Abstract
Ukraine, upon giving up the nuclear arsenal left on its territory by the USSR, entered in
1994 into a Memorandum on Security Assurances with the United Kingdom, United States
and Russian Federation (Budapest Memorandum). Since the crisis began between the Russian
Federation and Ukraine in February 2014, a number of States have invoked the Budapest
Memorandum. Unclear, however, is whether this instrument constituted legal obligations
among its Parties or, instead, is a political declaration having no legal effect. The
distinction between political instruments and legal instruments is a recurring question in
inter-State relations and claims practice. The present article considers the Budapest Memorandum
in light of the question of general legal interest – namely, how do we distinguish
between the legal and the political instrument?
Go to article