Angels And Demons Of International Legal System

Illustrative Image

You can read this article in German. LINK

The current system of international relations was consolidated by treaties and agreements of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences adopted after the World War II. It became the basis of a bipolar world. Despite the fact that the bipolar world no longer exists; the international system has not yet been replaced by any other. The current rejection of norms and principles of international law leads to further aggravation and destabilization of the international situation.

Moscow continues to openly accuse the United States of consistently destroying the current international legal system. The actions of the Washington establishment led to the destruction of all existing “red lines” in international politics. This was once again stated by the Spokesperson of the President of Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov in his recent interview.

“As practice shows, now there are no more such “red lines” at all. That is, in international politics, our colleagues from the United States made such a mess that they simply broke all the rules, ” Peskov said.

Washington took a course to replace the established international laws with its own rules of the game back in 1990s. This marked the beginning of a new era in international politics. The weakening and subsequent collapse of the USSR, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from the GDR led to the destruction of the existing system of checks and balances in the international arena. There was only one global hegemon left. In practice, this led to the fact that in the same year, the Americans lobbied for UN Security Council Resolution 678, where the wording “to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution” was used in international law for the first time. On the basis of this resolution, Operation “Desert Storm’ in Kuwait was carried out, which became a cornerstone of international law. The UN Security Council resolution set a “dubious precedent” by backing away from the “peaceful and humanitarian purposes and principles” enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The UN lost the responsibility and the accountability for the military force that was deployed to the region. The Americans gained the power to manage world policy in a unilateral manner.

At the start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. military to conduct a devastating aerial assault on Baghdad, known as “shock and awe.”

Thus, a series of inciting military conflicts was fueled in the international arena: the US decided to bomb Yugoslavia, violating the UN Charter, supported extremists in Chechnya during the First Chechen Campaign in the North Caucasus, the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In recent years, the United States has sought to withdraw from any obligations under international treaties. Previously, military-political treaties stood aside from the existing political struggle. However, these standards are currently being eroded, and the United States is at the head of this process. Washington is destroying the legal framework that restricts US actions on the world stage. The United States, withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and the Treaty on Open Skies. In addition to military treaties, the US is reneging on its international obligations: UNESCO, the Paris Agreement on Ecology, the agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.

“Now Western countries are increasingly using the term “rules-based order” instead of calling for compliance with international law. And the difference is clear. International law is the result of consensus negotiations, and the rules are invented by the West and demand that everyone follow them.”

NATO exercises and deployments near Russia since 2014

At the same time, the United States, within the framework of NATO, creates an image of a dangerous enemy – Russia, accusing it of aggression. This image is primarily directed to the members of the Alliance and aims to unite them. The Alliance claims that Russia regularly conducts “intimidating military operations in the immediate vicinity of NATO member countries”, “seeks hegemony over the former Soviet republics”, and has also strengthened its military potential as a result of the events in Nagorno-Karabakh and Belarus. Aggressive rhetoric against Russia leads to a deterioration in relations between Russia and Western countries, which are already at their lowest point.

The American deviation from international law and its policy of dictatorship also undermined the internal stability in countries that are dependent on it. In Eastern Europe, the American pressure provoked the major gap between the positive attitude of local elites sponsored by by the U.S. and the negative attitude of ordinary people towards Americans. This trend is even observed in Poland and Baltic States.

Russia, in its turn, is forced to respond to the NATO expansion towards its borders.

Speaking about the withdrawal of the United States from the Open Skies Treaty at the annual press conference, Putin said: “What should we do? … Let it go? You, as a NATO member country, will fly over our territories and transfer everything to your American partners, and we will be deprived of such an opportunity regarding American territory? You’re smart people, why do you think we’re jerks?»

The Crimean transition in 2014 remains one of the main accusations against Russia. Moscow insists that the procedure was carried out within the framework of international law on the free democratic expression of the people. However, the West imposed sanctions against Crimeans.

“Why do you impose sanctions against Crimeans? If it’s an annexation, it’s not their fault. And if this is not an annexation, but the results of the vote, then we must admit that this is a democracy, ” Putin said.

Comparing to the West, “Russia is white and fluffy,” as the President Putin declared. Despite all the circumstances, Moscow continues to follow the norms of international law, at least formally. The current problem of establishing an effective dialogue with Russia is caused by the unwillingness to consider even its minimal interests and its perception as a potential object for another neocolonial division.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• NATO Special Operations Forces
• United Nations Crosses The Threshold Into The Dark Age Of Neo-Liberal Totalitarianism