Current analysis and data related to the Imposition, decisions and effects of sanctions in Ukraine
In July and September 2014, the EU imposed economic sanctions targeting exchanges with Russia in specific economic sectors. In March 2015, EU leaders decided to align the existing sanctions regime to the complete implementation of the Minsk agreements, which is foreseen for the end of December 2015. Following this decision, on 22 June 2015 the Council extended economic sanctions for six months, until 31 January 2016.
These restrictive measures limit access to EU primary and secondary capital markets for 5 major Russian majority state-owned financial institutions and their majority-owned subsidiaries established outside of the EU, as well as three major Russian energy and three defence companies. Impose an export and import ban on trade in arms, establish an export ban for dual-use goods for military use or military, end Russian user’s access to certain sensitive technologies and services that can be used for oil production and exploration. The EIB was requested to suspend the signature of new financing operations in the Russian Federation.
EU member states agreed to coordinate their positions within the EBRD Board of Directors with a view to also suspend the financing of new operations. The implementation of EU bilateral and regional cooperation programmes with Russia was re-assessed and certain programmes suspended. Highlighting, EU economic sanctions target certain exchanges with Russia in the financial, energy and defence sectors and dual-use goods.
Reality and International Law in Ukraine one year after Crimea
The article seeks to provide an assessment analysis of the situation in Ukraine one year after the Crimean crisis from the stand point of international law. It contends that the legal status of Crimea is still a question mark: although condemnation has spread throughout the international community, in practical terms the residents of the peninsula are treated as Russian citizens.
The Ukrainian situation therefore well exemplifies the continuous tension between fact and law under international law on territorial changes. The article identifies, among the others, some of the major challenges posed to international law in this fields. Firstly, the linkage between the right to self-determination and secession from the parent State is presented. Secondly, attention is paid to whether the use of referendum by Crimea may add new elements to the developing trend of seceding by referendum and if so, in what manner.
Thirdly, the article provides a critical study of the interplay between the declaratory theory of recognition and de facto territorial reapportionments, focusing in particular on the possibility of Ukraine to legitimately claim its –former?-territory over time. All these elements testify the necessity for the international community to engage in a constructive dialogue in which different understandings of international law regarding democratic statehood as well as territorial changes may be reconciled.