(CNN) -- President Barack Obama has said that Russian President Vladimir Putin has violated international law by sending troops into the Crimea. Law is on Obamas side, which is why Putin is organizing his justification counter-offensive. The United Nations charter (article 2(4)) prohibits 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. Ukrainian lawyers have said there are additional treaties Putin is violating. Putins forces were apparently concerned enough about the U.N prohibition to strip the identifying markers off Russian soldiers before sending them into Crimea, and to now call these troops local defense forces. But removing their insignias does not change the facts. Putins new tactic is to claim that Russia has been invited in. It is illegal to invade another country, but not illegal to send in help when a legitimate government requests it. Putin has asserted that Ukraines ousted president, Viktor F. Yanukovych, remains the Ukraines legitimate president, and he has asked for help. Putin may also be behind the influx of protest tourists to Ukraine who pretend they are Ukrainians asking for Russian help. Opinion: Putins Ukrainian endgame There is a long and storied tradition of governments inventing a legal premise to justify their actions. During the Cold War, President Reagan justified U.S. intervention in Grenada as necessary to protect Americans living on the island. Reagan also defended U.S. military support in Nicaragua as collective self-defense requested by El Salvador. These claims were just as credible as Putins claims, which is to say: not very. Putin cares little whether his actions violate international law. But the Europeans and Americans who will organize a response do care, and ordinary Russians may also care, which is why Putin is working to create the appearance of legal intervention.
Posted on: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 22:11:35 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015