Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

NATO’s“Brain Death”: A Legal Perspective

Full Text:


At present, NATO is facing a severe crisis and has showed symptoms of disintegration and polarization of the relations between its Member States. At the last head meeting of the organization’s Council, in December 2019, in London, French President Emmanuel Macron qualied NATO’s current crisis as a “brain death.” From a legal perspective, the main cause of this alleged “brain death” is the organization’s special status under international law. In fact, NATO has constantly violated its constitutive treaty and many other international conventional and customary norms, including ius cogens rules. However, the organization has never assumed any negative legal consequences for its internationally unlawful behavior. This situation has reduced the legitimacy of the institution and has corroded, from the inside and the outside, states’ will to cooperate with the fullment of its objectives. Thus, NATO could only surmount its current crisis and continue to play a crucial role as a guardian of the international peace and security and as a promoter of the rule of law at the global level, if it accepts to submit its political and military power to international law.

About the Author

Virdzhiniya Petrova Georgieva
National Autonomous University of Mexico

Professor of Public and Private international Law, Faculty of Law

Circuito Maestro Mario de la Cueva s/n, Ciudad universitaria, Coyoacán, Mexico City, 04510


1. Benvenisti E. Judicial Misgivings Regarding the Application of International Law: An Analysis of Attitudes of National Courts, 4(2) European Journal of international Law 159 (1993).

2. Comin Comin F. Historia Económica Mundial: De los orfgenes a la actualidad (Madrid: Alianza, 2011).

3. Henderson C. International Measures for the Protection of Civilians in Libya and Cote d'Ivoire, 60(3) international and Comparative Law Quarterly 767 (2011).

4. i kenberry G.J. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012).

5. International Law in Domestic Courts: A Casebook (A. Nollkaemper et al. (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018).

6. Laursen A. NATO, the War over Kosovo, and the ICTY Investigation, 17(4) American University international Law Review 765 (2002).

7. Nauta D. The International Responsibility of NATO and its Personnel During Military Operations (Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2018).

8. Pellet A. L'imputabilite d'eventuels actes illicites: Responsabilite de l'OTAN ou des Etats membres in Kosovo and the International Community: A Legal Assessment 193 (C. Tomuschat (ed.), The Hague: Kluwer, 2002).

9. Petersson M. NATO and the Crisis in the International Order: The Atlantic Alliance and its Enemies (London: Routledge, 2018).

10. Petrova Georgieva V. La crisis de la Organización Mundial del Comercio:problemas e (im) posibles soluciones, 1(20) Anuario Mexicano de Derecho internacional 25 (2020).

11. Simma B. NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects, 10(1) European Journal of international Law 1 (1999).

12. Thakur R. The United Nations, Peace and Security: From Collective Security to the Responsibility to Protect (2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017).


For citation:

Petrova Georgieva V. NATO’s“Brain Death”: A Legal Perspective. Russian Law Journal. 2020;8(3):32-63.

Views: 1883

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)