Geopolitical power asymmetries and transitional justice in ongoing conflicts: a comparative study of Ukraine and Gaza

Abstract

Transitional Justice has historically focused on political transitions from authoritarian rule to democracy and on conflict settings where hostilities have ceased. In recent years however, the paradigm of transitional justice with a backward-looking approach has come under increasing scrutiny. Scholars have expanded its scope to contexts of consolidated democracies and ongoing violent conflicts. Despite the outstanding impact of power dynamics for the implementation and effectiveness of transitional justice mechanisms in ongoing conflicts, the tension between law and politics, which places transitional justice under cross pressures is often overlooked. This thesis asks in what extend transitional justice in the ongoing conflicts of Ukraine and Gaza is shaped by these power dynamics. Taking the critiques of international criminal law and transitional justice into consideration, the thesis adopts a comparative approach structured around three key variables: legal accountability, geopolitical and diplomatic support and narrative framing. The analysis draws on domestic and international legal and policy documentation from international organizations, states and political statements. The outcomes indicate that while both conflict settings have experienced approaches to transitional justice, the implementation and effectiveness remain unbalanced and are frequently limited by the politicisation of certain transitional justice measures. Gaza continues to be marginalized and to face political obstacles, while Ukraine enjoys a broad geopolitical and material support.