Skip to main content
opinion

Lawrence Herman is a former Canadian diplomat, counsel at Herman & Associates and a senior fellow of the C.D. Howe Institute in Toronto.

In his first speech to the U.K. Parliament after becoming prime minister in May,1940, Winston Churchill referred to Nazi Germany, in apt terms, as a “monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime.”

In the decades following the Second World War up to recent times, there have been infamous additions to that lamentable catalogue of human crime – in Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Syria and other places. The appalling Russian invasion of Ukraine is adding to the list, with war crimes being committed daily before the eyes of the world.

As the military situation grinds on, bear in mind two points. First, no international court or tribunal has actually adjudicated on the matter so, strictly speaking, Russian actions should be described as alleged war crimes. Alleged, yes, but from what’s seen every day, actions tantamount to international crimes nonetheless.

Second, whether individual Russian perpetrators like Vladimir Putin and his cronies are ever brought to justice, one should be clear about the different aspects of Russia’s actions and those of individual leaders.

At the highest level, Russia has breached the United Nations Charter which, among other things, says in Article 2 that every UN member shall refrain “from use of force against the territorial integrity ... of any state.” In waging an unprovoked war against another sovereign member of the UN, Russia blatantly violated its Charter obligations, a breach of international law at the highest level.

As to the responsibility of individual Russian leaders, we have to go back to the Nuremberg Principles, a key document that was the basis of indicting Nazi leaders after the Second World War. The principles were based on accepted norms of customary international law as well as various treaties, including the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions. What the Nuremberg Principles did was to gather all the pre-existing international rules and define three categories of criminal responsibility: first, “crimes against peace,” such as waging a war of aggression; second, “war crimes,” such as the deliberate killing of civilians and the wanton destruction of cities, towns, villages, civilian neighbourhoods, schools, churches, commercial establishments and other civilian areas and; third, “crimes against humanity,” meaning inhumane acts perpetrated against civilian populations in connection with crimes against the peace or war crimes.

The Nuremberg Principles were endorsed in following years by the International Law Commission and eventually incorporated into the 2002 Rome Statute creating the International Criminal Court. While the Rome Statute hasn’t been accepted by Russia (or by the U.S. for that matter), that’s beside the point. What’s clear is that today there’s a broadly accepted set of international criminal laws that apply to the Russian invasion and the facts on the ground demonstrating what appears to be legal culpability on a broad scale.

Whether Russian perpetrators will ever face judgement is another matter. It’s virtually certain no international court – whether the ICC or any other tribunal – will ever see individual Russians arrested, extradited and brought to stand trial. Even if Mr. Putin and other Russian leaders have been labelled war criminals by U.S. President Joe Biden and other Western leaders, the reality is that they’re unlikely to ever be brought before an international court to answer for their actions. And trying Russian leaders in absentia wouldn’t go anywhere.

Moral and political consequences are another matter. Whatever happens militarily in Ukraine, even in the event of some kind of armistice, it’s difficult to see how the Western allies could absolve Russia or its leadership from their actions. While there was reconciliation and a sort of absolution after the Second World War regarding Germany and Japan, the rapprochement resulted from criminal trials under the Nuremberg Principles and from regime changes in both countries, followed by national acceptances of guilt. It’s hard to see that ever happening in the case of Russia.

While we’re left with a legal vacuum at the level of criminal justice, on a broad scale it’s clear that the Russian actions have long-term geopolitical ramifications. Combined with China’s emergence as a world power, the Russian invasion has dramatically altered what historian Paul Kennedy has called “the broad sweep of history.”

We don’t have to wait for historians to tell the story. We are witnessing the broad sweep of history before our very eyes today.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe