“Volodymir Zelensky, as the head of a hostile regime, is a legitimate military target for Russia”: this is what Dmitry Medvedev, vice-president of the Russian Security Council, declared to the Tass agency in recent hours.
The moment is not coincidental: just yesterday, in fact, the presidential mandate of the Ukrainian leader would have expired, were it not for the fact that, clearly due to the war, no new elections were called.
But, even in the case of elections, nothing would have changed for Moscow: Medvedev would have continued - regarding Zelensky - by stating that "He is already at the head of a political regime hostile to Russia, which is waging war on us, and the leaders of the countries waging war are always considered a legitimate military objective. For us it is already a war criminal and the loss of its official status changes nothing".
In fact, from a point of law, this threat has a legal basis: given that, according to the legislation regulating armed conflicts, attacks can be made only military objectives, both people and things are to be considered as such. Among the first, those that are of interest here are included:
- members of enemy armed forces and other categories of legitimate combatants, recognized as such by specific rules;
- the CDsunprivileged combatants (spies, saboteurs and mercenaries), while taking part in an operation;
- i contractor not formally included in the regular enemy forces.
And the heads of state?
The answer is twofold: they can be considered - legitimately - military objective when they are also commanders of their own Armed Forces, as it often happens; otherwise, they could be made prisoners of war, due to their political importance, but he didn't killthe. The same fate could befall the other members of the government.
In the case of the Ukrainian president, therefore, since he is also head of his own armed forces, he can certainly be targeted by the Russian Federation, provided that his eventual killing occurs, however, by Putin's regular forces and not, for example, through spies or saboteurs.
The same argument, of course, could apply in reverse, as well as, in the event of NATO intervention, for all those heads of state of the coalition who, as mentioned, should also be commanders in chief of their respective armed forces.
Those expressed are cynical concepts: but unfortunately, it's war!
The law cannot do anything other than try, to the extent possible, to regulate it, avoiding - or "attempting to avoid" - that, already in the suffering of the same, it can degenerate further, without any brakes. Relying, always and ultimately, on the conscience of decision-makers, both political and military.
Photo: Presidency of the Council of Ministers archives / Quirinale
