Lauri Mälksoo – författare

This is an open access title available under the terms of a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licence. It is free to read on the Oxford Academic platform and offered as a free PDF download from OUP and selected open access locations.This book addresses a simple question: how do Russians understand international law? Is it the same understanding as in the West or is it in some ways different and if so, why?It answers these questions by drawing on from three different yet closely interconnected perspectives: history, theory, and recent state practice. The work uses comparative international law as starting point and argues that in order to understand post-Soviet Russia's state and scholarly approaches to international law, one should take into account the history of ideas in Russia. To an extent, Russian understandings of international law differ from what is considered the mainstream in the West. One specific feature of this book is that it goes inside the language of international law as it is spoken and discussed in post-Soviet Russia, especially the scholarly literature in the Russian language, and relates this literature to the history of international law as discipline in Russia. Recent state practice such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia's record in the UN Security Council, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, prominent cases in investor-state arbitration, and the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union are laid out and discussed in the context of increasingly popular 'civilizational' ideas, the claim that Russia is a unique civilization and therefore not part of the West. The implications of this claim for the future of international law, its universality, and regionalism are discussed.

This is an open access title available under the terms of a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licence. It is free to read on the Oxford Academic platform and offered as a free PDF download from OUP and selected open access locations.This book addresses a simple question: how do Russians understand international law? Is it the same understanding as in the West or is it in some ways different and if so, why?It answers these questions by drawing on from three different yet closely interconnected perspectives: history, theory, and recent state practice. The work uses comparative international law as starting point and argues that in order to understand post-Soviet Russia's state and scholarly approaches to international law, one should take into account the history of ideas in Russia. To an extent, Russian understandings of international law differ from what is considered the mainstream in the West.One specific feature of this book is that it goes inside the language of international law as it is spoken and discussed in post-Soviet Russia, especially the scholarly literature in the Russian language, and relates this literature to the history of international law as discipline in Russia. Recent state practice such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia's record in the UN Security Council, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, prominent cases in investor-state arbitration, and the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union are laid out and discussed in the context of increasingly popular 'civilizational' ideas, the claim that Russia is a unique civilization and therefore not part of the West. The implications of this claim for the future of international law, its universality, and regionalism are discussed.

Russia, the Soviet Union, and Imperial Continuity in International Law explores the history of imperial ideas and practices in Russian and Soviet engagements with international law. This volume traces the role of international legal doctrines and arguments in facilitating the expansion of the Russian Empire, their transition into Soviet Russia post-1917, and their use after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991. Particular attention is paid to Russian and Soviet international legal doctrines concerning the termination of treaties (clausula rebus sic stantibus), identity and continuity of Russia in the context of state succession, hegemonic doctrines such as the great power status of Russia (or the Soviet Union), and various interpretations of balance of power and spheres of influence, including the doctrine of socialist international law. In building its narrative, the book draws extensively on previously under-studied international law periodicals published in Russia and the Soviet Union, including the Soviet Yearbook of International Law, Soviet State and Law and Moscow Journal of International Law.

In Russia and European Human-Rights Law: The Rise of the Civilizational Argument, Lauri Mälksoo and his co-authors critically examine Russia's experiences as part of the European human-rights protection system since its admittance to the Council of Europe in 1998. The authors combine legal and constructivist international-relations theory perspectives in studying Russia's practice and rhetoric as a member of the Council of Europe and a subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights. Certain aspects of human-rights doctrine and practice in Russia are particularly highlighted: the increasing impact of Orthodox Christian teachings on the Russian government's ideology, the situation with media freedom, freedom of religion, etc. The authors draw widely on Russian sources and media. The questions whether modern-day Russia truly fits in the human-rights protection system of the Council of Europe, and whether a margin of appreciation will suffice when dealing with Moscow, are highly relevant in contemporary European politics.