POLITICS ARMED CONFLICT

Describe the perspective of he EU in relation to your selected contemporary crisis (3 marks) 

The EU’s perspective on the armed conflict in Ukraine is strongly influenced by its valuing of the principle of lasting peace and security, and influenced by its commitment to solidarity for all member states. While Ukraine is not a member of the EU, it has applied to be a part of it, and borders the EU region, meaning that the consequences of the war against Ukraine has the potential to impact EU states which border Ukraine. Furthermore, the EU values the regulation of people movement within its borders; the influx of 4 billion refugees into the EU from Ukraine has prompted an EU response to the humanitarian and legal implications of this. 

Outline one short-term cause (within the last 10 years) of your selected contemporary crisis. (4 marks)

After years of escalating tensions over the rights of Russian citizens in Crimea and other border regions, and increasing anger from Russia at Ukraine’s growing connections to NATO and the EU, Russia, called on the United States and NATO to cease military activity in the region, and to commit to preventing Ukraine’s ascension to NATO, in mid 2021. These calls were rejected and instead sanctions against Russia were threatened. In response to this decision, which, in Russia’s view, threatened their security, Russian troops were amassed at the border, and in 2022, a full scale invasion occurred.

Describe one driver of conflict between global actors in relation to your selected contemporary crisis. (4 marks)

One of the drivers of the conflict between the two actors is arguably the Putin’s administration’s capacity to withstand significant diplomatic, military and economic pressure, as well as Putin’s capacity to retain his position as Russian president in the context of the significant harms these pressures create for Russian citizens. As an authoritarian leader whose economy is characterised by severe corruption, and whose public discourse is manipulated by the wide reach of the Russian state into mainstream media, Putin is a leader who is more impervious to sanctions and public outcry than many democratic leaders would be. Furthermore, while the sanctions and military manoeuvres enacted by his opponents have caused significant losses to Russian life and damage to their economy (estimates of the cost to the Russian economy are around $450 billion since 2022), Putin’s willingness to persist in the war in spite of these harms, and in part because of the former size of the Russian population and economy, makes him less vulnerable than many other leaders would be to their effects.

Explain the role of diplomacy in addressing your selected contemporary crisis. (6 marks)

Diplomacy, or the use of speeches, statements and negotiation to achieve political outcomes, has been deployed as a consistent tool of power in the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict. Armed conflict is most strikingly experienced as an expression of military power but in a nuclearized world there is a strong recognition that dialogue, and not weaponry, is a desirable tool for the expression of one’s political perspectives.

In the Russia-Ukraine war, the two warring parties have not engaged in direct diplomatic dialogue but have instead communicated through intermediaries, the most prominent of whom has been the United States of America. Donald Trump came to power in part on the platform of his capacity to make a ‘deal’ in all matters, and has sought the exercising of this skill in the current conflict by hosting talks with Putin and Zelensky, separately, to try to negotiate division of territory and compensation for ongoing military support from the USA, in Ukraine’s case.

Some commentators argue that these diplomatic talks have in fact prolonged the war because they give Putin a platform to argue that he will enact changes, but on terms that are favourable to his own domestic political goals, like a 3 day ceasefire in May 2025 which coincided with a Russian military parade, but did not respond to the Ukrainian request for a 30 day ceasefire that would meaningfully support civilian recovery. Furthermore, critics notes that diplomatic talks with Putin symbolically degrading Ukraine’s position by hosting talks about the state’s territories, without them having a representative in the room.

Analyse one driver in the conflict.

he fundamental driver of this armed conflict is the existence of divergent and incompatible perspectives between Russia and Ukraine regarding state sovereignty and national identity. Russia’s perspective is anchored in an ideological narrative of "historical unity," as articulated by Vladimir Putin, who famously argued that "Russians and Ukrainians [are] one people – a single whole". This viewpoint frames the conflict not as an invasion but as a necessary reassertion of a "sphere of influence" to prevent a Western-aligned liberal democracy from existing on its border. In direct opposition, Ukraine’s perspective is built on the legitimacy of its post-1991 independence and a sovereign right to pursue integration with the European Union and NATO. The relationship between these perspectives is defined by a "normative rivalry"; while Russia views NATO’s eastward expansion as an "unacceptable" security threat, Ukraine views alliance membership as a vital security guarantee. This clash is worsened by intransigence, where both states see their positions as existential, leading to a refusal to cooperate or negotiate on core territorial interests.

The significance of these clashing perspectives lies in how they have "rewired" the crisis into a prolonged "war of attrition," making a diplomatic resolution nearly impossible to reach. A major negative implication of this driver is the high resistance to compromise; for instance, the European Council has characterized Russia's actions as "blatant aggression" and a gross violation of international law, while Russia has dismissed peace proposals that do not include Ukrainian "unilateral surrender". However, a constructive implication of this clashing perspective is that it has mobilized "unprecedented unity" and solidarity among Western allies. The EU's perspective has led to over €88 billion in wide-ranging support for Ukraine, reinforcing the stability of the rules-based international order even as the conflict continues. Ultimately, as long as Russia views territorial control as "fundamental" and Ukraine, as stated by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, maintains that peace requires a restoration of its "1991 borders," these differing perspectives will continue to fuel the conflict and block any meaningful ceasefire

Analyse the causes and consequences of one contemporary crisis

A primary cause of the armed conflict in Ukraine is alliance tension stemming from the expansion of NATO and the European Union (EU) into regions Russia considers its "sphere of influence". This tension escalated following the 2014 Maidan Revolution, which ousted pro-Russian leadership in favor of a "pro-Europe" movement, leading to closer Western economic and political ties. In mid-2021, Russia demanded legally binding guarantees from the U.S. and NATO to cease military activity in Eastern Europe and permanently block Ukraine’s future accession. The rejection of these demands, coupled with Ukraine’s 2020 National Security Strategy expressing intent to join NATO, propelled the Kremlin to amass over 100,000 troops and launch a full-scale invasion in February 2022. This represents a strategic competition for global power, challenging established norms of state sovereignty and the rules-based international order. Paradoxically, the conflict has accelerated the exact outcomes Russia sought to prevent: driving Finland and Sweden to join NATO and prompting Ukraine to formally apply for both EU and NATO membership within days of the invasion

The war in Ukraine has significantly impacted on food price and the delivery of aid to other regions. Due to the war in Ukraine, a leading grain exporter, has seen a dramatic drop in it's exports. This has resulted in major food security concerns for millions of people around the world. The actions of the EU and the United Nations have helped curb the price rise, but the outlook remains difficult.
Before the war, around 90% of Ukraine's agricultural exports were transported by sea. After the start of the war, the Russian military blocked Ukraine's black sea ports and brough exports to a virtual standstill.

Analyse the impact of political actors’ interests on the causes, course and consequences of one contemporary crisis

The causes of the conflict are deeply rooted in the incompatible interests and perspectives of the primary belligerents regarding national identity and regional security.

• Russia’s National and Strategic Interests: Driven by an ideological belief in the "historical unity" of Russians and Ukrainians as "one people," Russia seeks to reassert dominance over former Soviet territories. Strategically, Russia’s interest is to halt the eastward expansion of NATO, which it perceives as a direct threat to its security

• The course of the crisis is defined by a war of attrition fueled by the refusal of actors to compromise on their core interests.

course:

• Intransigence and Stalemate: Both Putin and Zelenskyy remain absolutely committed to their territorial interests; Ukraine refuses any deal involving "unilateral surrender" of territory, while Russia maintains that territorial control is fundamental to any settlement. This clash has resulted in a stalemate where Russia attempts to use its larger population and industrial base to "wear its opponent down"

The consequences of the crisis are multifaceted, impacting global stability, regional economies, and human welfare.

• Humanitarian Impact and EU Interests: The EU’s interest in regional stability and solidarity led to the activation of a "temporary protection directive," granting residence and labor rights to over 4.2 million refugees. While this mitigated the crisis for many, it also exposed internal divisions; member states like Hungary have occasionally blocked aid packages (such as a $106 billion loan) to protect their own specific ties to Russia

Distinguish between different perspectives of global political actors on one contemporary crisis

Russia: The Kremlin views the conflict through the lens of "historical unity," arguing that Russians and Ukrainians are "one people" belonging to a single Russian nation. Russia's perspective emphasizes historical grievances, a rejection of Western "double standards," and a belief in the validity of expanding its empire into former Soviet territories. Strategically, Russia perceives the eastward expansion of NATO as an unacceptable threat to its security infrastructure.

• Ukraine: Conversely, Ukraine views the war as an existential struggle for sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity within its 1991 borders. Its perspective is defined by a "pro-Europe" movement that seeks to escape Russia's "sphere of influence" and integrate into liberal democratic structures like the EU and NATO to ensure national security

COMPETING GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES: China and Mongolia

• China: China advocates for a perspective that rejects "Cold War mentality" and the "strengthening and expansion of military blocs". While its "12-point plan" calls for respecting sovereignty, it simultaneously pushes for a rollback of unilateral sanctions, reflecting a desire to portray itself as a global leader distinct from the U.S.-led order.

• Mongolia: As an ICC member state, Mongolia’s perspective is driven by pragmatic national interest over international legal obligations. Its refusal to arrest Vladimir Putin in 2024 was motivated by extreme energy dependency, as it relies on Russia for 95% of its petroleum, highlighting a realist perspective where survival outweighs the enforcement of global norms

Discuss how global actors’ responses and their ability to resolve one contemporary crisis have contributed to creating political stability and/or change

ICC and stability
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has attempted to restore political stability by reinforcing the rules-based international order. By issuing arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova for the "unlawful deportation" of nearly 20,000 Ukrainian children, the ICC signaled that violating international humanitarian law carries long-term legal consequences. This is historically significant as the first time the ICC has sought to apprehend a representative of the UN Security Council. However, the ICC's limited ability to resolve the crisis is highlighted by its lack of a police force, relying instead on state cooperation. This was evidenced in September 2024 when Mongolia (an ICC member) refused to arrest Putin, prioritizing its national interest in energy security—importing 95% of its petroleum from Russia—over its legal obligations under the Rome Statute

Regional grouping and structural change

The European Union (EU) has utilized its economic and regulatory power to drive significant political and economic change. Through the REPowerEU roadmap and Regulation EU/261/2026, the EU has permanently shifted the European energy landscape, reducing its dependency on Russian gas from 45% to 12% by 2025. Additionally, the EU's response has contributed to regional stability through the temporary protection directive, which granted residency and labor rights to over 4.2 million refugees. Despite providing over €88 billion in aid by early 2024 (rising to 197billion∗∗by2026),the EU′ s internal stability is challenged by member states like Hungary,which has used its position to block or delay funding packages- ,such as a 106 billion loan, to protect its own ties to Russia

State Interests and the Shift in Global Norms

Russia’s actions have acted as a primary driver of geopolitical change, challenging the post-Cold War security architecture. By citing "historical unity" and claims of "genocide" to justify the 2022 invasion, Russia has undermined the principles of state sovereignty established by the 1648 Peace of Westphalia. This aggression has triggered an expansion of Western alliances, with Finland and Sweden joining NATO and Ukraine formally applying for EU and NATO membership. Furthermore, Russia’s suspension of the New START nuclear treaty in February 2023 represents a major change, ending over a decade of verified limits on strategic nuclear warheads

Evaluate the political significance of one contemporary crisis

Armed conflict fundamentally challenges established political norms, specifically the principles of state sovereignty and territorial integrity established by the 1648 Peace of Westphalia. By initiating a full-scale invasion to reassert a "sphere of influence" and pursue an ideological narrative of "historical unity," Russia has shifted the regional status quo into a state of active confrontation. Domestically, the conflict has "rewired" states for war; Russia has transitioned to an authoritarian "war economy" where funding for welfare and healthcare is crowded out by military spending, while Ukraine has undergone a government shake-up to maintain its "resilience" and focus on its "EU accession track"

The significance of the crisis extends beyond the battlefield into structural global changes. Economically, the conflict triggered a global food crisis and "food-flation" because Ukraine, as the "breadbasket of Europe," saw its grain exports blocked by the Russian navy, affecting food security for nearly 600 million people. Strategically, the war has led to the collapse of nuclear arms control, with Russia suspending the New START treaty, thereby reversing decades of progress in limiting strategic warheads. Furthermore, it has driven a permanent shift in energy trade, as the EU implemented the REPowerEU roadmap to legally phase out Russian gas imports by 2027

Armed conflict necessitates massive resource mobilization and the use of various power instruments. The scale of the response is quantifiable:

Financial/Military Aid: Ukraine has received approximately 188billion∗∗from the United States and197 billion from the European Union.

Economic Sanctions: The EU has adopted 19 packages of sanctions, freezing over €210 billion** of Russian central bank assets and targeting over 2,700 individuals.

Legal Measures: The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for high-ranking Russian officials**, including Vladimir Putin, marking the first time the leader of a permanent member of the UN Security Council has been targeted by the court

Construct an argument to evaluate the significance and effectiveness of global actors’ ability to respond to and resolve one contemporary crisis, using evidence from sources.

Global actors, particularly regional groupings like the European Union (EU), have demonstrated significant capacity to manage the consequences of conflict, even when unable to halt the fighting. The EU’s response is politically significant for its solidarity and its ability to act as a powerful regulatory actor. Through the activation of the temporary protection directive, the EU provided residence and labor rights to over 4.2 million Ukrainian refugees. Furthermore, the EU established the €50 billion Ukraine Facility to provide stable financing for recovery and modernization through 2027. Economically, the EU and its allies implemented 19 packages of sanctions aimed at maximizing pressure on the Russian "war machine". The Repower EU roadmap successfully reduced EU dependency on Russian gas from 45% to 12% by 2025, demonstrating an effective, albeit gradual, decoupling from Russian energy.

While institutions of global governance like the International Criminal Court (ICC) are significant for establishing legal accountability, they remain largely ineffective in resolving conflicts due to a lack of enforcement power. The ICC's issuance of arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin for the unlawful deportation of nearly 20,000 children was a landmark event, marking the first time the leader of a permanent member of the UN Security Council was targeted. However, the court relies entirely on the cooperation of member states. This effectiveness was undermined in 2024 when Mongolia, an ICC member, refused to arrest Putin during a state visit. Mongolia prioritized its national interest in energy security, importing 95% of its petroleum from Russia—over its international legal obligations, effectively stalling the court’s impact on the conflict's course.

EVALUATE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE CRISIS HAS CONTRIBUTED TO POLITICAL STABILITY AND CHANGE (10 Marks)

The Russia-Ukraine armed conflict has served as a primary catalyst for profound structural change in the global political and economic order while simultaneously fostering a defensive stability within regional alliances and authoritarian systems. While the crisis has disrupted decades of progress in nuclear arms control and energy trade, it has solidified the internal cohesion of the European Union (EU) and NATO, illustrating that political stability and change are "relational and multifaceted". Ultimately, the extent of political change has been more significant, as the conflict has permanently "rewired" the strategic interests and domestic economies of the primary actors involved.

Forces of political stability are most evident in the strengthened unity of Western regional groupings and the persistence of authoritarian control within Russia. The European Union has demonstrated "unprecedented unity" in its condemnation of Russia's "blatant aggression," providing over €88 billion in wide-ranging support and activating the temporary protection directive to provide immediate legal rights to over 4.2 million refugees. This response reflects a prioritization of the principle of lasting peace and security and the need for regulated people movement across its borders. Additionally, institutions of global governance like the International Criminal Court (ICC) have sought to uphold the rules-based international order by issuing arrest warrants for high-ranking officials, including Vladimir Putin, to deter future offences and reinforce the Geneva Conventions. Domestically, the Russian state has maintained stability through authoritarian suppression, using its control over media and the elimination of dissidents to withstand military losses and international isolation.

Conversely, the crisis has driven irreversible geopolitical and economic changes that have ended the post-Cold War era of integration. Strategically, the war led to the collapse of nuclear arms control, with Russia suspending its participation in the New START treaty, thereby reversing decades of progress in limiting strategic warheads. This shift is further marked by a permanent geopolitical realignment through NATO expansion, with previously neutral states like Finland and Sweden joining the alliance in 2022. Economically, the EU’s REPowerEU roadmap turned the phase-out of Russian energy into law, successfully reducing gas dependency from 45% to 12% by 2025. Globally, the conflict triggered a catastrophic food crisis; as the "breadbasket of Europe," Ukraine's blocked exports caused "food-flation" that remains 12-13% above pre-war levels, threatening the security of nearly 600 million people in developing nations. Finally, the humanitarian scale of the crisis—with nearly 11 million Ukrainians displaced—constitutes a massive demographic change that will require generational efforts in reconstruction and recovery

Evaluate the political significance to an actor's response to the crisis.

The European Union’s (EU) response to the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict is politically significant because it marks the transformation of the regional grouping from a primarily economic bloc into a decisive geopolitical actor committed to defending the rules-based international order. By providing unprecedented levels of financial, humanitarian, and strategic support, the EU has not only shaped the trajectory of the crisis but has also fundamentally "rewired" its own internal policies and external dependencies, demonstrating the profound capacity of regional actors to influence the course of a modern armed conflict.

Affects Politics

The EU’s response has deeply altered regional and domestic politics. It has solidified Ukraine’s identity as an "aspiring member" of the Union, with the EU providing a €50 billion Ukraine Facility to ensure the state can continue functioning by paying salaries and pensions while pursuing its "EU accession track". Domestically, the crisis led to the activation of the temporary protection directive, which bypassed traditional asylum hurdles to grant residence and labor rights to over 4.2 million Ukrainian refugees. However, the conflict also exposes internal political friction; for example, Hungary has used its position to block or delay significant aid packages, such as a $106 billion loan and a 54 billion euro package, to protect its own ties with the Kremlin.

Brings About Further Ramification

The EU’s response has triggered structural global changes, most notably in the energy sector. Through the REPowerEU roadmap, which has been codified into EU law, the Union is legally mandated to phase out Russian gas imports by 2027. This has resulted in a permanent shift in trade, as the EU’s dependency on Russian gas fell from 45% to 12% by 2025. Furthermore, the EU has utilized its economic authority to implement 19 packages of sanctions, effectively freezing approximately €210 billion of Russian central bank assets to diminish the state's ability to wage its armed conflict.

Captures the Attention of Global Actors

The scale of the EU’s involvement has acted as a focal point for global attention, positioning the Union as an "anchor for European security". The EU’s "steadfast resolve" and "unprecedented unity" in condemning Russia's "blatant aggression" captured the attention of the international community, encouraging 141 UN member states to vote in alignment with the EU and its allies to condemn the invasion. This high-level attention has forced other global actors to take sides, as seen in the formation of the "Coalition of the Willing" by European leaders to supplement aid.

Demands Responses from Global Actors

The EU’s aggressive use of economic power has demanded significant counter-responses from actors around the world. The implementation of EU oil embargoes and the G7 price cap forced Russia to radically redirect its fossil fuel exports toward China, India, and Turkey. Furthermore, the EU’s decision to ban the export of "dual-use" technologies has demanded a response from global supply chains, as entities in countries like Iran and North Korea have been targeted for aiding the circumvention of these restrictions.

Elicits a Prioritization of the Crisis

Global actors have had to prioritize the armed conflict above or below other competing national interests. The EU has prioritized Ukraine’s resilience "for as long as it takes," even at the cost of accepting significant hikes in domestic energy prices. Conversely, this prioritization has led to a de-prioritization of other issues; for instance, the United States has recently shifted its focus toward the crisis in Iran and the Middle East, leading to concerns from the EU and Ukraine about faltering international resolve. This competition for prioritization is also seen in states like Mongolia, which prioritized its 95% petroleum dependency on Russia over its legal obligation to the ICC to arrest Vladimir Putin

ANALYSE THE ROLE OF GLOBAL ACTORS IN SHAPING THE COURSE OF THE CRISIS:

Ukraine’s military has shaped the course of the crisis because of their unexpectedly firm resolve, capacity to draw on allied support, and the strong morale their leader, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has elicited from his people. While Russia initially anticipated a ‘blitzkrieg’ style assault on Ukraine would be sufficient to take the main city of Kyiv, according to the BBC,  in 2022 Russia “hit very strong Ukrainian resistance almost everywhere and faced serious logistical problems with poorly-motivated Russian troops suffering shortages of food, water and ammunition. Ukrainian forces were also quick to deploy Western supplied arms such as the law anti-tank system, which proved highly effective against the Russian advance”. By October 2022, the situation had changed dramatically and, having failed to take Kyiv, Russia withdrew completely from the north. The following month, Ukrainian forces recaptured the southern city of Kherson. The war shifted to the east of Ukraine near the Russia border instead; thus, the territorial ambitions were re-focused to reflect the reality of the strong Ukrainian resistance. 

According to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, this has resulted, more broadly, in Russia resorting to an “attrition strategy” to conquer Ukrainian territory and defeat the Ukrainian military. This has required a longer-term commitment to the conflict from Russia which draws on larger numbers of soldiers and greater economic reserves. At the same time, Ukraine has been able to acquire significant military and economic aid from its allies: Since January 2022, Ukraine has received about $175 billion in aid from the United States and $197 billion in aid from the European Union. This has enabled Ukraine to withstand these longer term attacks more effectively than would have been the case had they relied on their own military. Russia is estimated to have a total of 1.1 million active-duty soldiers, roughly 600,000 of which are deployed in or near Ukraine. In contrast, Ukraine has roughly 880,000 active-duty personnel. 

Furthermore, Ukraine’s use of advanced technology, which it has drawn, in part, from its allies, and in part from their own strategy in ingenuity, has prolonged their capacity to withstand Russia’s attempts to take their territory. Ukraine has used high-tech military drones, for example, to slow Russian advances and inflict high casualties. Ukraine reports having built 2.2 million drones last year and aims to produce 4.5 million this year. This occurs in spite of the difference in military spending between the two states: in 2023, Russia’s military budget was 151 bn dollars, versus Ukraine’s $61bn. Russia has advanced by only approximately 4,000 square kilometers in the 4 years since the war began, illustrating the capacity of Ukraine to shape the course of the war in spite of being outspent and outsized by Russia. 

The Ukrainian ability to motivate their own citizens and other leaders to support their cause, in conjunction with their savvy use of military strategy and technology, has prolonged their capacity to withstand Russia’s invasion, and thus, altered the course of the war, especially as it was expected to run by Russia.

ANALYSE THE LEGAL AND DIPLOMATIC PROCESSES USED BY ACTORS TO ADDRESS THE CRISIS. (6 MARKS)

Actors utilize multifaceted legal and diplomatic processes to address the existential threats armed conflict poses to state sovereignty and the rules-based international order. Legal mechanisms are primarily anchored in the Rome Statute, which allows the International Criminal Court (ICC) to pursue individual accountability for war crimes, such as the "unlawful deportation" of nearly 20,000 children by high-ranking Russian officials. This is complemented by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which issued a 2022 provisional ruling ordering an immediate suspension of military operations, though enforcement remains a significant limitation because these institutions rely on the voluntary cooperation of states. Diplomatically, global actors engage in mediation to seek ceasefires and territorial settlements, exemplified by the United States' twenty-point draft peace deal and China’s 12-point plan calling for the respect of sovereignty and the rejection of a "Cold War mentality". Furthermore, the United Nations mediated the Black Sea Grain Initiative to resolve the global food crisis precipitated by naval blockades, demonstrating diplomacy's importance in managing the far-reaching consequences of local crises. These processes are essential because modern armed conflict frequently settles into a "war of attrition" characterized by intransigent interests regarding territory and security alliances like NATO. While the primacy of national interest—such as Mongolia’s prioritization of energy security over its legal obligation to arrest Vladimir Putin—often hinders these efforts, legal and diplomatic instruments provide the only normative pathways to deter future crimes, prevent nuclear escalation, and protect the 90 percent of casualties who are now predominantly civilians.

EXPLAIN THE WAY A REGIONAL GROUPING's perspective has shaped the course of the crisis

The EU’s perspective, rooted in solidarity and regional stability, has transformed the grouping into a primary economic and humanitarian pillar of the conflict. Viewing the invasion as "blatant aggression," the EU shaped the war’s humanitarian course by activating the Temporary Protection Directive, granting legal rights to over 4.2 million refugees. Its commitment to Ukraine as an "aspiring member" led to the €50 billion Ukraine Facility, ensuring the state’s continued functioning and its long-term "EU accession track". Strategically, the EU’s desire to "maximise pressure" resulted in 19 packages of sanctions and the RE Power EU roadmap, which legally mandated a permanent decoupling from Russian energy. This perspective successfully reduced gas dependency from 45% to 12% by 2025. However, the EU’s course is often hindered by internal political disagreements; member states like Hungary have frequently blocked or delayed crucial aid packages, such as a $106 billion loan in early 2026, to protect their own specific ties to Russia. Ultimately, the EU's perspective has prevented a rapid Ukrainian collapse while forcing a permanent geopolitical realignment within Europe.

DESCRIBE THE CONSEQUENCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ON ARMED CONFLICT:

International law seeks to deter future atrocities by signaling that perpetrators will be pursued indefinitely,. The ICC believes that publicizing arrest warrants can contribute to the prevention of further crimes. In the Russia-Ukraine conflict, these legal maneuvers have reportedly "caused nervousness among the Russian elite," exerting psychological pressure on leadership. Furthermore, proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have strengthened the legal basis of international support for Ukraine, solidifying the global community’s stance against Russia's actions

EXPLAIN THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ADDRESSING THE CRISIS:

International law serves as a set of rules and norms designed to govern the actions of states and individuals in international relations, fostering a "rules-based international order". In the context of armed conflict, its role is to provide a structured framework for global relationships and expectations, seeking to limit the effects of violence through International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and the Geneva Conventions. These laws specifically aim to protect prisoners of war, civilians, and essential infrastructure such as hospitals and schools. Furthermore, international law provides formal mechanisms for dispute resolution, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which in 2022 issued a provisional ruling ordering Russia to suspend its military operations.

The Rome Statute specifically functions as the legal foundation for the International Criminal Court (ICC), establishing it as the first permanent international court dedicated to prosecuting individuals for the most serious crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression. Its primary role in addressing the crisis is to shift the focus from state-level actions to the criminal responsibility of individuals, ensuring that high-ranking officials cannot hide behind sovereign immunity.

Identify a challenge to the resolution of the contemporary crisis (armed conflict)

One challenge to the resolution of armed conflict is resistance to diplomatic resolutions. Both Russia and Ukraine have demonstrated consistent reluctance to enter into peace negotiations throughout the war, partly stemming from radically different understandings of what a just resolution would look like. For Ukraine, any resolution to armed conflict that does not involve the return of all occupied territory has not been considered acceptable. Russia in turn, has been unwilling to engage in peace talks that do not include commitments from Ukraine to abandon its ambitions to join NATO.

DESCRIBE THE INTEREST AN IGG HAS relating to ARMED CONFLICT:

Relating to armed conflict, The EU has a primary interest in maintaining peace and security within Europe, particularly because the conflict is in close proximity to its borders. Since Ukraine is bordered by four EU member states, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania, the EU views Russia’s aggression as a direct threat to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the region.

TWO INSTANCES OF COOPERATION

This was a UN-brokered agreement signed in July 2022 by Russia and Ukraine, with significant mediation from Turkey. The initiative was designed to address the global food crisis from armed conflict by allowing the safe passage of grain exports from three Ukrainian ports—Chornomorsk, Odesa, and Yuzhny/Pivdennyi—through the Russian naval blockade. Before its collapse in July 2023, the cooperation facilitated the export of over 20 million tons of grain, providing critical food supplies vulnerable populations vulnerable to armed conflict in Asia and Africa.

In March and April 2022, 43 member states cooperated to refer the situation in Ukraine to the ICC. This collective action enabled the ICC Prosecutor to launch an investigation into allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. This legal cooperation aims to uphold the rules-based international order by pursuing accountability for the most serious crimes, such as the unlawful deportation of children.

DESCRIBE A LEGAL PROCESS USED TO ADDRESS THE CONTEMPORARY CRISIS:

Sanctions are a legal process used by global actors to maximize pressure on a state and diminish its capacity to wage an illegal war. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict, the European Union has adopted 19 packages of sanctions designed to exhaust the resources necessary for Russia's aggression. These measures relate specifically to armed conflict by targeting the "Kremlin’s war machine" through the reduction of profitability in the energy sector, which historically funded between one-third and one-half of Russia's federal budget. For example, tariffs on Russian fertilizers and agricultural products are explicitly intended to reduce export revenues, thereby limiting the state's ability to finance its military campaign.