Reactions to Russia’s Annexation of Crimea and the Legal Consequences Deriving from Grave Breaches of Peremptory Norms

Crimea’s referendum for self-determination and Russia’s ensuing annexation completed on 21 March 2014 have sparked a wave of international protest and accusations, es - pecially from governments in Europe and in the West, to the effect that, by doing this, Russia was committing a grave violation of international law, in particular of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. The present chapter discusses the legal consequences of the violation of peremptory norms protecting Ukraine’s territorial integrity, with specific focus on the theoretical underpinnings and practical implications of the collective obligations laid down in Article 41 of the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility. The analysis of the practice concerning Crimea shows that the collective dimension of the international community including the effectiveness of the legal regime regulating the consequences of grave violations of international rules protecting states from external aggression. Certain thorny issues remain unsolved though, such as the lack of an institutionalised and regulated mechanism by which to determine the existence of a grave violation of international law; a gap in legality that can only be partially filled by the “mobilisation” of normative standards by influential and powerful sectors of the international community.