International Justice: The Reality of “Legal Warfare”

The West is actively exploiting international law as an instrument of ‘legal warfare’. The term ‘lawfare’ has become part of our everyday language. International justice bodies are being used to level politically charged accusations, and conventions are subject to contradictory interpretations and manipulations. This is the new reality of international law in which Russia has found itself on the front lines due to massive legal attacks by countries in the Western camp. Having defended itself against these unfounded accusations, Russia is now going on the counter-offensive. Russia’s filing of a counter-memorandum with evidence of genocide by the Kyiv regime in Donbas has turned Ukraine into a de facto defendant in its proceedings with Russia under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. After Ukraine lost its lawsuit against Russia as part of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Russia has started presenting its own claims about Ukraine and several Western countries violating their obligations to combat terrorism and discrimination against Russians and Russian-speakers. Western countries continue to put pressure on the International Court of Justice, in part by abusing its third-party status to join the proceedings, but this practice has not yet produced the desired results and threatens to backfire on the West itself. As the legal confrontation continues to escalate, these discredited judicial bodies have become more active and are attempting to create new quasi-judicial structures that are obviously under political control, but yet claim to administer justice. International criminal justice bodies, including the International Criminal Court, are increasingly being used to hunt for domestic and foreign policy opponents. Their actions express a clear disregard for the generally accepted norms of international law, including the immunity of officials from foreign states. Interstate arbitration is another battleground on the ‘legal front’. The dispute between Ukraine and Russia over coastal rights in the Black Sea, the Sea of Azov, and the Kerch Strait constitutes an attempt by Kyiv to dispute the ownership of Crimea and the long-established status of maritime spaces and challenge historical realities, the norms of international maritime law, and the broad practices of different states. The tense political situation around the world is creating new challenges for the mechanisms used to appoint arbitrators and guarantees of their impartiality, thereby forcing countries, including Russia, to make use of dispute procedures.