Thesis and Its Purpose
Russian propaganda claims that because the US intervenes in other countries and has 'spheres of influence,' Russia supposedly has the same right. The main goal of this narrative is to legitimize aggression and justify invasions of sovereign states, framing them as 'security measures' and 'protection of interests.'
Historical Context of the US
The US has indeed participated in international operations, but key points are:
- Most actions are sanctioned by international organizations (UN) or coalitions;
- In cases of questionable legitimacy, the US faces international criticism and legal procedures;
- This fundamentally differs from Russia's unilateral actions, such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014 or the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
International Law and "Spheres of Influence"
International law clearly prohibits:
- Use of force against the territorial integrity of other states (UN Charter, Article 2(4));
- Interference in the internal affairs of other states;
- Establishing spheres of influence through threats, coercion, or military force.
Any violations by other states do not grant Russia the right to act similarly.
Russia's Illegal Military Operations
Historical and contemporary examples show that Russia regularly violates international law:
- Hungary 1956 — suppression of the uprising by Soviet troops;
- Czechoslovakia 1968 — Warsaw Pact troops entering to suppress reforms;
- Afghanistan 1979–1989 — invasion without the request of a legitimate government, prolonged occupation;
- Georgia 2008 — invasion of South Ossetia and Abkhazia;
- Moldova/Transnistria — support of armed separatists and military presence;
- Ukraine 2014–2025 — annexation of Crimea and full-scale invasion without legitimate international mandate (UN Resolutions).
Each of these cases has been recognized by most countries as a violation of international law.
Principle of Individual Responsibility
Internationally, the principle of individual and state accountability applies. Violations by other states do not exempt Russia from responsibility for its actions. Each actor is responsible for:
- Use of force against the territorial integrity of other countries (UN Charter, Art. 2(4));
- Annexation of territories without the consent of the legitimate government (UN General Assembly Res. 68/262 on Crimea, GA Res. 68/262);
- War crimes, including attacks on civilians and infrastructure (Rome Statute of the ICC);
- Interference in the internal affairs of other states (UN Charter, Art. 2(7)).
Legal practice and precedents (e.g., ICJ rulings on Crimea and Georgia) confirm that each violation is assessed independently, and the justification 'others also violate' has no standing in international law.
Double Standards and Propaganda Manipulation
Russian propaganda employs moral equivalence — falsely equating moral and legal responsibility:
- "If someone else did wrong, then we can too";
- "History justifies us" — attempts to frame past actions of other countries as legitimation;
- In practice, each case is evaluated according to international norms: Russia's actions are deemed illegal, regardless of US or other states' behavior (ICJ, Crimea Case).
This technique creates the illusion of 'equal rights,' distracting society from analyzing facts and real legal consequences.
Conclusion
The myth of 'Russia's equal right to spheres of influence' is a propaganda manipulation with no legal basis. International law and practice show:
- Russia bears full legal responsibility for its actions, including invasions, annexation, and human rights violations;
- Comparison with the US or other countries does not remove guilt or serve as justification;
- The propaganda technique aims to legitimize aggression, demoralize the population, and reduce critical perception of international law;
- Understanding facts and referencing international resolutions, conventions, and precedents dismantles the illusion of 'equal rights' and reveals Russia's real accountability.
Main Sources and Materials
About the Authors
This article was curated and verified by a team of experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis. Contributors have 15+ years of experience in research, legal documentation, and educational content development.
Methodology
The content on this site is compiled and verified by experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical research. Sources include official legal documents, national and international legislation, resolutions of the UN, reports from international organizations, and verified open-source evidence. Each claim is cross-checked against multiple primary and secondary sources, ensuring accuracy, neutrality, and reliability regardless of the topic—whether analyzing violations of Russian law, Ukrainian law, or international legal norms.
Expert Statement
The authors affirm that the information presented reflects established legal interpretations and documented facts. Analyses are grounded in international law principles and widely recognized geopolitical assessments. References to official documents and reports are provided to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Last modified date: 25/11/2025