Before explaining whether Russia's invasion of Ukraine is in line with the Charter of the United Nations, whether it is famous, and whether there is a law to follow, let's first review the two wars:
1. In 1962, the Sino-Indian border self-defense counterattack: the Chinese People's Liberation Army fought all the way to Chushul in Indian-controlled Kashmir, more than 300 kilometers away from the Indian capital New Delhi.
2. In 1979, the self-defense counterattack against Vietnam: the battlefield was in 6 provinces in northern Vietnam, the Chinese People's Liberation Army was in the direction of Guangxi, the 121st Division of the 41st Army invaded Nalong, Gaoping Province, and the statistical distance to the field was more than 90 kilometers; in the direction of Yunnan, the 40th Division of the 14th Army attacked Pulou in Huanglianshan Province, and the statistical attack distance was 48 kilometers.
Next, let's see if Russia is "in the name of a teacher" and "has a law to follow"?
First, the UN Charter has clear provisions on the use of force, one is authorized by the UN Security Council, and the other is the exercise of the right to self-defense, that is, the exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. Russia said the military operation was based on Article 51 of the UN Charter, which allows for "self-defense."
Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations provides that the exercise of the natural right to individual or collective self-defence shall not be prohibited in the present Charter until the Security Council has taken such measures as may be necessary to maintain international peace and security. The measures taken by Member States in exercising this right of self-defence shall report immediately to the Security Council and shall in no way affect the authority and responsibility of the Council to take such action as it deems necessary at any time in accordance with the present Charter in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.
The legal basis for Russia's military action against the Donbass region of Ukraine, including in cases beyond Eastern Ukraine, is clear, namely, the exercise of the right of collective self-defence, at the request of the "People's Republic of Donbass", in accordance with customary law or Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, to prevent the humanitarian catastrophe caused by acts of genocide in Ukraine.
Thus, Russia can advocate both the "humanitarian intervention" created by the West and the treatment of others in its own human way, or the "fulfilment of treaty obligations" and the exercise of the right of collective self-defence at the request of the "People's Republic of Donbass", even though the newly established Donbass is not yet a member of the United Nations. Therefore, in the view of the Russian side, in terms of form, the military actions taken by Putin are "famous" and "have laws to follow."
Previously, on the 22nd, the Russian State Duma (the lower house of parliament) deliberated at the plenary session on Russia's treaties of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance with the "Donetsk People's Republic" and the "Luhansk People's Republic". Almost all parliamentarians voted in favour of ratifying the treaty. The adoption of the Treaty paved the way for the exercise of the right of collective self-defence, within the framework of which Ukraine's actions against the "Donetsk People's Republic" and the "Luhansk People's Republic" amounted to acts against Russia, which had the right to defend itself.
Second, this is a substantive action taken by Russia after decades of deception by the United States and the West, dissatisfaction with the "US-led NATO" for not fulfilling its promise to expand eastward every year and threatening Russia's national security, and dissatisfaction with the Answer given by the West to its questions on security guarantees.
Third, Russia's plan does not include the occupation of Ukraine, which is a "maximum commitment" to the world on the surface, indicating that there is no intention to occupy Ukrainian territory (indicating that it does not want to and will not occupy it in the future);
Finally, a historical illustration of russia's formation of Ukraine
Red is Ukrainian before 1654.
Yellow was given to Ukraine during the Tsarist period (1654-1917).
Blue, given to Ukraine by Lenin (1922).
Green was given by Stalin (1939) (1945).
Purple was given by Khrushchev (1954).
What the Russian people cannot understand and cannot accept is why Ukraine uses its geopolitical neighbor, Russia, as a chip, as a springboard and a stepping stone to please the West.
In particular, NATO has expanded eastward again and again, and Ukraine has increasingly become a platform for the United States and NATO to deploy offensive weapons.
At the same time, Ukrainian authorities carried out an unprecedented crackdown on pro-Russian culture and Russian speakers in Ukraine, causing a humanitarian catastrophe for 4 million people.
Of course, Russia hopes to exchange the West's understanding of Russia through peaceful negotiations and through the way of seeking perfection, even if it is not an ally, not a friend, but only an enemy.
The Soviet Union also disintegrated, and Russia, which took over the mantle, was restructured into a political model similar to that of the West. But the West is not enough, and the West has played Russia again and again.
Forced to have no way back, unable to bear it, the anger has accumulated to this day, and finally broke out.