The War in Ukraine and the Concept of Change: An International Legal Perspective

It has often been assumed that the Russian aggression against Ukraine demonstrates the fundamental weakness of international law, and that the war signals the failure—if not the end—of the post–World War II international legal order. This contribution takes issue with this simplistic view of how wars of aggression induce change in the global normative order and argues—somewhat counterintuitively—that the Russian aggression has only served to reaffirm, rather than weaken, fundamental global rules relating to the use of force. The question of why international law changes—and why at times it resists change—is among the perennial puzzles of international relations theory and international law. In this contribution I argue that while powerful states do exercise a disproportionate influence on the formation and transformation of international law, it would be simplistic to assume that international law is determined by them, that it can be created and changed by unilateral fiat. The law is not merely a reflection of the subjective preferences of individual states but an intersubjective construct. Hence, wars of aggression launched by powerful states that are not supported by the international community at large leave the existing legal order intact.