The invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation and the subsequent military campaigns entail several classical aspects of armed conflict. First, it is a type of international armed conflict between two sovereign states that had been prevalent until the middle of the twentieth century but not in the last several decades. It is also a direct intervention by a superpower into a neighboring state with the former’s aspiration of territorial expansion. This action evokes a scheme of war reminiscent of the nineteenth or early twentieth century. At the same time, however, the invasion is generating in the international community a sense of new phenomena, leading to a new era that may be different from the past three decades following the end of the Cold War. In fact, the hostilities between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, as well as reactions by other states and international organizations, have raised legal and political issues that require scholars to reexamine existing frameworks of the international community and individual rules of international law. The process of applying international law to states is a dynamic one. Rules of international law may and should regulate the behavior of states and provide standards to decide whether a particular act by a state is permissible. At the same time, however, states may change or replace existing rules, and a significant event or series of such events may be a strong motivator to create a new legal framework. In this regard, rules of international law and the conduct of states are in a dialectical relationship. International law can both shape a mode of conduct and be shaped by that conduct—being its creator as well as its creation. The Ukraine conflict is not an exception. We can discuss the conduct of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, other states and international organizations and evaluate their legality and legitimacy from the viewpoint of existing rules. However, we may also reevaluate the current rules of international law through the lens of the Ukraine conflict and discuss possible changes to those rules in the future. Inspired by the latter aspect of the international legal process, the present book aims to examine the impact of the Ukraine conflict, whether salient or potential, on various rules of international law. Most of the authors are from Japan and other Asian countries that are geographically remote from the site of the conflict. It is often true, however — and particularly in this case — that those keeping an appropriate distance can look at relevant issues in a broader view and from a more objective perspective. To what extent and in what manner may the Ukraine conflict have an impact on the legal framework of the international community and the rules of international law? This book is the first to answer those questions in a comprehensive manner.

The invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation and the subsequent military campaigns entail several classical aspects of armed conflict. First, it is a type of international armed conflict between two sovereign states that had been prevalent until the middle of the twentieth century but not in the last several decades. It is also a direct intervention by a superpower into a neighboring state with the former’s aspiration of territorial expansion. This action evokes a scheme of war reminiscent of the nineteenth or early twentieth century. At the same time, however, the invasion is generating in the international community a sense of new phenomena, leading to a new era that may be different from the past three decades following the end of the Cold War. In fact, the hostilities between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, as well as reactions by other states and international organizations, have raised legal and political issues that require scholars to reexamine existing frameworks of the international community and individual rules of international law. The process of applying international law to states is a dynamic one. Rules of international law may and should regulate the behavior of states and provide standards to decide whether a particular act by a state is permissible. At the same time, however, states may change or replace existing rules, and a significant event or series of such events may be a strong motivator to create a new legal framework. In this regard, rules of international law and the conduct of states are in a dialectical relationship. International law can both shape a mode of conduct and be shaped by that conduct—being its creator as well as its creation. The Ukraine conflict is not an exception. We can discuss the conduct of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, other states and international organizations and evaluate their legality and legitimacy from the viewpoint of existing rules. However, we may also reevaluate the current rules of international law through the lens of the Ukraine conflict and discuss possible changes to those rules in the future. Inspired by the latter aspect of the international legal process, the present book aims to examine the impact of the Ukraine conflict, whether salient or potential, on various rules of international law. Most of the authors are from Japan and other Asian countries that are geographically remote from the site of the conflict. It is often true, however — and particularly in this case — that those keeping an appropriate distance can look at relevant issues in a broader view and from a more objective perspective. To what extent and in what manner may the Ukraine conflict have an impact on the legal framework of the international community and the rules of international law? This book is the first to answer those questions in a comprehensive manner.

The war in Ukraine, in all its dimensions, is producing alarming cascading effects to a world economy already battered by COVID-19 and climate change, with particularly dramatic impacts on developing countries. Recent projections by UNCTAD estimate that the world economy will be a full percentage point of GDP growth lower than expected 1due to the war, which is severely disrupting already tight food, energy, and financial markets.

The papers presented in this volume analyze the civil uprising known as Euromaidan that began in central Kyiv in late November 2013, when the Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych opted not to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union, and continued over the following months. The topics include the motivations and expectations of protesters, organized crime, nationalism, gender issues, mass media, the Russian language, and the impact of Euromaidan on Ukrainian politics as well as on the EU, Russia, and Belarus. An epilogue to the book looks at the aftermath, including the Russian annexation of Crimea and the creation of breakaway republics in the east, leading to full-scale conflict. The goal of the book is less to offer a definitive account than one that represents a variety of aspects of a mass movement that captivated world attention and led to the downfall of the Yanukovych presidency.

Strain over the ukraine-russia emergency has been stewing for over two months, with optional undertakings to decide the issue giving little signs of progress. Russia has more fighters on its limit with ukraine, beginning western alarms of an unavoidable assault. Moscow, which has at least a time or two denied it means to assault and says it is responding to antagonism by nato accomplices, pardons those exhortations as "lunacy. In this book russian ukraine war: A concise history of ukraine what are russia's inclinations in ukraine? Deal of pereiaslav (also known as the pereyaslav arrangement) The ems act 2014: the extension of crimea and the conflict in the donbas Ukraine's situation in the world What propelled russia's moves against ukraine? What are russia's targets in ukraine? What are u.s. Needs in ukraine? Insight into russia and ukraine war is a smart story which gives setting to the conflict and clarifies why putin was able to make such an extreme move in this day and time when no other world leader would try to do such. Insight into russia and ukraine war is brimming with facts, facts, and facts and not politically biased. Begun with moral equivalency and stayed on the right side of history methodically introduced and clarified.