Al Mayadeen English

  • Ar
  • Es
  • x
Al Mayadeen English

Slogan

  • News
    • Politics
    • Economy
    • Sports
    • Arts&Culture
    • Health
    • Miscellaneous
    • Technology
    • Environment
  • Articles
    • Opinion
    • Analysis
    • Blog
    • Features
  • Videos
    • NewsFeed
    • Video Features
    • Explainers
    • TV
    • Digital Series
  • Infographs
  • In Pictures
  • • LIVE
News
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Sports
  • Arts&Culture
  • Health
  • Miscellaneous
  • Technology
  • Environment
Articles
  • Opinion
  • Analysis
  • Blog
  • Features
Videos
  • NewsFeed
  • Video Features
  • Explainers
  • TV
  • Digital Series
Infographs
In Pictures
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Asia-Pacific
  • Europe
  • Latin America
  • MENA
  • Palestine
  • US & Canada
BREAKING
Commander-in-Chief of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, Major General Mohammad Pakpour: If the enemy makes a mistake, we will respond forcefully, just as we have over the past 12 days
Macron: Reaffirmed importance of using the path of negotiations regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities
Macron: Told 'Israel's' Netanyahu that he shares with him the objective that Iran should never have nuclear weapon
Macron: Reaffirmed to 'Israel's' Netanyahu the need for ceasefire in Gaza
Macron: Spoke to Netanyahu, highlighted mportance of respecting 'Israel'/Iran ceasefire
Iranian Health Ministry: Israeli aggression on Iran has resulted in the martyrdom of 627 people and the injury of 4,870 others across various provinces of the country
Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters mourns its commander, Ali Shadmani, who succumbed to severe wounds sustained during last week's Israeli aggression on Iran
Hamas: Any agreement must guarantee a cessation of aggression and war against our people, a permanent ceasefire, and a complete withdrawal of occupation forces from the Gaza Strip
Hamas: We affirm our continued positive engagement with the mediators' efforts and with any serious ideas or proposals that could lead to a comprehensive agreement
US President Donald Trump: US will talk with Iran next week

Ukraine Crushingly Defeated at ICJ

  • Kit Klarenberg Kit Klarenberg
  • Source: Al Mayadeen English
  • 16 Feb 2024 01:01
  • 28 Shares
6 Min Read

The ICJ's 13 judges ruled in Moscow’s favor in all but two instances. As we shall see, even these findings were highly questionable.

  • x
  • Ukraine Crushingly Defeated at ICJ
    The ICJ ruling was highly significant, and threw up a great many seismic findings, raising multiple grave questions (Illustrated by Hadi Dbouk to Al Mayadeen English)

On January 31st, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a damning ruling in a case brought by Ukraine, in 2017. It accused Moscow of almost every conceivable “terrorism” offence codified in international law, particularly supporting, sponsoring, and committing “terrorism” in Donbas, while racially discriminating against ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars in Crimea, since 2014. In the end, the Court’s 13 judges ruled in Moscow’s favour in all but two instances. As we shall see, even these findings were highly questionable.

The ruling was highly significant, and threw up a great many seismic findings, raising multiple grave questions. First, about the Ukrainian government’s narrative about events in Crimea and Donbas over the past decade, duly parroted and reinforced by Western journalists, foreign policy pundits, military, intelligence and security officials, and politicians every step of the way. Second, about what precisely Kiev was itself doing during its “anti-terrorist operation”, launched in April 2014 against “pro-Russian separatists”.

While Kiev’s most ardent Western advocates are now admitting the war is already lost, and mainstream news outlets almost daily publish dire reports pointing unambiguously to a total frontline collapse in the very near future, the ICJ’s groundbreaking findings were universally ignored by the media. But of course - a Western government and media apparatus actively complicit in the horrors inflicted in Donbas by Ukraine and its British- and US-trained and armed fascist paramilitaries can only be expected to remain eerily silent.

‘Proving Facts’

Several charges levelled by Ukraine in 2017 related to purported treatment of Crimea’s Tatar and Ukrainian population, following the peninsula’s reunification with Moscow in March 2014. Kiev argued that Russian authorities had thereafter engaged in a concerted, state-sanctioned campaign of measures “that discriminate against persons of Crimean Tatar origin based on their ethnic origin.” The ICJ brutally slapped down almost everyone, while severely indicting the quality of evidence supplied in their support.

For example, the Court was “not convinced” the Russian Federation had discriminated against any Tatar or Ukrainian on the explicit basis of their ethnicity, or that Ukraine-supplied evidence indicated “a pattern of racial discrimination” against anyone. Judges furthermore dismissed witness testimony attesting to these accusations “collected many years after the relevant events” Kiev provided, which was “not supported by corroborating documentation.” They ruled any and all such “evidence” must be “treated with caution”, and associated charges “had not been established” as a result”:

“The reports relied on by Ukraine are of limited value in confirming that the relevant measures are of a racially discriminatory character…Ukraine has not demonstrated…reasonable grounds to suspect that racial discrimination had taken place, which should have prompted the Russian authorities to investigate.”

Related News

Modern slavery in Ukraine… and antislavery resistance

Siberianisation and the pursuit of a new civilisational platform

A particularly striking excerpt of the judgement noted the ICJ “held that certain materials, such as press articles and extracts from publications, are regarded ‘not as evidence capable of proving facts’,” speaking volumes about just how seriously the world’s premier international justice court views Western media reporting on serious matters. Which is to say, not at all. Kiev cited a wealth of negative press coverage to support its arguments, and reports from government-funded NGOs, on the purported plight of Tatars post-reunification.

Ukraine also claimed post-reunification, Crimean authorities created “difficulty” for local residents by forcing them to choose between Ukrainian and Russian citizenship. Again, this was robustly rejected by the Court, which also noted, “the Russian Federation…produced evidence substantiating its attempts at preserving Ukrainian cultural heritage.” Meanwhile, other Moscow-supplied documentation showed “ethnic Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar organizations” were “successful in applying to hold events,” but “multiple events organized by ethnic Russians” were denied. In other words, officials were clearly unconcerned by the population’s ethnic origin.

Elsewhere, Kiev had invoked a 90% reduction in demand across Crimea “for school instruction in the Ukrainian language” as a sign authorities had deliberately suppressed teaching in Ukrainian. Yet again, the ICJ was unmoved, attributing this to not only “a dominant Russian cultural environment and the departure of thousands of pro-Ukrainian Crimean residents to mainland Ukraine,” but to a genuine desire by locals to be taught in Russian, not Ukrainian.

Nonetheless, the ICJ did find Moscow “violated its obligations of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,” as Russia did not adequately demonstrate “it complied with its duty to protect the rights of ethnic Ukrainians from a disparate adverse effect based on their ethnic origin.” This, despite the Court conceding it was “unable to conclude, on the basis of the evidence presented, that parents have been subjected to harassment or manipulative conduct aimed at deterring them from articulating their preference.”

‘Alleged Offenders’

On the other charges, the ICJ was particularly excoriating. Ukraine accused Moscow of presiding over a campaign of “terrorism” in Donbas, which included the July 2014 downing of MH17. Kiev moreover framed the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk “people’s republics” as terrorist factions, on a par with Al Qaeda. Judges overwhelmingly rejected these characterizations:

“The Court reaffirmed that an organization cannot be considered to be ‘terrorist’ just because one state labels it this way… [Neither the Donetsk and Lugansk “people’s republics” had] previously been characterized as being terrorist in nature by an organ of the United Nations.”

The ICJ furthermore found that, contrary to Western and Ukrainian allegations, Russia could not be found liable for facilitating terror activity against Kiev. Documentation supplied to that effect was considered “vague and highly generalized,” lacking anything like substantive evidence, let alone proof. Moscow was nonetheless found to have fallen short of its “obligation…to investigate allegations of the commission of terrorism financing offences by alleged offenders present in its territory.”

Even this flaccid finding was spurred by Russia simply not providing evidence it had upheld this “obligation” to the ICJ, and government of Ukraine. Moscow conversely did launch investigations into some “alleged offenders” named by Kiev, and handed over their results, which determined the individuals in question either “[did] not exist in the Russian Federation or their location could not be identified.”

In sum, Kiev was not fighting a counterinsurgency campaign against Russia-supported “terrorists”, and there is no serious indication Moscow was responsible for the litany of violent acts - including all-out invasion of Ukraine - attributed to the Kremlin following the US-orchestrated Maidan coup 10 years ago. Little consolation to the scores of independent researchers, journalists and activists who spent the past decade attempting to challenge prevailing Western narratives. Although evidently, the truth does eventually out, even if it’s ignored by the mainstream.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect Al Mayadeen’s editorial stance.
  • Russia
  • Ukraine
  • Crimea
  • ICJ
Kit Klarenberg

Kit Klarenberg

Investigative journalist.

Most Read

All
At the time of Vanunu’s whistleblowing, Western governments and intelligence agencies had been aware of "Israel’s" development of nuclear weapons for almost three decades. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Mahdi Rtail)

Hidden history: How 'Israel' acquired nukes

  • Opinion
  • 13 Jun 2025
Absent a full-scale American war on the Islamic Republic, Netanyahu has set up his regime and himself for a historic humiliation. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab el-Hajj)

The clock is ticking down to 'Israel’s' capitulation

  • Opinion
  • 18 Jun 2025
Trump's failures, 'Israel's' impasse and Iran's apocalyptic trump card

Trump's failures, 'Israel's' impasse and Iran's apocalyptic trump card

  • Opinion
  • 12 Jun 2025
'Israel' burns its deck while Iran plays its cards right

'Israel' burns its deck while Iran plays its cards right

  • Opinion
  • 17 Jun 2025

Coverage

All
War on Iran

More from this writer

All
Spying for enemies: Beware ‘intergovernmental’ organizations

Spying for enemies: Beware ‘intergovernmental’ organizations

At the time of Vanunu’s whistleblowing, Western governments and intelligence agencies had been aware of "Israel’s" development of nuclear weapons for almost three decades. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Mahdi Rtail)

Hidden history: How 'Israel' acquired nukes

It may well be due to the longstanding relationship between MI6 and HTS, via Inter Mediate, that Britain was the first Western country to recognise their assumption of government in Syria. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab El-Hajj)

How MI6 helped HTS seize Syria

Eurovision: NATO Psychological Warfare Tool

Eurovision: NATO Psychological Warfare Tool

Al Mayadeen English

Al Mayadeen is an Arab Independent Media Satellite Channel.

All Rights Reserved

  • x
  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Authors
Android
iOS