Stručni rad
UNLAWFULNESS OF INTERVENTION AND ANNEXATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE CASE OF CRIMEA
Hrvoje Miloglav
; student 4. godine Pravnog fakulteta Osijek
Pasko Tomaš
; student 4. godine Pravnog fakulteta Osijek
Sažetak
In late 2013, Russian Federation utilized political crisis in Ukraine caused by the non-signing of the Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union in order to further destabilize Ukraine, causing turbulence on the inside plan and tensions between ethnic groups At the same time Russian Federation was organizing armed groups on the Crimean peninsula. This opened old wounds and memories of historical conflicts and of complicated and complex relations between two peoples – the Russians and the Ukrainians. However, at that time the plan and ultimate goal of Russian Federation were not entirely clear. Very soon, in March 2014, the Russian Federation helped in the organization of a controversial referendum on the political future of the Crimea by invoking the right to self-determination of the Russian population on the Crimean peninsula. The results of the referendum have shown that the people of Crimea have voted in favour of the secession from Ukraine. Then it became clearer in which direction the Russian policy was going. The ultimate goal of the Russian Federation was the annexation of Crimea and its incorporation into the Russian Federation. Through annexation, Russian Federation wanted to expand its own territory and, even more importantly, it wanted to occupy and gain control over the Crimean peninsula because of its highly important geostrategic position for Russian Federation in the Black Sea. With this act, Russian Federation has not only violated and abused a number of provisions of the International Law, but it has also violated the international treaties which it had meanwhile concluded with Ukraine. Furthermore, the internal regulations of Ukraine have also been violated. Therefore, the annexation of the Crimea by the Russian Federation represents one of the most current and most controversial issues for the international community, and it also indicates the greatest weaknesses of the contemporary international law. Summing up all the Russian arguments in favour of the annexation of Crimea and studying the relevant norms of international law, one comes to the conclusion that the Russian Federation has de facto occupied and annexed a part of the neighbouring state and has thus violated the norms of positive international law.
Ključne riječi
annexation of Crimea; intervention; Ukraine; Russian Federation; international law
Hrčak ID:
188424
URI
Datum izdavanja:
28.6.2017.
Posjeta: 2.835 *