This book addresses a simple question: how do Russians understand international law? Is it the same understanding as in the West or is it in some ways different and if so, why? It answers these questions by drawing on from three different yet closely interconnected perspectives: history, theory, and recent state practice. The work uses comparative international law as starting point and argues that in order to understand post-Soviet Russia's state and scholarly approaches to international law, one should take into account the history of ideas in Russia. To an extent, Russian understandings of international law differ from what is considered the mainstream in the West. One specific feature of this book is that it goes inside the language of international law as it is spoken and discussed in post-Soviet Russia, especially the scholarly literature in the Russian language, and relates this literature to the history of international law as discipline in Russia. Recent state practice such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia's record in the UN Security Council, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, prominent cases in investor-state arbitration, and the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union are laid out and discussed in the context of increasingly popular 'civilizational' ideas, the claim that Russia is a unique civilization and therefore not part of the West. The implications of this claim for the future of international law, its universality, and regionalism are discussed.

This volume, now in its second and revised edition, deals with the legal status of the three Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - as a consequence of the illegality of the Soviet annexation in 1940-1991. It offers a detailed historical overview of the Soviet takeover of the Baltic States in 1939/1940 and analysis of international law as it was in force, also regionally and bilaterally, at the time. It examines the role of the continuity of the diplomatic representations of the Baltic States and other manifestations of the Western non-recognition of the Soviet annexation. Moreover, the book examines the nature of the restoration of the Baltic States in 1991 based on their State continuity claim. It also studies in detail questions such as borders, citizenship and reparation claims, and asks to what extent State continuity could or could not be restored in practice.

Russia and European Human-Rights Law critically examines Russia's experiences as part of the European human righs protection system since its admittance in 1998. The authors combine legal and constructivist international relations theory perspectives in this study of Russia's practice and rhetoric in the Council of Europe and before the European Court of Human Rights.

This book addresses a simple question: how do Russians understand international law? Is it the same understanding as in the West or is it in some ways different and if so, why? It answers these questions by drawing on from three different yet closely interconnected perspectives: history, theory, and recent state practice. The work uses comparative international law as starting point and argues that in order to understand post-Soviet Russia's state and scholarly approaches to international law, one should take into account the history of ideas in Russia. To an extent, Russian understandings of international law differ from what is considered the mainstream in the West. One specific feature of this book is that it goes inside the language of international law as it is spoken and discussed in post-Soviet Russia, especially the scholarly literature in the Russian language, and relates this literature to the history of international law as discipline in Russia. Recent state practice such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia's record in the UN Security Council, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, prominent cases in investor-state arbitration, and the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union are laid out and discussed in the context of increasingly popular 'civilizational' ideas, the claim that Russia is a unique civilization and therefore not part of the West. The implications of this claim for the future of international law, its universality, and regionalism are discussed.

Why has there been a human rights backlash in Russia despite the country having been part of the European human rights protection system since the late 1990s? To what extent does Russia implement judgments of the Strasbourg Court, and to what extent does it resist the implementation? This fascinating study investigates Russia's turbulent relationship with the European Court of Human Rights and examines whether the Strasbourg court has indeed had the effect of increasing the protection of human rights in Russia. Researchers and scholars of law and political science with a particular interest in human rights and Russia will benefit from this in-depth exploration of the background of this subject.

Why has there been a human rights backlash in Russia despite the country having been part of the European human rights protection system since the late 1990s? To what extent does Russia implement judgments of the Strasbourg Court, and to what extent does it resist the implementation? This fascinating study investigates Russia's turbulent relationship with the European Court of Human Rights and examines whether the Strasbourg court has indeed had the effect of increasing the protection of human rights in Russia. Researchers and scholars of law and political science with a particular interest in human rights and Russia will benefit from this in-depth exploration of the background of this subject.

This volume of the Baltic Yearbook of International Law contains articles based on presentations delivered at the Annual Conference of the European Society of International Law which took place in Riga, Latvia, from 8-10 September 2016. Among the selected authors, the Yearbook is pleased to continue to introduce new authors from the region. The Baltic Yearbook of International Law is the first legal journal in the field of international law published under the auspices of the Baltic Editorial Board that attempts to bring to the international debate the issues that are of importance in the Baltic States and provides a forum for the views of, among others, Baltic international scholars on various topical themes of international law. The first volume appeared in 2001 with the symposium on the question of International Legal Status of the Baltic States. The Yearbook contains State practice reports from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and thus serves as an important source of information that is not available elsewhere. On several occasions the Yearbook has offered articles discussing the history of international law and current issues in Eastern Europe and the Russian Federation, thus making more accessible a regional discourse to a wider audience in the world.