The Supremecy of International Law

So nice to hear high-placed Russian officials such as Sergey Lavrov using the language of democracy and international law. It would be even nicer if it meant something. From his article in the Guardian.

Plans to expand Nato seem aimed at tackling problems of the past, rather than building confidence now. So, too, do unilateral decisions over anti-ballistic missile defence systems. We must recognise that it is not possible to enhance the security of individual countries by ignoring the security implications for their neighbours.

Many of the institutions already in place are primarily concerned with the security of their own members; the Organisation of Security and Co-operation in Europe, as the summer crisis in the Caucasus demonstrated, lacks the rules and accountability to be effective. And it was seeking a way to plug this damaging gap that prompted President Medvedev to propose a new treaty on European security: we believe it would establish a truly united area of collective security in the Euro-Atlantic region and put right what we together so far failed to manage.

The new system would have to be based on supremacy of international law and adherence to the UN charter. It is intended to provide the forum through which we could resolve security problems for many years to come. A treaty could only arise from a democratic negotiating process involving all states of the region, as well as multilateral security bodies already working in this area.