REVISTA EdeDC

Authors : Dr. Yoochul Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.79425/rev.v5i1.15-24

Published Date: 2025-03-02

Abstract:
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, marked by Russia's military invasion, has now entered its second year, with no apparent resolution in sight. A notable aspect of this war is the active discourse and legal proceedings concerning war crimes, with both Russia and Ukraine accusing each other and prosecuting opposing soldiers. The international community is also engaged in addressing not only war crimes but also the legality of the conflict itself, utilizing various platforms such as the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC initiated an investigation shortly after the invasion and issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin on war crimes charges. These developments reflect the strengthening of international humanitarian and human rights norms and underscore the heightened expectation for justice in the context of war crimes. Concurrently, discussions are underway regarding potential 'exit strategies' for a ceasefire. While some argue that war crime prosecutions might hinder ceasefire efforts, historical precedents suggest that such prosecutions can be integral to post-conflict stability. This paper explores the role of war crime prosecutions within exit strategies, positing that these prosecutions are crucial for the transition from military conflict to peace. By examining historical cases, such as the Nuremberg Tribunal and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the paper aims to refine the concept of exit strategies and expand policy options by highlighting the strategic objectives shared between ending conflicts and establishing long-term peace.