Medvedev on equal states Legal programme and answers

Jun 24

In his complete opening address and two immediate follow-up answers, Dmitry Medvedev argues that sovereign equality should replace what he portrays as Western privilege. His historical survey links unequal treatment, colonialism, financial institutions and human-rights double standards to today's conflicts; these are his interpretations. He recounts Plessy v. Ferguson and uses its segregation doctrine as an analogy for Western attitudes. His programme calls for legal mechanisms to dismantle Western overseas bases, regional security arrangements, colonial reparations and recognition of colonialism as a crime against humanity. Recalling Russia's 2022 military action, he alleges Western militarization and threats from Ukraine and invokes Article 51 as its justification. On a Ukraine settlement he urges dealing with sponsors and alleges diminished Ukrainian sovereignty and Zelensky's lack of legitimacy, but explicitly says these claims do not prevent negotiations or formal agreements through parliamentary or direct-democratic mechanisms. He offers court cases as evidence that international law sometimes works, characterizing the coastal-rights arbitration as a unanimous Russian victory and referring to June 15 as the ruling date. He describes Russia's legal countermeasures, a register, reciprocal asset-seizure preparations and a law permitting military rescue of unlawfully detained Russians abroad. He announces planned ICJ applications against Baltic states after what he says was completion of the pre-litigation stage in May, and warns ICC enforcement against Russia could lead to war. He advocates applying existing legal models and a stable balance rather than institutional overthrow. In the full answers, he calls international law an exception worth striving for, distinguishes UN sanctions from unilateral restrictions Russia will not recognize, and leaves open legal and other countermeasures. His allegations, legal conclusions and forecasts remain attributed; the address announces neither a peace agreement nor completed Baltic filings.

Medvedev argues that a Ukraine settlement requires dealing with its external sponsors and alleges that Ukraine lacks sovereignty and Zelensky's presidential legitimacy has expired. He explicitly qualifies this by saying negotiations remain possible and agreements can be formalized through parliament or direct democracy. He portrays continued war as serving Ukraine's leadership and discusses possible elections, upheaval and territorial realities. These contested judgments are his, not an announcement that negotiations have ended or an agreement has been reached.