New Paper Shows Civilian Men Have a Right to Flee the Ukraine War
Ukraine’s martial law banning men 18-60 from leaving the country should be reconsidered, the researchers say.
Doctoral researcher Jenna Norosky and Human Security Lab Director Charli Carpenter will publish a new article this month on civilian protection in the Ukraine war in the latest issue of the leading human rights journal Human Rights Quarterly.
The article details the international law pertinent to the right of all civilians to flee an armed conflict regardless of their gender and documents the negative impacts on men, women, children and the war effort of Ukraine’s martial law banning “military-age” men 18-60 from crossing the border to leave the country except under specific exemptions. The paper also draws on two randomizd surveys with Ukrainian citizens conducted June 2022 and July 2023 since the start of the Russian invasion.
The paper culminates a Human Security Lab project, sponsored by the College of Social Behavioral Sciences and the Cole Endowment for Faculty Excellence, to amplify civilian voices from the Ukraine theater, look at the impact of gender norms on war and civilians, and to crowdsource wisdom from humanitarian and human rights thought leaders at the global level around this important issue largely overlooked by human rights groups thus far.
Amid Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, the human rights community has understandably focused its attention on human rights violations committed by the Russian state, leaving the human rights implications of Ukraine’s martial law on civilians largely unexamined. This article highlights the ways Ukraine’s travel restriction on “battle-aged” civilian men has harmed three overlapping groups: civilian men, families (including women and children), and trans and nonbinary individuals. It then demonstrates that wartime policies such as this one are at odds with several areas of international human rights and humanitarian law: the right to freedom of movement, the right to conscientious objection, and the principle of respect for familylife—all of which are meant to be implemented without discrimination on basis of gender. We conclude this type of gender-based law is not justified according to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’ rules on derogation in time of national emergencies and emerging customary law and should receive greater attention by the human rights community.
The paper can be accessed here.