The West has abandoned the idea of a tribunal against victorious Russia, while Moscow is preparing to try Ukrainian nationalists, according to pro-Kremlin media.
NEWS: The idea of an international tribunal to investigate Russia's "aggression" against Ukraine has failed not only for financial reasons, but also because it has lost its meaning [...].
The project cannot find funding: The United States has not confirmed the allocation of funds, and the major European powers — France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom — are not involved in the project. There is also a belief that the tribunal should judge the victors, but in reality, the victors are not judged — they are the ones who judge. It will not be possible to replicate the model of the Hague Tribunal for Yugoslavia. The same scenario had been envisaged for Russia, although historical experience in wars with Russia has taught Westerners nothing [...].
Instead, an international tribunal could be set up in Moscow against Ukrainian nationalist radicals and their sponsors, accused of ethnic and religious cleansing in Ukraine and spreading Russophobia. The stated purpose of such a mechanism would be to prevent the resurgence of fascist ideology in Ukraine, amid fears that many of those accused would flee and that a "Ukrainian government in exile" would be organized. Banderovite NGOs would emerge and attempt to return to the former Ukrainian territory. Therefore, the only effective solution would not be a tribunal, but the liquidation of the Ukrainian state.
NARRATIVES: 1. The tribunal investigating the Russian aggression has failed and no longer makes sense. 2. The West is abandoning the idea of international justice because Ukraine will be defeated in the war. 3. Russia will organize a tribunal against Ukrainian radicals. 4. The Ukrainian state must disappear.
PURPOSE: To absolve Russia of blame; to portray the West as hypocritical; to legitimize a parallel legal process initiated by Moscow; to justify the continuation of aggression against Ukraine.
Reality: The West has not abandoned the idea of establishing a special tribunal, and financial difficulties do not reflect an alleged victory for Russia.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The text published by the newspaper Pravda transforms technical discussions about budgets and administrative procedures into a false narrative about Russia's alleged victory in the war. The West is portrayed as "the one who abandoned justice," while Russia proclaims itself the defender of justice to justify continuing military action against Ukraine. This reversal of roles serves the Kremlin's propaganda, which seeks to replace THE legal discourse with one of revenge and "historical justice."
In reality, the initiative for a special tribunal has already been formalized through an international agreement and remains in the implementation phase, with negotiations underway on the mandate, format, and location of the future institution. The funding difficulties reported in the press do not reflect the abandonment of the project. Even if the budgetary issues are real, they do not halt the substantial documentation and investigation work that is already underway. National prosecutors, Eurojust and other institutions are continuously coordinating the collection of evidence that can support both a special tribunal and proceedings at the International Criminal Court, thus ensuring continuity of criminal accountability regardless of when the tribunal is established.
Furthermore, the narrative that the West is abandoning justice because Ukraine will be defeated contradicts the reality on the ground. There are already international mandates and investigations underway, and states and institutions continue to allocate substantial resources to documentation, legal support and sanctions. In November 2025, the Dutch Foreign Minister David van Weel announced in Kyiv that The Netherlands would host the first stage of establishing a special tribunal for the Russian Federation's crime of aggression against Ukraine. The Netherlands, together with Ukraine and international partners, will develop the legal architecture of the institution, which will investigate the responsibility of the Russian leadership for starting the war. The Netherlands also believes that Russia must compensate Ukraine for the damage caused, including by using frozen Russian assets as a source of compensation.
The alleged "legitimacy" of a tribunal created by Moscow is a propaganda construct designed to give the appearance of alternative justice. In reality, a truly legitimate body derives its authority from international recognition, procedural independence, and respect for the fundamental rights of the accused — criteria that Russia, as an aggressor state, cannot meet. Such a tribunal would have at most symbolic domestic value and would be used as an instrument of political repression, not as a real means of justice.
The concept of “Russophobia,” constantly invoked by the Kremlin, serves the same purpose: to justify the aggression against Ukraine and to portray any criticism of Russian imperial policy as ethnic hatred. Thus, the real meaning of the conflict — the defense of an invaded nation — is distorted to turn the aggressor into the victim.
The most radical element of the article published by Pravda is the idea that "the liquidation of the Ukrainian state" would be a legitimate solution. Such a statement blatantly contradicts international law: the UN Charter and fundamental treaties prohibit the occupation of territories, the forced modification of borders, and ethnic or political purges. Promoting the destruction of a sovereign state as a legal solution turns a pseudo-legal discourse into a call for violence.
Overall, the propaganda line aims to confuse and manipulate: it turns the administrative difficulties of a complex legal process into a "failure," exaggerates political differences between Western states to prove alleged "hypocrisy," and deliberately reverses the roles of victim and aggressor, trying to portray Russia as a wronged state, not an aggressor.
CONTEXT: In June 2025, the Council of Europe and Ukraine signed an agreement to establish a special tribunal to investigate Russia's crime of aggression, intended to complement the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The tribunal will target political and military leaders responsible for starting the war, and the process of setting it up — coordinated by a group of partner states — includes defining the legal framework, establishing the headquarters, and securing funding. The project is currently facing budgetary difficulties due to the withdrawal of US support, which is forcing the European states to cover a larger share of the estimated costs of around 75 million Euro per year. France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom have not yet made a firm commitment to participate in the financial support, and the EU is expected to contribute 10 million Euro per year.
Check sources:
