Access to water in Donbass and Crimea: Attacks against water infrastructures and the blockade of the North Crimea Canal

• Author: Sondra Faccio,Marco Pertile
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12316
• Published date: 01 April 2020
• Date: 01 April 2020

56  

|

  RECIEL. 2020;29:56–66.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/reel

1 | INTRODUCTION

The events lead ing to the Russian annex ation of Crimea origi nated

from the ‘Europ ean movement’ protest s of late 2013. The movement

asked for closer coo peration with the Eu ropean Union, whi ch the

Ukrainian president prevented. Protests turned into revolution and

led to the overth row of the government in Feb ruary 2014. Meanwhil e,

a pro-Russia moveme nt took power in Crimea , backed by the pres-

ence of Russian troo ps that soon after the overth row of the govern-

ment had moved into th e region. On 11 March 2014, a ‘Declar ation of

independen ce of the Republic of Crimea’ was ado pted, followed by a

referendum.1 The majority of Cr imeans voted to join the Ru ssian

Federation, w hile Russian troops kept watch. O n 17 March 2014, the

Republic of Crimea declared its independence from Ukraine and sub-

mitted a formal r equest to the Russian government to b e integrated

into Russia. The day af ter, the Autonomous Rep ublic of Crimea and

the City of Sevas topol were annexed by the Rus sian Federation.2

It is by now widely acce pted that such events amou nt to a forc-

ible annexation prohibited by international law.3 In 2014 and in

2016, the United Nati ons General Assembl y (UNGA) adopted res-

olutions aff irming its commit ment to Ukraine’s sovereig nty and

territorial int egrity, underscoring the inval idity of the referendum

and condemning t he occupation of Crim ea by the Russian

Federation.4 In 2017, the International Crimin al Court (ICC) quali-

fied the situat ion within the territor y of Crimea and Sevastopol as

an international armed conflict.5 More recently, the same le gal ar-

1 ‘Statemen t of the Ministr y of Foreign Affa irs of Ukraine’ (11 Mar ch 2014) <https ://mfa.

gov.ua/en/press-cente r/news/19328-zajava-minis terst va-zakor donnih-sprav-ukrajini>.

2 For an overvi ew of the events, se e N Tünde and C Maria n, ‘The War Whic h Brings in the

Cold – Ukrain e and Crimea – Mas kirovka and Dis informatsia’ (2 014) 2 Research and

Science Today Sup plement 87; P Dumbe rry, ‘Requiem f or Crimea: Why Tribu nals Should

Have Decline d Jurisdicti on over the Claims of U krainian Inve stors agains t Russian under

the Ukrain e–Russia BIT’ (2018 ) 9 Journal of Inter national Disp ute Settleme nt 506,

507–508; J Bering, ‘ The Prohibiti on on Annexatio n: Lessons from C rimea’ (2017) 49 New

York Universit y Journal of Inte rnational La w and Politics 748 , 755–756.

3 Bering (n 2) 755–756, 768; Dumb erry (n 2) 511; M Arcari, ‘ Violazione d el Divieto di Uso

della Forza , Aggressio ne o Attacco Arm ato in Relazione a ll’Interve nto Militare de lla

Russia in Crim ea?’ (2014) 2 Diritt i Umani e Diritt o Internaziona le 476; A Tancredi, ‘The

Russian Anne xation of the Cri mea: Questio ns Relating to the U se of Force’ (2014)

Questions of Int ernational Law 5.

4 UNGA ‘Territo rial Integrit y of Ukraine’ UN D oc A/RES/68/262 (27 March 2 014); UNGA

‘Situatio n of Human Rights i n the Autonomou s Republic of Cri mea and the Cit y of

Sevastopo l (Ukraine)’ UN D oc A/RES/71/205 (19 Dec ember 2016); Nort h Atlantic

Council, ‘S tatement by the N orth Atlanti c Council on the So -called Refer endum in

Crimea’ (17 March 2014) <https ://www.nato.int/cps/en/natoh q/news_108030.

htm?selec tedLo cale=en>; Org anization for S ecurity and Co -operation i n Europe (OSCE)

Parliamen tary Assem bly, ‘Resolutio n on Clear, Gross and U ncorrected V iolations of

Helsinki Pr inciples by the Ru ssian Federat ion’ (2014) <https ://www.oscepa.org /meeti

ngs/annual-sessi ons/2014-baku-annual-sessi on/2014-baku-final-decla ratio n/1850-06>.

5 Internatio nal Criminal Co urt (ICC), ‘Rep ort on Prelimi nary Exami nation Activi ties 2017’

(4 December 20 17) 88 <https ://www.icc-cpi.int/ite ms Docum ents/2017-PE-rep/2017-

otp-rep-PE_ENG.pdf>.

DOI: 10 .1111/reel .12316

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Access to water in Donbass and Crimea: Attacks against water

infrastructures and the blockade of the North Crimea Canal

Marco Pertile  | Sondra Faccio

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsi ngton Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Stre et, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Correspondence

Email: marco.pertile@unitn.it This article analyses two situations currently endangering water security in Donbass

and Crimea, highlighting the international law obligations of the actors involved. First,

the article analyses the ongoing armed conflict in Donbass, exploring what responsibili-

ties may be envisaged under the applicable rules of international humanitarian law and

international criminal law for the actors involved in the continuous attack and damaging

of water facilities. Second, the article focuses on the legality of Ukraine’s decision to

block the North Crimea Canal, thereby stopping the flow of water towards the occu-

pied territory of Crimea. The question is whether this action can be qualified as a lawful

sovereign decision or whether there are international rules limiting Ukraine’s discretion.

The article analyses the legal obligations of both Ukraine and the Russian Federation

under general international law, international humanitarian law and human rights law.