Double standards, simplification of economic programmes and permanent circumvention of the Security Council have become a sample which threatens the main concept of international rules that can regulate each country’s treatment. A clear example of legally suspect action can be seen in the current US and UE sanctions against the Russian Federation.
According to these statements in support of efficiency of these sanctions, the incorrect opinion can appear that international sanctions are free from conditions and limits imposed by international public right. Binding rules connected to any international sanctions appear from the articles of government responsibility for international wrongful acts. When these binding rules bump into the facts of the US and EU sanctions, conflicts come out.
Firstly, the international sanctions against the Russian Federation are not proportional. Secondly, they are directed against Russian citizens. Thirdly, they have obvious punishing aim. Fourthly, they are called third States, but not only Ukraine. Fifthly, they harm the Russian population on the whole. Contrary to the initial premise that international public right is a “teethless tiger”, violation of article on governments responsibilities for international wrongful acts requires a relevant response.
Close inspection of factual and legal framework can lead to responsibilities of the UE and US Member-States. Moreover, mutual acceptable regulation can be reached only if the negotiations can be equally according to law demands introduced by the Russian Federation, a senior specialist on international arbitration from Vienna Milos Ivkovich claimed.
Natalia Veselnitskaya – official website