Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits Member States from using force directed against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The provision States and i quote ““All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations”
The only exception to the above prohibition is self-defense under Article 51 of the UN charter which is not the case here.
Consequent upon the above, Russia has no right under International law and International Customary law to attack Ukraine.
My position is not based on any conspiracy theory or any pre-emptive motive, but clear provisions of the UN Charter and other International and regional treaties which Russia is a signatory to.
This gross display of aggression against Ukraine by Russia does not fall within self-defence which is the exception to the prohibition of armed attack under the UN Charter and that doctrine is not applicable here.
The right to self-defense is not an open-ended right. To be valid under International Customary, it is expected to have these three elements:
1. It must be necessary
2. It must he proportionate
3. It must be immediate.
The question is, did this attack fulfill this three elements? If No there can never be any justification of the attack.
Remember this is basically the first time any sovereign State is invading another and completely taken over her territory. It is quite different from what we experience in the case Syria, Lybia and others which was seen as a technical humanitarian intervention.
NATO and the US made repeated efforts to to engage Russia on the part of diplomacy but Russia was bent of the armed attack. It was show of of force and they were ready to damn the consequences.