The Russo-Ukrainian War: An Analysis of International Law
- WULR Team
- Apr 8
- 4 min read
An analysis of the international law relevant in the Russo-Ukrainian War
Published April 8th, 2026
Written by Kathryn McKinney
The path to independence for the state now known as Ukraine has been a long, complex history of domination, control and suppression. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declared its independence, marking a turning point in the nation’s sovereignty. The ability for true economic and political freedom has not been one easily attained as Russia, the strong holder of the Soviet Union, continually diminishes the idea of a Ukrainian identity. On February 24, 2022, Russian military forces invaded Ukraine, marking a turning point in the conflict between the two nations, which began in 2014.
Conflict arose between the two nations in February 2014 when Ukrainians ousted their pro-Russia president Viktor Yanukovych following his refusal to enter the state into the European Union and subsequent retaliation on his own people for protesting. During this politically turbulent time of Ukrainian politics, the government was left weak, giving Russian president, Vladimir Putin, the ability to infiltrate and annex the region of Crimea. This affair turned into a global event when a battle between the two sides caused an accidental missile attack on a commercial airline killing everyone onboard — international entities pushed for a peace agreement to be reached in 2015, but the Ukrainian military continued to push back, leading to the now 10+ year conflict.
The United Nations designed a charter in the wake of post-WWII to promote international security and peace. This charter, ratified by both the Russian Federation and Ukraine, lays the stipulations for the global designation of peace. Article II, section IV, authorizes “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of political independence of any state”. Following this ideal, the invasion of sovereign Ukraine in 2022 by the Russian Federation proves to be in violation of the very charter signed in 1945. Jeffrey Mankoff expresses Vladimir Putin’s actions against the nation of Ukraine promoting his belief of Ukraine’s “artificial” identity and his aspirations to once again control the day-to-day functions of the state. Furthermore, Ukraine is an aspiring member of NATO whose primary function is to protect member states from attack by foreign entities. It can be hypothesized if Ukraine were to become a member of NATO, Russia would now be faced with the backing of strong forces against them—significantly hindering their ability to attack on Ukrainian soil.
International security and sovereignty is not the only international law implication this conflict has created. Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, has suffered insurmountable losses through the attacks by Russia including damages to residential areas and hospitals. Human Rights Watch noted Bucha, an area northwest of Kyiv, reported damages one civilian described as “worse than hell”. Russian forces have been accused of war crimes, including humanitarian rights violations such as executions, torture and rape. While the Russian military and government have denied virtually all accusations of their actions against the people of Ukraine, the effects done onto the population will leave generational impacts. The European Convention on Human Rights, a subset of the broader Council of Europe, details “Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law” for all member states including Ukraine. This aspect is incredibly significant because it explains how the scope of international law extends far beyond sovereignty and how violations of humanitarian rights impact what it means to be a member of a nation.
The future of this ongoing conflict is still up in the air as international entities have attempted for multiple years now to craft a resolution both sides will agree to. Notably, President Donald Trump has stepped into the scene with his efforts straining U.S. relations between both Ukraine and NATO allies. In his 28-point plan, leaked on November 21st, 2025, Trump is pressuring Ukraine to concede from the war effort including handing over territory to Russia, reduce the size of their military and stop their efforts to join NATO. Per the New York Times, Trump has placed full blame on the Ukrainian government stating the war wouldn’t have happened if there had been “strong and proper” leadership. Putin and other Russian leadership are expected to agree to this plan, though Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukraine’s president is not as it’s a direct threat to their ability to act as an independent nation. Through international law, the Russo-Ukrainian War has questioned international actors worldwide on what the best approach to solving this complex issue. As this conflict quickly approaches its 12-year anniversary, there is no clear resolution to satisfy every party and the potential for continued backlash is always imminent. International law is a field of complicated cases, charters and histories, though it’s evident the Russo-Ukrainian War will set precedents and leave lasting impacts for the years to come.
Comments