Introduction.The 8^th edition of M. Shaw’s textbook on “International Law” (2017) provides an opportunity to reflect on how the most “burning” and complicated issues of contemporary International law are interpreted in the West and in the Russian Federation.

Materials and methods. The materials for the article were the 8th edition of M. Shaw’s textbook on “International Law” (2017) in the context of the earlier relevant publications of the Russian and foreign scholars in the field of international law . The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods .

Research results. Honesty becomes an imperative feature of contemporary textbooks on International law, hiding or distorting relevant facts are unacceptable. Naturally, the English language offers its own advantage (in respect of the much wider market that can access such a work), but Shaw’s textbook eschews the natural temptation to present an essentially anglocentric perspective in the work. It is imperative to avoid “International law” becoming “English International law” or “US International law” or “International laws”, meaning (normatively) quite different things across continents and jurisdictions. There is room for a theoretical discussion of such notions as “the Common Heritage of Mankind” (for example, is this a part of general International law? Or just a notion provided by some international agreements?) or specific territorial issues of International law. Still International law remains a coherent and unique regulator of international relations.

Discussion and conclusions. The events of 1989-1991 have presented certain opportunities for International law research, but also tragedies for peoples and challenges for the International community. The break-up of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union engendered certain adjustments which, almost three decades on, are still not concluded. Perceived historical injustices have, in some instances, been attempted to be corrected. Inevitably, International law research includes consideration of the events in Ukraine since these events are the most important issue of the contemporary crisis in relations between the US/EU on the one side, and, on the other, the Russian Federation. The two opposite legal approaches are explained. According to Russian legal sources, the events of 2014 in Kiev are regarded as a coup d’état. According to Washington and the European Union (in contrast to the accusations provided in the book of the former Prime Minister of Ukraine Nikolay Azarov) the West did not intervene in the internal affairs of Ukraine in 2014 nor organize a coup in Kiev. Western legal sources ignore the very fact of the coup d’état in Kiev in  February 2014. There may be different legal qualifications of a given real-life situation. Dropping of atomic bombs by the US on the Japanese towns of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was differently qualified by lawyers: some qualified it as a violation of International humanitarian law, while others, as a justified measure against Japan as an aggressor during World War II. The US military intervention in Iraq in 2003 without relevant UN Security Council resolutions was treated differently by the community of international lawyers. However, there are limits for a State’s Policy of International law, for practising International law. A message is suggested: the further organization from abroad of another coup d’état – in Kazakhstan, or in Belarus, or elsewhere – is unacceptable and contradictory to the Rule of Law. “Quieta non movere”.

Introduction. Taking into account the fact that neither the normative nor the doctrinal form contains an exhaustive list of principles of international law, clarification of the issues of their concept and content problems is important not only for international law itself and its adequate understanding, but also for application of law at the national level, because the national legal systems of states, including the Russian Federation, are widely based on the principles of international law. This article deals with theoretical and practical issues related to the principles of international law, and the study is not limited to the framework of international law, but also covers other general theoretical aspects of law, as well as non-normative aspects. The article contains the main thesis of the speech of prof. Aslan Abashidze addressed the judges of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, held at the invitation of the guidance of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on November 23, 2017.

Materials and methods. The study is based on a considerable amount of materials, including international legal acts, decisions of international judicial institutions, national legislation of the Russian Federation and decisions of the highest judicial bodies of the Russian Federation, as well as classical and contemporary doctrinal studies of Russian and foreign authors. The methodological basis of the research was the general scientific methods (logical and system analysis, the dialectical method, methods of deduction and induction) and special methods of cognition (historical and legal, comparative legal and formal legal methods, method of legal modeling and forecasting).

Research results. On the basis of the study of the doctrinal positions of Russian and foreign authors, international legal acts and practice of international judicial institutions, as well as national legislation of the Russian Federation and the national court practice of the Russian Federation concerning the principles of international law, the author makes conclusions on the conceptual and substantive problems concerning the principles of international law.

Discussion and conclusions. In the article the author analyzes various approaches to the content of such notions as “general principles of international law”, “generally recognized principles of international law”, “basic principles of international law”, “fundamental principles of international law”, “imperative norms of international law”. The author comes to the conclusion that “generally recognized principles of international law” both in the western and in the Russian doctrine of international law presuppose “general principles of international law” or “general principles of law” as a whole with the addition of “civilized nations”, which are often referred to as “fundamental”; these principles include, first of all, the principles enshrined in the UN Charter, the 1970 Declaration on the Principles of International Law and the 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the CSCE. The analysis of practice of international judicial institutions, mainly the International Court of Justice, allows to conclude that the Court does not differentiate the principles which it applies; all of them, as enshrined in the UN Charter, i.e. “generally recognized”, and others (in particular, principles of branches of international law, for example, the principle of humanism) are referred to as “general” principles of law. Moreover, the general principles of law, according to legal doctrine, may cover moral norms, which have been fragmentarily and declaratively already found fixation in international documents, and which in the long term may strengthen their international legal status up to an imperative norm.

Introduction. Human rights law has had a powerful influence on general international law. It sets the vector of the progressive development of general international law for decades to come. Under its influence the international community began to perceive and states started to implement national sovereignty in other way and the person acquired many characteristics of international personality. Classical international law began to emerge as the global  transnational law largely due to the fact that Human rights law is the right of result, and also due to non-state, including international judicial, rulemaking, that has assigned to Human rights law selfdevelopment and constant adaptation to the changing needs of social and moral evolution of society.

Materials and methods. Materials used for the analysis include legal works of Russian and foreign researchers in the field of international Human rights law as well as multinational treaties in the sphere of Human rights protection, decisions of UN treaty bodies and judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Methodological procedures of the research include general and specific scientific methods of enquiry (dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction, induction, comparative-legal and historical-legal methods).

Research results. At some point, many states have ceased to encourage the international judicial activism, for example, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the countries of Eastern Europe and, last but not least, the Russian Federation. Now international judicial rulemaking is accused of limiting freedom of national discretion in struggle against the recent crisis experienced by society due to increased terrorist threats, weakening of international competitiveness, influx of illegal migrants and refugees. In addition, a number of controversial legal positions promoted by international judicial bodies also met opposition.

Discussion and conclusions.  The authors see the possibility to eliminate the growing extremely dangerous and harmful conflict between the states and international judicial bodies in strict adherence to the latest requirements of subsidiarity, restraint, neutrality and political impartiality and in that the international judicial bodies should focus mainly on search for a reasonable and generally acceptable balance between the interests of the individual and society, the individual and the state and between individual rights of different types.

Introduction. Developing countries are interested both in the inflow of foreign investments and in their effective use in the country’s economy. To achieve this goal, the recipient states establish in their national legislation investment measures of a commercial nature, which are called “performance requirements” (requirements to achieve certain nationally economically useful results). The interests of foreign investors and recipient states in the issue of measures falling under the term “performance requirements” in most cases do not coincide, as these measures create competitive restrictions for foreign investors related to the use of their capital investments. The possibility for foreign investors to carry out investment activities without execution of investment measures of a commercial nature was one of the main problems of transnational investment. This problem has been resolved in the interests of investment-exporting countries through the adoption of a multilateral TRIMS agreement within the WTO.

Materials and methods. The materials for the article were the works of Russian and foreign researchers in the field of international economic law and WTO law as well as the main international legal documents prepared under WTO. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods: dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical legal methods.

Research results. The analysis shows that in the doctrine and practice investment measures of a trade nature, e.g. “demand for the export component”, “the demand for currency balance”, “local component requirement”, etc. are known. The Agreement on Trade Related to the Uruguay Round of negotiations under the GATT in 1994 investment measures (TRIMs) limited the ability of states to use “performance requirements”, which, according to the author, is not in the interests of developing countries and does not contribute to their progressive development.

Discussion and conclusions. The  author of the article justifies the need to amend the TRIMs Agreement, the purpose of which is to revise the conditions of “performance requirements”.

Introduction. Diversity of international financial legal order results in different approaches to the term ‘international financial law’ (IFL). Author argues that the latter refers to the segment of international public law and governs relations between states and international intergovernmental organizations (IGOs).

Materials and methods. The materials for the article were the works of  Russian and foreign researchers in the field of international economic and international financial law. . The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods:  dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical legal methods.

Research results. In the article the definition of the IFL is specified as well as its components. The subject matter of the IFL can be divided into three units: 1) public actors relations on the intercourse of money and securities and on the debt restructuring; 2) state relations on the internal regulation in financial affairs including public law regimes in budget, tax, currency control politics, banking, insurance and securities regulation and money laundry prevention as well as regulation of financial reporting, audit and appraisal activities; 3) relations of states and IGOs on the normative and institutional foundations of the international legal order.

Discussion and conclusions. The author shows that the system of the IFL sources contains few multilateral international conventions. In particular cases variety of non-normative treaties (for instance loan agreements between the IMF and borrowing states or debt restructuring agreements in the framework of the Paris club) by applying the same or similar provisions forms a repeated practice of the states and IGOs. This practice being summarized in the documents of the international organizations and paraorganizations tends to form an international customs. Non-obligatory acts named ‘International Financial Standards’ (IFS) are widely used for the sake of harmonization of the different states laws. Standard setters of such IFSs are IGOs (IMF, IBRD, OECD), non-state organizations (International Accountant Standard Board) and bodies with intermediate character (Financial Stability Board, International Organization of Securities Commissions).

Introduction. The article considers an issue if a court of an injured state could deny immunity to a state committed an internationally wrongful act and if that denial could represent a legally acceptable countermeasure. Authors consider an issue if a limitation to the state immunity can be a subject to countermeasure and if this type of countermeasure complies with the conditions of legality.

Materials and methods.  In the course of incubation of research, we use writings of foreign and Russian authors, United Nations International Law Commission materials, practice of states and practice of international and national courts. Methodological foundation of research is composed by general scientific and specific scientific methods of obtaining knowledge (dialectical method, analysis method, synthesis method, deduction method, induction method and rather-legal method).

Research results. Based on the results of the research conducted authors suggest a mechanism of denial of immunity to a state by a court of an injured state which represents a countermeasure. Authors conclude that if the conditions of legality of countermeasures were met, a denial of immunity to a defendant state by a court of an injured state, which represents a countermeasure, would comply with international law.

Discussion and conclusions.  The article draws attention to special aspects of denying of immunity to a state by a court of an injured state, which represents a countermeasure, in case of lodging personal criminal injury claim. Authors conclude that limitation to the state immunity by national courts, which represents a countermeasure, isn’t prohibited by rules of international  law.

Introduction. On 10 October 2017 the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Outer Space Treaty) celebrated fifty years from the day of its entry into force. In this same year, the world celebrates another memorable event – 60 years of the space era, which began with the successful launch of the first artificial Earth satellite. These dates once again reminded the global community that technological progress is inseparable from international law, as well as of the importance of the rule of law in such a unique sphere of human activity as outer space.

Materials and methods. The materials for the article were the works of Russian and foreign researchers in the field of international space law as well as the main international treaties governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space, Resolutions of the UN General Assembly, reports of the Legal Subcommittee of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. As for the methodology, the author opted to employ popular scientific research methods (including dialectics, analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical analysis).

Research results. Over the past decades, the international space law (ISL) has changed, but the Outer Space Treaty, which established the basic principles of the exploration and use of outer space, remains a reliable foundation for the global space activities. With the development of private space activities specific separate states attempt to govern aspects of such activities at the national level bypassing the imperative requirements of the Outer Space Treaty. In this respect a problem of due and authentic interpretation of universal norms of the ISL is of particular relevance, which would correspond to the interests of all participants of space activities.

Discussion and conclusions. In recent years the Legal Subcommittee of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UN COPUOS) has heard statements that the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty are “obsolete” and “do not correspond to reality”. It seems possible to disagree with this characteristic. For half a century none of the basic principles established in the Treaty have been challenged, both States members to the Treaty (as of 10 October 2017, 106 states ratified the Treaty and another 24 signed it) and other countries that still have not joined it respect these basics and adhere to them. The Outer Space Treaty has fulfilled its aim: to preserve outer space peaceful, weapons-free and accessible for exploration and use by all states on the basis of equality and non-discrimination.

Introduction. This article examines the legal consequences attached to the Russia’s notification of its intention not to become a party to the ICC. The authors point out the confusing language employed by Russian Ministry for Foreign Affairs in its attendant declarations and highlight the necessity to strictly stick to legal terminology especially in documents and speeches intended as a message to foreign States. These materials express the official position of the Russian Federation and need to be unequivocal and not subject to interpretation. Otherwise, a State taking liberty with terminology in its official declarations takes a risk of assuming in the eyes of international community obligations that it did not intend to assume. The authors’ remarks may be used in the future interactions with the ICC and generally in similar situations.

Materials and methods. The article uses treaties, declarations of States and doctrinal research on the law of treaties. The authors rely on various methods to reach their conclusions, among which treaty interpretation is most frequently used.

Research results. In the article the authors show that on 16 November 2016, Russia disclosed its intention not to become a party to the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Ministry for Foreign Affairs stressed that although fighting against impunity, including collectively through international tribunals, is of the utmost importance to Russia, in its view, the ICC has not lived up to the expectations held at the Rome diplomatic conference. The Ministry pointed out the disproportionality between the finances spent by the Court in fourteen years of work and only four verdicts rendered. It also indicated understanding the decision of several States-parties to initiate proceedings to withdraw from the Statute.

Discussion and conclusions. In this article the authors draw attention to potential adverse effect of such declarations and notifications on the legal status of the Russian Federation. The article concludes that no substantial changes have affected the status of the Russian Federation as a result of its decision not to become a party to the Rome Statute. Russian officials simply have had recourse to common language to express a legal concept thereby creating a confusion and distorting the reality.

Introduction. This article is devoted to the analysis of Art. 18 of the 1994 Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, which declares the goal for the neutral status of the state, from the point of contemporary theoretical studies on the essence of neutrality in international law.

Materials and methods.  The material for the research is the works of leading Russian lawyers, specialists in international law (V.N. Durdenevsky, L.A. Moguryan, O.I. Tiunova, etc.), devoted to neutrality in international law. The study of the experience of foreign countries, primarily the case of Switzerland, makes the authors to analyze the researches of the representatives of Western international legal doctrine. In addition, the authors actively use the achievements of other humanities – theory of international relations and political science. The methodological basis of the research includes scientific methods of cognition (dialectics, analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical methods).

Research results. In the face of increasing political tension in Europe, stated even at the level of the constitutional norm, neutrality should help to maintain peace on the continent. Practical implementation of the institution of neutrality in Switzerland and Austria shows the ambiguity of this process.

Discussion and conclusions.  Despite numerous cases of non-observance of the principle of non-interference in contemporary international relations, nevertheless, with a number of additional guarantees and agreements, the concept of neutrality of the Republic of Belarus may turn out to be realistic. The beginning of the XXI century should be marked by the non-admission of aggression on the territory of the Republic of Belarus.

Introduction. The article analyses the foreign policy of the actual US administration in order to determine whether it is based on the commitment to the rule of law in international relations.

Materials and methods.  The scope of sources includes related subject works of foreign and Russian researchers; official documents; public statements and comments given by the US President Donald Trump, as well as by the members of his Administration responsible for foreign affairs – VicePresident, Secretary of State and Minister of Defense. The research covers the period from the beginning of election campaign (June, 2015) to the end of the first year of D. Trump’s presidency (November, 2017). The methodological framework of the article consists of the following methods: general scientific (analysis, synthesis, functional and systematic methods) and special scientific (statistical analysis, event-analysis, content-analysis, modelling, cognitive mapping), as well as specific legal methods (legalistic, comparative legal methods).

Research results. The article results in the evaluation of the actual US foreign policy under international law; as well as in the formulation of a proposal for clarification of the Russian position regarding further cooperation with the US.

Discussion and conclusions.  The main conclusions of the research are as follows. Donald Trump acts in accordance with Layne theory of “the offshore balancing” rather than traditional striving for global predominance. The US President is indifferent towards the principles and norms of international law even when declares the opposite. D. Trump addresses bilateral and multilateral cooperation of the US with the other states, analyzed in the article, in particular in the context of space activities, through the prism of ‘deals’, that is more typical for the Grotian tradition of international law obligations now considered outdated. The worsening of bilateral relations between the US and the Russian Federation, the threat of use of force against North Korea, and the potential non-compliance with principles and norms of international law are all the negative impacts of this approach.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the development of banking regulation in the European Union, which subsequently led to the creation in 2012 of the European Banking Union as part of the Economic and Monetary Union. This process took place in three main areas – improving the mechanisms of banking supervision, crisis management and protection of depositors. The article explores and defines the main milestones and problems of the legal regulation of the EU banking sector, which were particularly clearly manifested during the global financial and economic crisis of 2008.

Materials and methods. The author made a theoretical and empirical analysis of the main sources of international and European law, the studies of domestic and foreign scholars, analytical documents and reports of the EU institutions and bodies. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, systemic analysis) and special methods (the comparative legal method, formal legal method).

Research results. Cross-border markets form a single space, giving the members certain benefits and opportunities for development. However, they also contribute to the distribution of risks among all participants, accumulate damage and contribute to the rapid spread of the crisis. That is why a consistent and comprehensive supranational regulation is required for safe and stable highly integrated markets. The embodiment of this approach was the creation of the European Banking Union.

Discussion and conclusions.  EU banking regulation has passed a long and thorny path of evolution from minimal harmonization to the adoption of regulations on certain issues. The global financial and economic crisis of 2008 became an impetus to the revision of the formed approaches to state intervention in banking sector, “too big to fail” concept, methods of crisis management, protection of the depositor’s rights. As a result there has been developed a comprehensive legal and regulatory framework for the banking sector in the EU, which has become a legal basis of the European Banking Union.

Introduction. Secession as a way of realization of the right of peoples to self-determination is disputed in contemporary international law, which distinguishes several secession theories. Of particular interest is the theory of remedial secession, which is based on the right to secede from a state under certain circumstances. It is argued that application of the theory of remedial secession is justified in cases of systematic, gross and massive violations of human rights, which endangers the existence of a national minority or a people, as well as when the policy of genocide, apartheid or ethnic cleansing is carried out.

Materials and methods.  The material for the study is the works of western and Russian scholars in the field of the theory of international law, as well as the current international legal practice of implementation of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. At the same time attention has been paid to works in which the problems and theories of secession are highlighted. The methodological basis of the research includes scientific methods of cognition (dialectics, analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, comparative legal and historical methods).

Research results. As the foundations for applying the theory of the remedial secession, it is necessary to consider not only the genocide (which is the basis for the recognition of independence of Kosovo), but also the commission of large-scale war crimes, the policy of forced assimilation, the forced erasing of nation-al identity by the titular nation, whose goal is, as a rule, refusal in internal self-determination (as it was and is the case in Ukraine). The new state should be created exclusively on the basis of requirements of jus cogens norms of international law, and in some cases (Western Sahara), the rules governing the process of decolonization.

Discussion and conclusions.  In this article, the author draws attention to the fact that the correlation of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and the principle of the territorial integrity of states should be considered today within the framework of the theory of the remedial secession. Secession is one of the ways of realization of the right of peoples to selfdetermination in contemporary international law. Secession from a state and the creation of an independent state must always be considered as an extreme measure and implemented only in exceptional cases.

The review of the monograph highlights the academic and practical significance of a conceptual holistic analysis of the subject of study as a phenomenon of modern international relations. The monograph considers the process of development and implementation of the American doctrine of pre-emptive strike from Monroe to Trump from the point of view of modern international law. By all objective indicators the presented academic work by substance qualitatively differs from the existing array of related subject works of Russian specialists in international law. Moreover, none of the related academic works is equal in law or in fact to the considered monograph.. Relevant to the law of international security this monograph meets the objective academic criteria of comprehensiveness of research of the stated issues. Substantively the monograph fits the format of the international legal positioning by the Russian Federation as being a state whose foreign policy is designated to ensure good faith implementation by all States members of the world community of their international obligations (Article 2 (2) of the UN Charter). Consisting of eight chapters, the monograph represents a complete scientific study of the subject of the law of international security conducted at a high level of the modern science of jurisprudence. In the parameters of its scientific importance and practical applicability in the framework of a coherent foreign policy of Russia on the rule of law in the system of international relations, this monograph establishes appropriate legal methods in terms of building of a new world order. The work shows the process of formation and realization of American doctrine of preventive strikes from Monroe to Trump from the point of view of modern international law, its essence and significance.