Are Russia's attacks on Ukraine's power grid a war crime?

Analysis: bombing aimed at damaging civilian morale does not offer a military advantage and should be regarded as unlawful

As Russia continues its assault on Ukraine's power grid despite evidence of the dire impact on civilians and condemnation from world leaders, the question arises whether such action is a war crime. Russian officials continue to insist that the power grid is a legitimate military target. Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov is reported to have said that Russia was using high-precision weapons against energy facilities that support combat operations. The Ukrainian military responded that its forces used an autonomous energy supply and that the strikes had no effect on their fighting capability.

The targeting of any military object under international humanitarian law involves the four core principles of the law of armed conflict: distinction, military necessity, proportionality and avoidance of unnecessary suffering. However, it especially engages the principles of distinction and proportionality.

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RTÉ News, Ukraine scrambles to restore power supply after more Russian attacks

Central to the issue of what constitutes a legitimate target is the distinction between military objectives and civilian objects under international law. In order to constitute a lawful military objective, the target must meet certain criteria. First, it must make an effective contribution to military action and, second, its total or partial destruction, capture or neutralisation must offer a definite military advantage. In many cases, these are not clear cut criteria.

Having established that a proposed target meets these requirements, commanders must then ask if the actual attack is necessary. In this way, an overriding principle remains that all military action taken must meet the requirement of military necessity. While this is clear in principle, in practice it is often difficult to challenge the view that certain action was necessary and justified on military grounds.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time energy grids have been attacked during armed conflict. Such attacks occurred during the Korean and Vietnam wars, but such tactics did not bring an end to the conflict or undermine the morale of the civilian populations under attack.

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RTÉ Radio 1's News At One, Ukrainian correspondent with the Financial Times, Christopher Miller, on how Russian missile strikes have forced emergency power shutdowns n Ukraine

During the NATO Kosovo campaign against Serbia in 1999, power supplies were initially targeted with carbon fibre filaments causing temporary blackouts. This was followed by deliberate targeting of major power transmission stations with high-explosive munitions. Officials said this was intended to disrupt military operations and not to target civilians. However, in reality NATO appeared to be attempting to increase hardship on civilians so as to increase dissatisfaction with the Serbian government. The attacks also caused serious damage to water utilities. Many Serbs blamed NATO and this increased their sense of victimhood.

Likewise, the strategic bombing of Iraq in 1991 was portrayed as an attack on Baghdad’s offensive military capabilities. Attacks on civilian structures such as electrical plants and oil refineries were deliberate and caused serious civilian suffering. This was also intended to create post war leverage over Iraq and punish what some considered the not so blameless Iraqi civilian population for the invasion of Kuwait. This strategy contained elements that were reminiscent of the controversial, shocking and unnecessary targeting of German cities by Allied forces towards the end of World War II.

Attempts to influence the political leaders of a country by depriving the civilian population of electricity is often associated with a strategy of increasing costs of continuing the military campaign and attempting to force a change in policy. This was the justification for attacking electric power in Vietnam and Korea, but it was not successful in either case,

We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences

From RTÉ Radio 1's News At One, RTÉ Europe Editor Tony Connelly reports from Kyiv on how large parts of Ukraine remain without heat or power after Russian air strikes

It is also unlikely to succeed in Ukraine. An attack on electricity production in order to directly affect the military forces of a country is a relatively new phenomenon, having been used for the first time in the war against Iraq. This is primarily a reflection of how much more dependent the military is on electricity to perform activities, such as powering air defence radars and communications, than in the past. In contrast, during World War II, attacks on electric power for military effects were specifically rejected because of the length of time between an attack and the impact on military operations.

In Iraq, the negative impact of these attacks on world opinion far outweighed the military benefits accrued by bombing electrical power. The implication is clear: national electrical systems are not a viable or legitimate target and will prove counterproductive to the political aims of the war.

In strategic air operations, the targeting of national power systems has little utility

Despite the historical precedents, bombing aimed at damaging civilian morale does not offer a definite military advantage and should be regarded as unlawful and a war crime. Although national power grids are vulnerable to air attack, history teaches us that such attacks do not offer any significant military advantage. The military is most likely insulated from the consequences while civilian suffering has not been shown to influence government policy.

If the real purpose of destroying electricity supplies is to degrade command and control systems or weapons production, then the time and effort would be better spent concentrating on the intelligence and alternative ways of directly attacking these systems. In strategic air operations, the targeting of national power systems has little utility. In the past, implementing international law has been hampered by selectivity and hypocrisy. Declaring such actions by any state as a violation of the laws of war and a war crime is long overdue.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ