This is blustering by the gentleman, since we all know, abiding or not by the IL isn't something the US can impose on a fellow UNSC member.
The US regularly ignores international law when it suits them... and with their veto in the UNSC there is no practical way for Russia or anyone else to do anything about it.
This is just a change to Russian law to allow them to ignore international law too and with their veto there wont be much the US and the west can do about that either...
Well as I said, it still is blustering, since the IL isn't some monolith, what part of it do you, or don't you follow? Russia has everything to lose here...Furthermore, the sanctions are an illegal on many accounts, but they're also unilateral, there isn't ANYTHING related to the IL regarding these current sanction regime vis à vis Russia.
This is totally Irrational and a very serious lack of understanding of the different legalities that insterted the primacy of IL within Russian Constitution.
To put it mildly, it is not because the US can't be condemned for its "adventures" that those "adventures" are legal or that Russia should scrap the playbook all together. It's counterproductive. Plus see how it goes in Ukraine, there's nothing against Russia on the UN, because of the veto issue.
So you have yet another 'coalition of the willing'.
At best the west might decide to rethink the veto and UNSC system so that international law can be properly enforced for everyone and not just a chosen few and will be willing to renegotiate the current mechanisms which clearly don't actually work.
IL is a daydream, having worked in an institution claiming to abide by it, it simply is bullshit. Things never change, you will always have peace and solution through superior fire and will power. Period. The moment the IL becomes a reality, the whole system of privileges goes down and so does the guys that built it.
At best there might be a change so everyone is subject to international law with no exceptions, and at worst the Russians will be freed up to do as they wish the way the US does... of course only if it suits their interests... they may choose to simply abide by international law anyway, but now they wont actually have to if it does not suit them.
Go ahead, deliver in your claims.
He is entitled to his opinion.
Obviously without hard evidence it would be easy to dismiss claims as just opinion, but I personally think if "civilian contractors" and "weapon inspectors" in all sorts of international bodies are infiltrated by the CIA to subvert their work to Americas interests that when US firms are given advisory roles to the Russian government you could bet your ass quite a few will be on the CIA payroll if not actually agents.
If the roles were reversed I would expect the same from the Russian secret services...
But again changing that small comma changes everything regarding the way Russia does business legally. And it also changes nothing. This is just an ill thought bravado that will cause a backlash on international level, not because Russia is Evil, but because Russia will have to deal every aspect of it international obligations with every nation.
For instance, what's the Russian take on the ICC? What would that change from the current status? What about adoptions? What about different consummer protections provisions within treaties like ICAO etc...
This is madness on the purest form. Russia can't still disengage on a case by case basis from the references that bother its policy, but rejecting the IL as a whole? What?