THE BEGINNING OF THE CRISIS BETWEEN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE

The world is now keeping an eye on the crisis between Russia and Ukraine, which is affecting many countries around the world e.g. the reaching of the gold price, the reaching of oil price, etc.

       To mention how the Russia and Ukraine crisis started, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union until 1991, and since then has been a less-than-perfect democracy with a very weak economy and foreign policy that wavers between pro-Russian and pro-European. This all began as an internal Ukrainian crisis in November 2013, when President Viktor Yanukovych rejected a deal for greater integration with the European Union, sparking mass protests, which Yanukovych attempted to put down violently. Russia backed Yanukovych in the crisis, while the US and Europe supported the protesters.

        In February, anti-government protests toppled the government and ran Yanukovych out of the country. Russia was trying to salvage its lost influence in Ukraine, invaded and annexed Crimea theี next month. In April, pro-Russia separatist rebels began seizing territory in eastern Ukraine. The rebels shot down Malaysian Airlines flight 17 on July 17, killing 298 people, probably accidentally. Fighting between the rebels and the Ukrainian military intensified, the rebels started losing, and, in August, the Russian army covertly invaded eastern Ukraine to support the rebels. This has all brought the relationship between Russia and the West to its lowest point since the Cold War. Sanctions are pushing the Russian economy to the brink of recession, and more than 2,500 Ukrainians have been killed.

         Ukraine has been facing this kind of crisis for a long time from Russia. The country has been divided many times, even between Ukrainians who see Ukraine as part of Europe and those who see it as intrinsically linked to Russia. An internal political crisis over that disagreement may have been inevitable. Meanwhile, in Russia, Putin is pushing an imperial-revival, nationalist worldview that sees Ukraine as part of greater Russia.

Is Russia's action against international law?

     The international law, it has the principle to not use force, that it is customary international law which chains as general with every state except they opposed when it begins and it is also prescribed in Article 2 (4) of United Nations Charter. Article 2 (4) is established that “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, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” Russia is a member of the United Nations which has a duty to not use force against other states except self-defense or possessing of Article 42 but according to Article 42 Russia objected to this. it mentioned armed force not meaning economic pressure. 

         When Russia attacked a mother and child hospital in Ukraine. Russia used armed forces in combat. Moreover, offended by bomb to the mother and child hospital in Mariupol. It makes children and civilians injured. Russia can not claim self-defense because hospitals are not dangerous to Russia. Action of Russia which raided a hospital in Ukraine or another place in Ukraine that is against Article 2 (4) of UnitedNations Charter.

            Furthermore, international law also has the principle to dispute by peaceful means that is customary international law and it was regulated in Article 2 (3) of the United Nations Charter. Article 2 (3) was formulated that “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.” When Russia is a member of the United Nations then Russia has role disputes by peaceful means in international conflict or if Russia is not a member of the United Nations Russia has a mission in disputes by peaceful means in accordance with customary international law though.

Nowadays, Russia has disputes with Ukraine since Ukraine will join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

            When Russia and Ukraine have disagreements, Russia uses armed force in disputes that are not peaceful. Consequently, Russia is contrary to Article 2 (3) of the United Nations Charter.

            Ukraine is a member of the United Nations as well. So, Both principles of not to use force and disputes by peaceful means are the duty of Ukraine to do but when Russia hits Ukraine by force using in order to defend genocide of Russia, if Ukraine counteracts Russia, Ukraine can mention to it acts for self-defense its state.

            Ultimately, the international law about the principle of war which this principle is on Geneva Conventions that Russia and Ukraine join this convention. This principle such as protecting and helping people in war and forbidding to hit hospitals and civilians to save lives and protect humanity while war, when Russia attacked to mother and children, hospital, and civilians who evacuated safe state. Therefore, Russia infringed the principle of war on the Geneva Conventions.

IS THERE ANY RESOLUTION? WHICH PERSON SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES?

            At this time the damage still occurs and sure there will be a lot more damage. If we want to cut the losses. We have to find some method as fast as possible. And if we think about the “duty to not use force against other states”  that we previously mentioned. There are so many methods that we could use such as (these examples of method are from UN Charter Article 33),

●  Negotiation: is the most popular method. Both countries just provide their demand to those situations, and those countries will decide, bargain, amending their demand. And if things go well, this method is the fastest method to the dispute resolution and the most flexible ones. But we will have to be concerned about the international political pressure between those states that comes to negotiate. Because big countries are more likely to benefit from this method rather than small countries

●  Good - Office: This is the method that requires a “3rd party state”. And 3rd party state will be the one who have a duty to make a meeting for the disputed state, and most of them are likely to be familiar with the “Negotiation”

●  Mediation: this method will also have a“3rd party state”. But this time, the 3rd party state will have a role with those disputed states. Such as to point out the resolution for the conflict. Not just the duty to make a meeting for the disputed state

● Conciliation: Is to form a commission to propose a solution to the dispute. But the report is not legally binding on the conflicting states.

●  Arbitration: It is another type of Dispute Resolution by Court Method. But, things that are different from regular state court is

○    You can choose an arbitrator (familiar with Judges but NOT JUDGES)

○    You can choose Laws that can be used to settle disputes

○    Way faster than State Court

●      Another method such as the international court of Justice, etc.

But, reality is not that easy. We have heard that both Russia and Ukraine (a disputed state) have been trying to negotiate for a long time. But it did not work out. We can see that the severity of the situations in Ukraine keeps getting worse. SO, negotiation is not working in this situation.  Moreover, the situation has reached the point where it is unlikely to be negotiable anymore. because weapons have been used. Then, what can we do?

If we take a look at the related (International) Organizations such as the UN, Nato, etc. they are trying at their best to deal with the situations. Because the situation could lead to another World War. There have been statements, condemnation, showing their concern about the situation, economic sanctions or to boycott Russia from their economic relations. And if someone would say these methods were useless. We could proof that they are wrong because the Russian people are currently having a hard time from those sanctions.

And if we take a look, most of the countries in the world are now having familiar sanctions. Which is an “Economic Sanctions” which makes the economic system of Russia shutting down. They can’t use credit, debit cards or even create payment transactions because those companies are boycotting them. And not just a bank, Even a fashion industry also boycotting a transaction that occurs in Russia too. Which is rarely happening. For example, CHANEL, LOUIS VUITTON, DIOR, BALENCIAGA are closing their boutique and donating their funds to related organizations to make a statement which they deny any armed conflict. Or even tech companies also have their statement, Google shutdown Playstore on the Russia located device, Apple is stop selling their products in Russia etc.

And those are the best things that we could do rights now in the 21st century. If we want to maintain the “duty to not use force against other states” and prevent the damage that we couldn’t imagine. Whether it is another world war or not. Things that happen to the people in Ukraine are more than enough. There shouldn't be any state fight back with weapons. We know that this is heartbreaking that the things that we could do right now are so little. But international conflicts are as complicated as we can expect. We have to be concerned about the sovereignty of the state and any actions that happen. could lead to another thing that we couldn’t even imagine. That’s why international countries (look like) don't care about it. So let’s pray for the innocent people in Ukraine and hope that the situation will get better in the future.

As a country outside the means of resolving the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, how should it end?

First of all, In this big conflict, we should consider about the sovereignty of the country and The principle of non-interference because these two principles are fundamental principles that are respected by all countries. As a country that surrounds we are unable to manage the internal affairs of Russia and Ukraine. This makes boycott the best thing now that other countries can do to keep continuing sovereignty of the country and The principle of non-interference which is the honors to Russia and Ukraine.

However, no matter how much controversy between them, violence is unacceptable. We do not support violence. Every person in the world has a share of responsibility in this respect in humanitarian terms. If this violence continues the boycott will still need to be continued too. In order for this conflict to be pressured and settled without engaging in the two key principles discussed above. We should consume news from both sides consciously because of the news that comes out, some can be trusted and some cannot be trusted. The news that is presented nowadays is sometimes too self-indulgent so we should follow the news from reliable news agencies and wait to see how this conflict will end.

CITATIONS

Article 2 (3), 2 (4) of United Nations Charter

Chanjira_Yee, ‘อนุสัญญาเจนีวากฎหมายสำคัญยามสงคราม ที่ต้องเคารพศักดิ์ศรีความเป็นมนุษย์’ (Springnews,11 มีนา2565) <https://www.springnews.co.th/news/821758> สืบค้นเมื่อ 13 มีนาคม 2565.

Max Fisher, ‘Everything you need to know about the 2014 Ukraine crisis’ (Vox, 3 พฤศจิกายน 2557) <https://www.vox.com/2014/9/3/18088560/ukraine-everything-you-need-to-know> สืบค้นเมื่อ 13 มีนาคม 2565.

Paul Kerby, ‘why has Russia invaded Ukraine and what does Putin want‘ (BBC News, 12 มีนาคม 2565) <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589> สืบค้นเมื่อ 13 มีนาคม 2565.

the Geneva Conventions

photo by Karollyn Hubert , on Unsplash

CONTRIBUTORS

Nanchanat   Tangpawana

Kornkod       Suk-aram

Nattakarn     Vivatvanavong

Chayanee    Maneein