Treaties are meant to be upheld — it is an old legal principle. A treaty creates an obligation, and that obligation must be fulfilled. What else should business partners rely on, if not on the contracts they have signed?
What holds true in commerce, also applies in diplomacy, in politics, and generally in international life. We pride ourselves on upholding the rule of law. We criticize states that violate international law — even go as far as filing lawsuits against them.
Let's Take a Look at Ourselves
The Rome Statute is an international treaty that established the International Criminal Court. Humanity pursued an important principle: that justice is not merely for the victor, but that those responsible for the gravest crimes — aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes — can be held accountable regardless of their country of origin, the conflict in which they were involved, or whether they were on the winning or losing side. The Court’s task is not to address political questions, but legal ones.
Hungary has signed and ratified this treaty. Yet, the Prime Minister of Hungary has declared he will not respect the commitment his country undertook, and will not arrest the Prime Minister of Israel based on a valid arrest warrant, despite being legally obliged to do so.
The international Convention on Cluster Munitions establishes a binding commitment never to use cluster munitions under any circumstances, nor to develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain, or directly or indirectly transfer them to others.
And yet, the Czech Republic supports the decision of allies such as the United States to supply Ukraine with this type of ammunition in its fight against Russian aggression. The Directorate of Information and Cyber Forces of the Czech Army stated that modern weapons, including cluster munitions suitable for targeting entrenched enemies, are essential for balancing Russia’s military advantage — especially since Russia itself uses such munitions against Ukrainian cities.
We are allies under the Washington Treaty and bound by the primary law of the European Union. And suddenly, we become active supporters — together with a few other countries — of forming ad hoc coalitions of the willing across both organizations, thus dividing our allies into closer and more distant ones. We place greater trust in some, while distrusting others. Such an approach will eventually backfire. One day, when we ourselves need foreign support, our allies might simply refer us to find a suitable coalition of the willing.
Somehow, we manage to refuse to fulfill obligations we have voluntarily undertaken. Hence comes the legitimate question: what exactly do we take seriously? What can anyone rely on from us?
Cyril Svoboda
