Document Type : Original Article from Result of Thesis
Highlights
1. Introduction
In contemporary international law, the environment no longer functions merely as a natural resource or a technical subject. It is now recognized as a fundamental standard human value and a prerequisite for sustainable development, as well as for international peace and security. The interdependence among human health, economic stability, food security, and ecosystems has placed environmental protection at the center of international legal attention, particularly in the context of human rights and humanitarian law. Within this framework, the right to a healthy environment falls under the category of third-generation, or solidarity, rights, the realization of which requires the acceptance of transnational obligations and cooperation among states.
However, one of the most serious challenges to environmental protection arises in international armed conflicts. Wars not only cause human casualties and destruction of civilian infrastructure, but they also leave extensive, severe, and sometimes irreversible impacts on ecosystems. These consequences extend beyond the territory of the belligerent state and affect future generations. Although international humanitarian law and international environmental law have developed rules to reduce such damage, a fundamental question remains: do these rules enjoy effective and enforceable sanctions? Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine since 2022 stands as a prominent example of this challenge and clearly exposes the structural weakness of enforcement mechanisms in international environmental law.
2. Research Method
This study applies a descriptive–analytical method and relies on library-based and documentary research. It critically examines key instruments of international environmental law, international humanitarian law, and international criminal law, including conventions, protocols, declarations, judicial practice, and doctrinal opinions. The war between Russia and Ukraine serves as a case study to assess the applicability of existing rules and to evaluate the possibility of holding Russia accountable under international responsibility for environmental destruction.
3. Findings
The findings show that although international law contains a set of rules aimed at protecting the environment during international armed conflicts, these rules suffer from serious deficiencies in normative coherence and sanctions. Instruments such as the Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the Statute of the International Criminal Court implicitly prohibit causing widespread, severe, and long-term damage to the environment. However, they do not establish a clear and binding regime of international responsibility for compensating such damage. The case study of the war in Ukraine demonstrates that Russia's military operations, conducted without due respect for the fundamental principles of necessity and proportionality, have resulted in widespread pollution, destruction of natural resources, and severe threats to human health and biodiversity. At the same time, no effective mechanism exists for immediate accountability.
4. Conclusion
The study concludes that existing international law, despite recognizing the importance of environmental protection during international armed conflicts, lacks clear and effective sanctions to compel states to compensate for environmental damage. Nevertheless, the interpretive potential of existing rules, together with the gradual development of international judicial practice and the possibility of invoking violations of the fundamental principles governing armed conflicts, may provide a basis for holding Russia accountable. This research emphasizes the need to strengthen the international responsibility regime and establish adequate enforcement mechanisms to achieve environmental justice in future armed conflicts.
