In this paper we review the significant political events and economic forces shaping contemporary mi-gration within and into Europe. Various data sources are deployed to chronicle five phases of migration affecting the continent over the period 1945–2015: immediate postwar migrations of resettlement, the mass migration of ‘guestworkers’, the phase of economic restructuring and family reunion, asylum-seek-ing and irregular migration, and the more diverse dynamics unfolding in an enlarged European Union post-2004, not forgetting the spatially variable impact of the 2008 economic crisis. In recent years, in a scenario of rising migration globally, there has been an increase in intra-European migration com-pared to immigration from outside the continent. However, this may prove to be temporary given the convergence of economic indicators between ‘East’ and ‘West’ within the EU and the European Eco-nomic Area, and that ongoing population pressures from the global South, especially Africa, may inten-sify. Managing these pressures will be a major challenge from the perspective of a demographically shrinking Europe.

Following the so-called “special military operation”, which was in fact an open aggression against Ukraine, Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe. This step has significant legal consequences, including for the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights. Meanwhile, many individual applications were filed with the Court, and Ukraine brought an inter-State complaint against Russia. Ukraine has also triggered the International Court of Justice. The Court has already ordered provisional measures. The ICC Prosecutor has launched an investigation into the most serious international crimes, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Ukraine and delivered arrest warrants against the Russian President and his Commissioner for Children’s Rights. There is a serious discussion going on concerning the establishment of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression. This text deals with some aspects of the Russian “special military operation” cases before international courts. It attempts to identify what role the international courts may play in the new phase of the conflict in Ukraine and the extent and effect of their intervention, given the jurisdictional limitations and the inability to enforce judgments.

‘The special military operation’ conducted by the Russian Federation, including the ‘anti-terrorist operation’ in the Black and Azov Seas carried out by its Black Sea Fleet, meets the definition of aggression, which, in addition to violating the UN Charter, also violates the provisions of UNCLOS (Article 301) and the San Remo Manual (general provisions, first three sections). The unilateral announcement (through a navigational warning) of an ‘anti-terrorist operation’, and in fact a sea blockade of Ukrainian ports, is contrary to the content of UNCLOS (freedom of navigation) and does not meet the requirements for methods of fighting at sea (sea blockade, zones - San Remo Manual).
The missile attacks on civilian and protected objects located on the territory of the Ukrainian state, carried out by ships and aircraft of the Black Sea Fleet, as well as artillery and missiles shelling of coastal towns, constitute a gross violation (war crime) of the international humanitarian law of armed conflicts (San Remo Manual). On contrary, the use of unmanned surface vehicles (drones) by the Ukrainian side in the arak on the Sevastopol base is in accordance with the provisions of the Manual (means of warfare at sea). Particular attention in the discussed armed conflict deserves art. 35 (c) UNCLOS relating to the Turkish Straits, which allows Turkey (based on the Montreaux Convention) to significantly influence the strategic and operational situation in the Black Sea by denying the use of the straits to warships (Turkey closed them to warships all flags). The voting procedure for informal members of the UN Security Council should be considered ineffective, which in the discussed case, when the aggressor is a state – a permanent member of the Security Council makes it difficult to apply measures provided for by international law against it and forces the use of ad hoc solutions, such as ‘grain corridors’.