds:
a. That which is established by the inhabitants who
rise in revolt against and depose the legitimate
regime;
b. That which is established in the course of war by
the invading forces of one belligerent in the territory
of other belligerent, the government of which is also
displaced; and
c. That which is established by the inhabitants of a
state who secede therefrom without overthrowing its
government.
2. De Jure – It is the legal and regularly constituted
government of a state which is so recognized by other states.
De Facto De Jure
Provisional Relatively permanent
Does not vest title in the Vests title in the
government to its government to its
properties abroad properties abroad
Limited to certain juridical Brings about full diplomatic
relations relations
Two Aspects of Sovereignty
1. Internal – It refers to the power of the state to direct its
domestic affairs, as when it establishes its government, enacts
laws for observance within its territory.
 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, STATES, AND THE UNITED NATIONS
2. External – It signifies the freedom of the state to control its
own foreign affairs, as when it concludes treaties, makes war
or peace, and maintains diplomatic and commercial relations.
It is often referred as independence.
The United Nations
Delegates of 50 nations met at the San Francisco conference
from April 25, to June 26, 1945, and prepared and unanimously
approved the charter of the United Nations. This came into
force on October 24, 1945. Because the League of Nations
failed to prevent the occurrence of World War II, the victors
then set up the UN in 1945 as a new avenue for peace. This
marked a shift of power away from Europe and the beginning
of a truly universal institution. Its purpose is to maintain
international peace and security, develop friendly relations
among nations, achieve international cooperation in solving
international problems, and be a center for harmonizing the
actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
Membership
1. Original – Those states which, having participated in the U.N
conference on international organization at San Francisco or
having previously signed the declaration by U.N of January 1,
1942, signed and ratifies the charter of the U.N.
2. Elective
Admission – Decision of 2/3 of those present and voting in the
general assembly upon the recommendation of at least nine
(including all the permanent) members of the Security Council.
Expulsion – A member which has persistently violated the
principles contained in the Charter may be expelled by 2/3 of
those present and voting in the General Assembly upon the
recommendation of the Security Council by a qualified
majority vote.
Withdrawal of Members – No provision on withdrawal of
membership was included in the Charter because of the fear
that it might encourage successive withdrawals that would
weaken the Organization.
Organs of the United Nations
1. The General Assembly – It serves as the main deliberative,
policymaking, and representative organ of the UN. The UNGA
is responsible for the UN budget, appointing the non-
permanent members to the Security Council, appointing the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, receiving reports
from other parts of the UN system, and making
recommendations through resolutions.
2. The Security Council – It is charged with ensuring
international peace and security, recommending the
admission of new UN members to the General Assembly, and
approving any changes to the UN Charter. Its powers include
establishing peacekeeping operations, enacting international
sanctions, and authorizing military action. The UNSC is the only
UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions on
member states. The Security Council consists of 15 members,
of which 5 are permanent: China, France, Russia, the United
Kingdom, and the United States.
3. The Economic and Social Council – It is responsible for
coordinating the economic and social fields of the
organization, specifically in regards to the fifteen specialized
agencies, the eight functional commissions, and the five
regional commissions under its jurisdiction. ECOSOC serves as
the central forum for discussing international economic and
social issues, and formulating policy recommendations
addressed to member states and the United Nations System.
4. The Trusteeship Council – It was established to help ensure
that trust territories were administered in the best interests of
their inhabitants and of international peace and security. The
trust territories—most of them former mandates of the
League of Nations or territories taken from nations defeated
at the end of World War II—have all now attained self-
government or independence, either as separate nations or by
joining neighboring independent countries. The last was Palau,
formerly part of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, which
became a member state of the United Nations in December
1994.
5. The International Court of Justice – It settles disputes
between states in accordance with international law and gives
advisory opinions on international legal issues. The ICJ is the
only international court that adjudicates general disputes
between countries, with its rulings and opinions serving as
primary sources of international law.
6. The Secretariat – The secretariat is the UN's executive arm.
The secretariat has an important role in setting the agenda for
the deliberative and decision-making bodies of the UN (i.e., the
General Assembly, Economic and Social Council, and Security
Council), and the implementation of the decision of these
bodies. The secretary-general (currently, Antonio Guterres),
who is appointed by the General Assembly, is the head of the
secretariat. The secretariat is the main source of economic and
political analysis for the General Assembly and Security
Council; it administers operations initiated by UN's
deliberative organs, operates political missions, prepares
assessments that precede peacekeeping operations, appoints
the heads of peacekeeping operations, conducts surveys and
research, communicates with non-state actors such as media
and non-government organizations, and is responsible for
publishing all of the treaties and international agreements.
 RUSSIAN INVASION OF UKRAINE
Summary
Russia began an invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, in a
major escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian War that began in
2014. It is the largest military attack in Europe since WWII.
Following the Ukrainian Revolution of Dignity in February
2014, Russia annexed Crimea and Russian-backed separatists
seized part of south-east Ukraine, starting the war in Donbas.
In 2021, Russia began a large military build-up along its border
with Ukraine, leading to an international crisis. During this
period, Russia's president Vladimir Putin espoused Russian
irredentist views, questioned Ukraine's right to statehood, and
accused NATO of threatening Russia's security, demanding
that Ukraine be barred from ever joining the alliance. Putin
also baselessly accused Ukraine of committing genocide
against its Russian speakers. The United States and others
accused Russia of planning to attack or invade Ukraine, which
Russian officials repeatedly denied as late as 23 February 2022.
On 21 February 2022, Russia recognized the Donetsk People's
Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic, two states with
limited recognition controlled by pro-Russian separatists in
Donbas. The next day, Russia's Federation Council
unanimously authorized use of military force, and Russian
soldiers entered both territories. On 24 February, Putin
announced a "special military operation" to "demilitarise and
denazify" Ukraine. Minutes later, missiles and airstrikes hit
places across Ukraine, including the capital Kyiv, shortly
followed by a large ground invasion from multiple directions.
Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelenskyy enacted martial law
and general mobilization.
Why did Russia invade Ukraine?
There are three reasons that Russia espoused for invading
Ukraine:
1. Denazification;
2. Demilitarization; and
3. Denial of Ukraine’s statehood.
Denazification
Nazism (National Socialism) is the ideology and practices
associated with Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party (National
Socialist German Workers’ Party). Nazism is a form of fascism
with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary
system. It incorporates fervent antisemitism, anti-
communism, scientific racism, and the use of eugenics into its
creed. Nazism subscribed to pseudo-scientific theories of a
racial hierarchy and social Darwinism, identifying the Germans
as a part of what the Nazis regarded as an Aryan or Nordic
master race. It aimed to overcome social divisions and create
a homogeneous German society based on racial purity which
represented a people's community (Volksgemeinschaft). The
Nazis aimed to unite all Germans living in historically German
territory, as well as gain additional lands for German expansion
under the doctrine of Lebensraum and exclude those whom
they deemed either Community Aliens or "inferior" races.
Putin explained that the goal of invading Ukraine was to
denazify it – to protect the people that are subjected to abuse,
genocide from the Kiev regime. However, nothing could be
further from the truth. Putin is using the term “denazification”
because it resonates deeply with his domestic audience and is
a very powerful piece of propaganda considering the history of
Ukraine having sympathies with the Nazis and the role that the
Soviet Union assumed in helping the Allies defeat the Nazis.
However, the Ukrainian government is not a fascist
dictatorship or in any way associated with the Nazi past. Its
president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a Jewish, is democratically
elected in a fair election. The history of Ukraine 80 years ago is
no longer reflective of the current Ukrainian Government.
But historical accuracy is not the priority. Putin is deliberately
abusing such concept to take advantage of the fact that there
are strong emotions around it which would enable his people
to rally behind his cause.
Demilitarization
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an
intergovernmental military alliance among 28 European
countries and 2 North American countries. Established in the
aftermath of World War II, the organization implements the
North Atlantic Treaty, signed 4 April 1949. NATO constitutes a
system of collective security, whereby its independent
member states agree to mutual defense in response to an
attack by any external party. Its aim was originally to counter
the threat of post-war Russian expansion in Europe. In 1955,
Soviet Russia responded to NATO by creating its own military
alliance of eastern European communist countries, called the
Warsaw Pact. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in
1991, a number of former Warsaw Pact countries switched
sides and became members of NATO.
Among the top reasons for the ongoing war in eastern Europe
is the desire of Ukraine to become part of NATO, a Western
military alliance led by the United States. To President Vladimir
Putin, Ukraine becoming part of NATO poses an existential
threat to Russia that is serious enough for him to start a war of
the scale that Europe has not seen since the end of World War
II in 1945.
From the perspective of the Kremlin, keeping a buffer between
NATO and Russia along its southern and western border is
critical to its security. The three Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia,
and Lithuania), now part of NATO, share borders with Russia,
and only Belarus and Ukraine among the countries that were
once in its sphere of influence are now outside of the western
military alliance. A hostile Ukraine, protected by NATO’s
nuclear umbrella, could potentially have missile launchpads
within a few hundred kilometers of Moscow, and cut off
Russia’s access to the warm water ports of the Black Sea — it
was in part to pre-empt this eventuality that Russia annexed
Crimea in 2014.
Denial of Ukraine’s Statehood
Putin is a Soviet Sentimentalist and a Peter the Great wannabe.
 RUSSIAN INVASION OF UKRAINE
In 2005 state of the nation address, Putin called the collapse of
the Soviet empire as “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of
the century.” In an interview with Lionel Barber, then editor of
the Financial Times, in 2019. ‘A towering bronze statue of the
visionary tsar looms over his ceremonial desk in the cabinet
room,’ noted Barber. Peter the Great was Putin’s ‘favourite
leader’. ‘He will live,’ declared the Russian President, ‘as long
as his cause is alive.’
What was Peter’s cause? In essence, to make Russia a
European great power, capable of matching the likes of
Austria, Britain, Prussia and France in both military might and
the economic and bureaucratic foundations on which it is
based. No historian would dispute that he achieved that. At
the Battle of Poltava (8 July 1709), Tsar Peter won the most
important victory of his reign, defeating the army of Charles XII
of Sweden, which had been one of the great powers during the
17th century. Poltava lies about 200 miles east of Kiev, not far
from Luhansk and Donetsk. Under Peter the Great, Russia was
modernized and grew into a European power. Because of him,
the Tsardom of Russia was replaced and succeeded by the
Russian Empire.
This is the history that inspires today’s Tsar Vladimir, much
more than the dark chapters of Stalin’s reign of terror, which
will forever be associated in Ukrainian minds with the
Holodomor, the genocidal manmade famine inflicted on
Ukraine in the name of agricultural collectivization. It is a
history that reminds us how crucial victory in the territory that
is now Ukraine was for the rise of Russia as a European great
power. It also reminds us that this territory was as contested
in the early 18th century as it is today.
Russia under Putin has become a great power once again. That
is precisely why he has been able to fight and win wars in
Georgia (2008), Ukraine (2014) and Syria (2015). That is why
he is in a position for a full-scale invasion of Ukraine today.