Item

Abstract

The Collective Security Treaty Organization’s military intervention in Kazakhstan in January 2022 quashed the unfolding nonviolent protest movement in the country. Nonetheless, the intervention raised few concerns with regard to the prohibition of the use of force in international law. Among states and scholars, the invitation issued by the Kazakh president was regarded as sufficient to justify the intervention. This article critically assesses this understanding. The intervening states limited the Kazakh people’s right to self-determination and violated protesters’ human rights. Against this backdrop, the authors develop an argument for why international law prohibits states from intervening in another state in order to quash nonviolent protest movements. While the intervention in Kazakhstan serves as the primary example, the argument also applies more broadly and is of particular importance as nonviolent protest movements have a central role in spreading democracy and advancing human rights.