Misuse of humanitarian intervention for political gain: Russia-

Ukraine war.

David Ghavtadze

School of Governance
Ethics of War: the virtues of Ethics of War and its Limitations
Lecturer: Tako Jobava
 I. Introduction
From the start of the humanity people have been facing challenges which still are able to inflict

massive damage. To increase quality of human life ancient people formed pre-state societies

such as tribes, bands, chiefdoms. Before common era first as estimated unified state was created

– Ancient Egypt. All formations were created to address problems concerning humans, but what

should people do if their state is unable/unwilling to help them? In order to address this issue

some countries have acknowledged that they have responsibility to protect not only their

population, but other people as well. Such behavior is called humanitarian intervention.

However, this measure has been and still is used for wrongful purposes.

Often, before 20th century, countries had been using it to achieve their own interests, rather than

humanitarian goals. Humanitarian intervention was used as a curtain, to hide real desires from

the people, not deeply involved in politics. However, this situation significantly changed after

international organizations were created, with the main goal of establishing peacefulness, safety

and international cooperation. The U.N. made it clear that it’s illegal to intervene in other state’s

territory unless it is used to defend yourself or is given right to do so by the Security Council.

However, this change hadn’t addressed the problem of suffering, caused by either not having

desire or not having opportunity to at least alleviate problems of people. Holocaust and lately

Bosnian and Rwandan genocides, which happened in 1990’s, showed to the whole world that

international society was ineffective to stop such events and that they should work on creating

environment, which will enable them to act urgently, if it needed to do. In the start of the 21 st

century, in 2005, R2P (responsibility to protect) was approved to be a tool to save the world from

such tragedies.
Despite such changes, 21st century is still a period when country can infringe on the sovereignty

of state proving that they are doing it with just cause, even though that they have neither moral or

legal right to do so. Most recent example of such action is Russia’s intervention in Ukraine in

February 24, 2022. Despite the fact that international society doesn’t justify Russia’s behavior,

these type of explanation of starting a war is used to persuade people in internal area that war is

necessary and make them fuel the war, by for example joining the army. Regular people have

more and more influence on country’s foreign policy as time passes. Because of propaganda,

some people from other countries, support Russia in this war, are therefore making their

governments more cautious when declaring their help for Ukraine or at least their position about

it. Unfortunately, not only Russia is using Humanitarian Intervention as an excuse, also other

states are using similar excuse to justify starting a war. If this type of misinformation won’t be

countered by facts proving it wrong, then more countries will start armed conflicts and main

purpose of humanitarian intervention, which is to alleviate human suffering, won’t be achieved.

It’s worth mentioning that humanitarian intervention was and still is used for just purposes too.

In some cases, coalition of democratic countries, with help of the U.N. use humanitarian

intervention for right aims. Undemocratic states use this to justify their actions. They lie about

having same goals as democratic states have, like nothing is different between them. Because

people do not have at all or have little access to the different information sources, they often

believe that and justify behavior of their countries.

This paper will firstly try to define what is humanitarian intervention and and what is the

difference between using it for just and unjust reasons but also argue that Russia misused

concept of humanitarian intervention, in order to achieve non-humanitarian goals. Vladimir

Putin, president of Russia, not only didn’t alleviate problems of people in Ukraine with his so-
called humanitarian intervention, but also gained some political influence over Ukraine, which

was his initial aim.

Research question
How did Russia misused concept of humanitarian intervention for its own gains in Ukraine
2022?

II. Literature Review

In Elias Gotz’s and Per Ekman’s article “Russia’s War Against Ukraine: Context, Causes and

Consequences “authors review some reasons why Putin has started a war. They explain his

decision by focusing on his imperial ambitions, external pressures and domestic factors. Authors

focus on Putin’s mindset and geopolitical accounts. By geopolitical accounts, they mean t West’s

growing political and strategic Ties with Ukraine. These are reasons why authors think that these

were main reasons, but not only, why Russia invaded Ukraine almost 3 years ago.

In article called “Humanitarian Intervention and Pretexts for War” by Ryan Goodman, author

argues that allowing humanitarian intervention can possibly decrease a number of conflicts

started by aggressive states. To do that he firstly finds an argument against a legalizing

humanitarian intervention and then examines them. Paper says that one of the biggest challenges

of humanitarian intervention is a fear of powerful states starting wars for their own purposes.

Author doesn’t argue that Humanitarian Intervention Should be legal, but writes that previously

mentioned argument shouldn’t be a reason to deter its legalization.

moral thing to do, and others say that it’s a new form of violating a sovereignty. According to

Britannica , humanitarian intervention is : “actions undertaken by an organization or

organizations (usually a state or a coalition of states) that are intended to alleviate extensive

human suffering within the borders of a sovereign state” (Britannica 2019).

People believing in morality of Humanitarian Intervention, think that sovereignty isn’t absolute

and it can be violated if it is needed to save people suffering from either natural disasters or

events caused by inactivity or activity of government. From this point of view, sometimes

governments use concept of sovereignty as a shield to do whatever they want and however they

want. This view includes thinking that one’s rights can be violated, if that person/state is

violating someone else’s fundamental rights or doing nothing to stop this violation.

Humanitarian intervention involves not only military aspect, but financial and diplomatic

measures as well. In this paper, case-study will be about military intervention.

People opposing humanitarian intervention think that despite noble causes, often said by people

supporting humanitarian intervention or states doing it, real reason is to achieve something else.

By that opinion Humanitarian Intervention is a tool to increase an influence on other state or

even mechanism to subdue a country. Opponents of Humanitarian Intervention do not justify

breaking the concept of sovereignty. By that view, if sovereignty won’t be an absolute, even

more people will be suffering from wars started for that reason, therefore Humanitarian

Intervention will only harm people and not achieve its initial great goals.

Humanitarian Intervention for some people is considered as a “paradox” because of its nature. In

theory, it’s a little bit hard to understand how can armed intervention be conducted to save
people. Even though that intervention for example in Kosovo raises concerns about casualties, it

is clear that nonintervention leads to even more death and human suffering. Example proving

that is inactivity of International society in preventing Rwanda genocide, where more than 800

000 people were victims (Britannica 2024).

IV. Differences between using Humanitarian Intervention

In order to determine whether Russia conducted Humanitarian Intervention way it’s should be

conducted or used it for different reasons, firstly paper will try to review ethical dilemmas

surrounding intervention in other country for noble reasons. These dilemmas will show

difference between conducting intervention for humanitarian reasons and for political reasons.

It is important for country/countries intervening in other state to not violate an international law.

Compliance with established ethical norms gives legitimacy and legal justification to that kind of

action. Without these two, regimes who want an expansion will have an excuse about why they

crossed borders of state while breaking the international law. Without legal justification global

stability and peace will be in danger and that will cause even more threat to humanity.

When Humanitarian Intervention is misused, states do not care about International Law and do

not try to be in compliance with it. Logic for such behavior is pretty simple. International law

prohibits countries misusing concept of humanitarian intervention; therefore, state’s initial aims

cannot be achieved.

It is important to note that even if intervention is legal, international law is still in use, because it

monitors not only pre-intervention time but also how action is conducted. State might have
decent cause to intervene, however their possible wrongdoing should be outlawed, and that is

done by international law. Those countries which intervene for political reasons do not act at all

or do not act primarily for people’s interests, but behave in a way that it is only beneficial for

them. By that they are breaking the international laws.

The United Nations is important tool to prevent humanitarian intervention usage for political

causes. The UN helps countries to work together and ensures that humanitarian actions involve

multiple countries and international organizations. This is important because involvement of

multiple sides minimizes the risk of misusing humanitarian intervention.

However, problem with this is that undemocratic state might intervene with its puppet/ another

undemocratic state to say that humanitarian action was done not only by them and that

countries where balancing each other, so that no one can act primarily for their interests. That’s

why the U.N. involvement is necessary, so that even coalition of countries/ international

organizations could be controlled.

Respecting the sovereignty is biggest difference. Even though that intervention, doesn’t matter

legal or illegal, done by legitimate actor or not, is already bypassing concept of sovereignty, it’s

still should be protected and not violated. It involves that countries should only be doing things,

helping achieving humanitarian goals. While states who have another goals, do not respect

sovereignty and do things, that aren’t necessary for achieving noble goals. Some actions can be

breaking the sovereignty but in other situation not. For example, organizing coup against

government, which oppresses its population, to alleviate human suffering is permissible,

however, organizing coup in order to take power in your own hands and use it for different aims

isn’t just and goes against the concept of Humanitarian Intervention.

this is just cause, however, after that they keep using their gained power for different reasons.

That’s a misuse, even though that initial goal was achieved.

V. Case Study: Russia’s intervention in Ukraine

Whole world was shocked by Russia’s invasion in Ukraine in 24 February, 2022. While

Europe thought that time of wars on continent was in past, Vladimir Putin announced that his

country has started “special military intervention” against Ukraine. This war ruptured relations

between two countries for many years to come and has significantly weakened Russia’s ties with

western world.

Putin’s aggression towards Ukraine started at Crimea almost 11 years ago. 2014 was the

year when Putin ordered to capture a peninsula. At 20 th of February Russia’s first military

vehicles were spotted in Crimea. Two days later Viktor Yanukovych, ex-president of Ukraine,

appeared in Crimea after he run from Kyiv. At that time there were mass protests against him in

capital of the country. At 27 th of February Russian forces are occupying the Crimean Parliament,

while Kremlin doesn’t admit that Russian forces are at Crimea. However, day after that Russian

soldiers admit to journalists that they are indeed from Russia.

While Ukraine was having “Revolution of Dignity”, protests started in Lugansk and

Donetsk, however unlike Kyiv, protestants were holding Russian flags. Locals started to realize

that some people on streets weren’t Ukrainians but were from different cities of Russia. This

people were attacking pro-Ukrainian people. At first of march, protesters holding Russian flags

ask Kremlin to send troops to defend them from “western Ukrainian fascism”. It won’t be a
surprise to tell that Russian media was using same words to describe what was happening in

other parts of Ukraine. At Donetsk, Protesters put Russian flag above administration building,

same in Lugansk. After that, for next few years, this conflict was considered to be frozen.

However, on 24 February, 2022, almost 3 years ago, Russia has invaded Ukraine, by that

starting a war which caused more than 500 000 soldiers either killed or wounded from both

sides. Its difficult to say how many soldiers Russia has lost because they are hiding that

information, however it is considered that 120 thousand Russian troops have died and 180 000

have been injured. Ukrainian officials say that 70 thousand of their soldiers have died at this war

and at least 100 000 wounded.

5.2 Russia’s decision- making

On 24 February, 2022, Putin has declared the start of special military operation in

Ukraine. Real reasons are still debatable. Some think that Putin just wants to conquer whole

world, others think that he truly believes that Ukraine is territory of Russia and others think that

he was afraid that Ukraine with NATO would attack him first. However, Putin said that aim of

intervention is to protect people, who for the last 8 years were made fun of and even experienced

genocide by Kiev regime and for that Russia will try to disarm Ukraine and aim for Ukraine

without Nazi’s. In this same video he said that Russia’s plan isn’t to occupy Ukrainian territory.

One of the main topics which Putin was discussing was violating people’s rights in

Ukraine, whose only hope is Russia. He said that there were no other possible measures to help

its people.
 Firstly, let’s review that. Even if Ukraine was really violating rights of some people,

that’s not a reason to intervene in a country. One might argue that paper said that humanitarian

intervention is used when state is either unable or unwilling to alleviate human suffering.

However, that’s not a case. If there really was a case of violating someone’s rights, Russia

should have said it to international public, sue Ukraine in International Courts and etc.

Unlike other cases where there was a tangible fact proving that people’s rights were

violated, there still isn’t any evidence of system either violating people’s rights in such level that

other country’s help is needed. Take for example Rwanda, in that country more than 800 000

people were victims of genocide and that information is available for everyone. Russian

president hasn’t declared neither at the start of the war neither after it how many people were

“suffering” from Ukrainian government. Paper’s position is based on ICJ judgement, which was

unable found any tangible evidence of Ukraine committing genocide in the Donbas region. This

lines from ICJ document prove that Russia just made up all this allegations : “ there is no

credible evidence that Ukraine is responsible for committing genocide in violation of the

Genocide Convention in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine” (INTERNATIONAL

COURT OF JUSTICE 2025)

Nonexistence of facts in Putin’s speech only makes stronger the narrative that Putin is

misusing Humanitarian Intervention. However, there are many facts of Russia violating human

rights, not only rights of people on occupied territories, but on its own territory as well.

Therefore, person violating human rights and being war criminal because of unlawful

deportation of children, cannot be entering other state’s territory in order to alleviate human

suffering.
 One of the main things proving that Russia is misusing Humanitarian Intervention is luck

of international involvement in its actions. It’s common practice to conduct humanitarian

intervention with help of other countries. By conducting this so called “humanitarian

intervention” Russia is rising concerns about its behavior. If goals were truly noble, Russia

would have used help of other countries, because they would have been more effective.

Not only other countries didn’t help Russia in this “Humanitarian Intervention”, but

almost no one recognized the need of it. Whole civilized world agreed that there was no

genocide in Ukraine and that Russia is conducting a war in Ukraine ant not an action aimed to

achieve noble goal.

Also, there wasn’t and still isn’t Adherence to international law. Russia broke and is still

breaking all international laws. They are made to minimize casualties during Humanitarian

Interventions. One of the infamous examples of Russia violating international law, is usage

attacks on civil areas. Those attacks violate the Geneva Conventions. Non-governmental

organization “Amnesty International” declared that Russia’s army has used explosive weapons,

such as ballistic missiles in areas which are populated densely. (AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

2022).

Probably the best example of Russia misusing humanitarian intervention is declaring the

annexation of 4 Ukrainian regions, which are: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

Russia declared that referendums where held in these regions and that people decided that they

want to join Russia, however no one recognizes this election except Russia’s puppet states or its

allies, so this fact is an example of having no balance between conducting Humanitarian

Intervention and respecting a sovereignty of a state.

of starting “special military operation” however, this reason is one of the most often mentioned

reason by Russian propaganda and that’s a reason why it should be discussed.

VI. Conclusion

To conclude, Humanitarian Intervention, despite that it is used many countries for noble

reasons, was used by Russia to gain control over a Ukraine. Russia intervened without just cause,

without involvement of other actors, both countries and international organizations and therefore

violated international law. Most importantly, Russia took control over some territories of

Ukraine after using Humanitarian Intervention.

Bibliography

1.nytimes.2023.” Troop Deaths and Injuries in Ukraine War Near 500,000, U.S. Officials Say”. Accessed
February 6, 2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html
2. International Court of Justice. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (South Africa v. Israel): Order of 31 January 2025. The Hague: ICJ, 2025.
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/182/182-20250131-pre-01-00-en.pdf.
3.Kremlin.2022. Address by the President of Russian Federation. Accessed February 6, 2025.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843
4. Holzgrefe, J. L., and Robert O. Keohane, eds. Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal and Political
Dilemmas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
5. Götz, Elias, and Per Ekman. 2024. “Russia’s War Against Ukraine: Context, Causes, and
Consequences.” Problems of Post-Communism 71 (3): 193–205. doi:10.1080/10758216.2024.2343640.
6. Amnesty International. 2022. Russian Military Commits Indiscriminate Attacks During the Invasion
of Ukraine. February 25. Amnesty International.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/02/russian-military-commits-indiscriminate-attacks-during-
the-invasion-of-ukraine/.