I have prepared my presentation in English. First of all, I would like to thank the organizers of this excellent conference for very representative and very interesting presentations. The central topic of my presentation will be dealing with the issue of the issue of sanctions. And I decided to abstract myself in this presentation from political or sociological aspects, and to present a picture what can be described in terms of legal dogmatics.
First of all, regarding the title of my presentation, I would slightly change it: I would like to make it more concrete. I would introduce as a sub-title another sort of a sentence: How to make Russia stop war against Ukraine, and how to liberate occupied Crimea and Donbas by using sanctions. Whether we can do it, or we are helpless.
Even official statistics confirm that more than ten thousand Ukrainians have perished during more than five years of the war as a result of Russian armed aggression, almost thirty thousand have been wounded and mutilated, and millions have been forced to leave their homes.
The main issue that worries everyone is how to restore peace, to return all our territories and to live further, with a neighbouring nuclear power that does not recognize the rules on which the world is kept?
I am sure that there is no alternative to strengthening the Ukrainian army, but at the same time, the last thing the country has to pay for the liberation of its land is the life of her soldiers.
1. We will only talk about lawsuits that lie in the plane of international public law, that is, suits of the "Ukraine" state against the "Russia" state. Claims of legal entities, business entities and private enterprises are the subject of a separate investigation.
2. The importance of opening a legal front is a confrontation between Russian articulations. This adds a significant and strong enough component to the military and diplomatic front. Of course, it started a little late, since claims against Russia were formulated only at the end of 2016 and early 2017, that is, almost three years after the occupation of the Crimea and the beginning of the war in the Donbas. This three-year pause, our Foreign Ministry argued for the need for bilateral consultations with Russia for the purpose of a so-called pre-trial settlement. International judicial bodies, in particular the International Court of Justice, do require such consultations, but three years are many. But on the whole, attempts to attract Russia to international legal responsibility are an absolute positive.
Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be in Kyiv as a guest of the Center for Russian Studies and Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine. I’m conscious that we are going into our discussion time so I shall restrict myself to 10 minutes.
The usual disclaimers apply: I am speaking on my own behalf, not for the University of Cambridge or any other institution.
The organizers of today’s workshop have invited me to address some issues of the legal response in the West to aggression against Ukraine. I would like to say a brief word about sanctions, which constitute an important part of the response, and then to make some observations about judicial and arbitral proceedings, which also have some relevance to Ukraine’s situation.
The study of Ukraine-Russia relations in the modern era provides grounds for establishing such a fact: since the twentieth century and to date there have been at least 6 Russia-Ukraine wars, unleashed and inspired by Russia.
The first war began after the Ukrainian Central Rada adopted the III Universal in November, 1917, which proclaimed the restoration of the Ukrainian state, though as part of the future Russian Federation. But even that fact caused a negative reaction of the Bolsheviks, Lenin, the Russian government headed by Lenin. On 4 December, 1917, they presented an ultimatum to the Central Rada and unleashed the war - they began to bring their troops into the territory of Ukraine.
Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. My name is Yoshihiko Okabe, I am Professor of Economics at the University of Kobe Gakuin and an expert at the Centre for Russian Studies. I am grateful to the Centre for Russian Studies and the Diplomatic Academy of Ukraine for inviting me to this forum.
Today I would like to talk about the territorial problems with Russia from the point of view of the Japanese side.
Minister Ogryzko, esteemed colleagues, esteemed participants of the conference!
At the height of World War II, when mankind had already experienced all the horrors of war and was obsessed with the idea of peace and began to reflect on how to avoid conflicts and wars in the future, a document called the Atlantic Charter appeared (14 August, 1941), which not only provided the ideological basis for the future coalition, defined general principles of the national policy of their countries - the principles on which they set their hopes for a better future for the world, but also became the basis for the United Nations Declaration, and later the UN Charter.
One of the trends of the present liberal thought in the West regarding Russia is to justify its aggressive policy through "pressure from the West". Certainly, no examples or even signs of such pressure are given for one simple reason: the liberal West is just incapable of doing so. The whole period after the collapse of the USSR, the West did not press it, but closed its eyes on everything that Moscow did within the country (e.g., the Chechen wars, the practice of "managed democracy") or outside (aggression against Georgia in 2008). And that was done with the sole purpose: to draw Russia into the western civilizational space and thus begin its gradual transformation into a democratic society.
Thank you very much indeed, and particular thanks to the organizers, to the Center of Russian Studies and the Diplomatic Academy. I was here in event but I don’t often get invited back, so it is a real pleasure. Obviously, I didn’t do too bad the last time.
I should also say it is a bit humbling speaking after such excellent presentations. And, it’s very nice to be in Ukraine, speaking about Russia, all things considered, I think it is a sign of real maturity considering the fact that Russia is in war of Ukraine right now. I will tell you, as a participant of many conferences on Russia across Europe, the quality of discussion, the honesty of discussion, and the maturity of discussion about Russia is far greater here than in most countries.
Vladimir Putin won the election on 18 March, which was quite predictable - and I believe that he will not stop at this: there is such a scale of patriotic frenzy and admiration for imperial rhetoric in the present-day Russia that there are no obstacles for the current "national leader" to continue to remain in power of the head of the state, regardless of how the post he holds is to be called. However, it should be stressed that in addition to purely political exaltation, V.Putin's regime is largely supported by the economic achievements of the Russian government, which, perhaps, are not its exceptional merit, but nevertheless are identified with the current leadership of the country by the overwhelming majority of its inhabitants .