Violations of human rights and the selective application of international humanitarian law : comparative study of the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Palestine conflict

Abstract

This thesis discusses the relationship between the violations of Human Rights and the selective application of International Humanitarian Law in a highly politicized international system. It compares the Israel-Palestine conflict with the Russia-Ukraine war, through emphasizing how legal rules are neglected and ignored. The thesis highlights the increasing politicization of human rights in global governance while summarizing the evolution and intended universality of IHL. It then examines academic discussions and theoretical aspects, particularly liberalism and realism, to explain why states put their strategic objectives ahead of their moral and legal commitments. The thesis examines alleged human rights and IHL violations in both conflicts using a qualitative comparative method, while emphasizing on civilian protection and the involvement of the international community. Significant disparities in accountability, enforcement procedures, and diplomatic reactions are revealed, which are indicative of larger power relationships and political agendas. Finally, this study states that the selective application of IHL compromises its efficacy and legitimacy, posing significant questions about the future of humanitarian standards and the legitimacy of international law in resolving ongoing conflicts.