Yesterday at 20:01
Providing military aid to Ukraine, including weapons, does not make NATO a party to the war against Russia, said John Swords, NATO’s Chief Legal Adviser, during the Riga Conference panel “Plans, Resources, and Resolve: How to Help Ukraine Function.”
“From the perspective of international law, there is nothing legally problematic about providing assistance to Ukraine. It is the victim of blatant aggression and has the right to self-defense, which it exercises in accordance with international humanitarian law,” Swords stated.
He explained that NATO allies carefully manage escalation risks by avoiding direct involvement in the conflict, strictly adhering to international rules that govern warfare — namely, jus ad bellum (the right to war), jus in bello (rules of warfare), and the law of neutrality.
According to Swords, assisting Ukraine with military equipment “is not the use of force” under the UN Charter (Articles 2 and 4) or jus ad bellum. It also does not constitute an attack on Russia or direct participation in hostilities under jus in bello.
Regarding the outdated concept of neutrality, which once required third countries to remain impartial between warring parties, Swords said:
“That is clearly wrong in the era of the UN Charter and the prohibition of aggression. We cannot be expected to treat aggressors who violate the law the same way we treat their victims.”
As reported earlier, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy named the Netherlands, Germany, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway as the six countries that have contributed the most to the PURL program, through which Ukraine purchases weapons from the United States.
