The Suitability of Using the Term «Hybrid War» for the Qualification of the Arme D Aggression of the Russian Federation Against Ukraine (from the Position of International Law)

Abstract

It is investigated from the standpoint of international law the feasibility of using the term «hybrid war» to qualify the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. The international legal doctrine and norms of international law concerning the subject of the research are analyzed. It is emphasized that, in accordance with norms of international law, armed conflicts have traditionally been divided into international and noninternational. The mentioned division contains ideal constructions, since no armed conflict can be exclusively international or non-international, the more so it does not contain «political wars», «information wars» and propaganda, collaboration, etc., that is all that is often included in the concept of «hybrid war». It is emphasized that to characterize the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, the most acceptable is the use of the term «international armed conflict», which is used by the UN General Assembly, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the Office of the Prosecutor of the International criminal court. It is noted that the use of the term «hybrid war» shifts the focus from the armed aggression of the Russian Federation (international armed conflict) to the very vague concept of «hybrid war». This can be used to deviate from the concept of international armed conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, and in particular as a gradual transition to the concept of non-international armed conflict, with all its negative consequences, including the questions of responsibility of the Russian Federation and its senior officials. Key words: hybrid war; armed conflict; aggression; war crimes; International Criminal Court.