Russia - General Discussion.

[Ananda]

BBC Report on Russian parade of Western Armoured vehicle. Reinforce notion of deviance toward West, and building confidence of Russian public.

literally real life trolling. There were even suggestions that destroyed Leopard tanks should be put on display in Moscow in front of the Germany embassy.

This images have been circling around on Pro Russian accounts. Basically comparing Leopard 2 being capture recently, with German Reich Tanks being capture 80 years ago when Red Army drive West. Incidentally some of those Tanks capture in 1944 also come from Ukrainian front.

So yes, it is basically trolling by Russian toward Western Alliance. Ironically in 1944 Red Army drove West against common enemy with Western Allies.

 

[KipPotapych]

The West should put up a show of seized oligarch yachts and other assets. Perhaps a picture of the An-124 seized in Toronto which I believe has now been turned over to Ukraine. BTW I guess Russia won't be paying the million dollar parking fee Pearson Airport was charging. Having been screwed around by Canada's worst airport, I will give Russia a pass on that invoice.

The airplane is still sitting at the YYZ. Saw it myself just over two months ago, the last time I was in Toronto. It is sitting in the quiet corner and has not been moved in years now.

Seized Russian Antonov An-124 Has Been At Toronto Pearson So Long It’s On Google Maps

Since the seizure of the freighter, there has been no movement.

simpleflying.com

When you invade a country, blowback from the invaded country's friends is a fair move.

I recently commented on the subject in this or the other thread, but will add a little more. I am 100% with Feanor on the dirty move here and the cargo was the rapid Covid tests, 77 tonnes worth, and they were… for us. We closed our airspace for the Russian planes just before this one was going to depart (an hour or two before the departure, I believe, and would take a guess and say that the timing was for exactly this reason). Then we put the sanctions on the owner of the aircraft, the company called Volga Dnepr. All this while YYZ was demanding the parking fees, some of which, I believe, the Russian company paid in the beginning (though, I believe it is us - the government of Canada - who is on the hook for these fees, really). Then, a year and a half later, we passed the law that allowed us to seize the aircraft (and assets of any other individual (or a corporate entity) that we deem worth sanctioning). The law is probably in violation of international law, our own Charter, etc. Some experts say it’s ok though, which I really doubt (but I am no expert). So aside from dirty, the move was also potentially (and I personally think probably) illegal. Which is why the plane is still sitting in Toronto and likely will for the foreseeable future. I can clearly see us having to pay the fees the airport incurred, return the aircraft to the owner, pay some additional money to the owner, along with maintenance fees, and so on. Like I said in my previous post on the subject, our current government has to run ahead of the train on every issue, no matter how stupid and what it costs us (usually a whole lot) and they are extremely good at further discouraging already stagnating foreign investment. I am sure you are well aware of the issue, John, haha. This is no different. But we just have to show support in any crazy way possible - I mean our lawmakers gave a standing ovation to an actual nazi, lol. At least we are finally going to deliver 10 of the 50 promised ACSVs this summer and the Ukes will be able to use them in the fall after training somewhere in Europe.

This is behind a paywall, but there is some discussion on the subject of legality and whatnot:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/09/canada-sanctions-russia-volga-dnepr/

Last comment. I would also suggest that the company, Volga Dnepr, did not invade any country, but brought medical supplies that needed at the time. Our overall response is pretty embarrassing, actually. But the talk sure is loud.

 

[KipPotapych]

Shoigu is the new head of the Security Council instead of Patrushev. Gerasimov is staying put. The new Minister of Defence is Belousov (still to be confirmed by Duma, but is a given).

Владимир Путин представил силовой блок правительства

Подробнее на сайте

www.kommersant.ru

Edit: more context.

Patrushev’s new job is to yet be announced.

In regards to the new Minister of Defence (via Google translate);

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained Vladimir Putin's decision to offer Belousov for the post of Russian Defense Minister. According to him, the appointment of a civilian as the head of the defense department will increase the openness of the Ministry of Defense to innovations and advanced ideas.

“The Ministry of Defense should be absolutely open to innovation, to the introduction of all advanced ideas, to create conditions for economic competitiveness. That's probably why the president stopped at the candidacy of Andrei Removich Belousov”

Peskov reminded that in the past Belousov successfully headed the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia, for a long time he was an assistant to the president on economic issues.

The spokesman for the President of Russia also noted that the appointment of a new Minister of Defense will not change the current coordinate system, since personnel changes in the General Staff are not expected.

“This purpose does not change the coordinate system. The military component will be the prerogative of the head of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov, there are no changes”

The head of the State Duma Defense Committee Andrei Kartapolov noted in an interview with RIA Novosti that the president's decision to appoint Belousov as Minister of Defense suggests that today the department needs such a person.[…]

Andrey Belousov is a Russian statesman, Doctor of Economics, former First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation.

In 1981, he graduated with honors from the Faculty of Economics of Moscow State University with a degree in "economist-cybernetics" and for a long time was engaged in scientific activities. In 2006, he defended his thesis on "Contradictions and prospects for the development of the system of reproduction of the Russian economy" and received his doctorate.

From 2006 to 2008, Belousov was Deputy Minister of Economic Development and Trade, Deputy Minister of Economic Development. In 2012-2013, he headed the Ministry of Economic Development.

From 2013 to 2020, the statesman was an assistant to the President of Russia for economic issues. In January 2020, he was appointed First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia and held this position until May 7, 2024.

Кто будет новым министром обороны РФ вместо Шойгу: кто такой Андрей Белоусов и почему его кандидатуру предложили

Нынешний министр обороны Сергей Шойгу покинет свой пост, на его место президент России Владимир Путин предложил бывшего вице-премьера Андрея Белоусова. Об этом сообщили в Совете Федерации

m.lenta.ru

 

[seaspear]

This article goes into the demographic challenges facing Russia even mentioning that these discussions are now prohibited in Russia

https://www.inss.org.il/publication/russia-demographic/#:~:text=the%20invasion%20of%20ukraine%20has,and%20its%20composition%20has%20changed

.
Certainly these articles go into some depth of the issues facing Russia ,cutting back on healthcare services for both wounded and family serviceshave brought the birth-rate to record lows

https://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP162.html

Russia Is Ramping Up Its Defence Spending While Cutting Education And Health, UK Says

The country's military budget will soar by 68% in 2024 compared to this year and the war in Ukraine continues.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

2e59

 

[Inverno]

https://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP162.html

Nah, the Rand study goes back to 1997 and seems biased to me. Right now Russia and Ukraine look still quite healthy, even in the projection scenarios. Japan is far worse, China developing a huge overaging in the next decades.
But the healthcare and familiy services will of course have an impact of what's to come, worldwide.

Population & Demography Data Explorer

Explore data from the United Nations World Population Prospects.

ourworldindata.org

 

[seaspear]

Statistics can be a funny beast for sure but its easier to find such projections showing a large net loss of population for Russia even by 2030 down some millions with claims Putin addresses this by claiming those populations from annexed from Ukraine ,below are some of the projections I've come across that don't all match ,if you could consider would this have been reversed with resources directed at this through government incentives and ongoing family support instead of a war things might be very different

Russia: projected population by scenario 2036 | Statista

Both low and medium expectation set-ups forecast the population in Russia to follow a negative trend and decline between 2021 and 2036.

www.statista.com

The World Counts

www.theworldcounts.com

Russia’s Demographic Decline Will Be Deeper, Last Longer, and Hurt More Than Expected

On October 20, the Russian state statistical agency, Rosstat, issued a second report predicting that Russia’s population will continue to decline and be down more than seven million people by 2046. Rosstat’s first report came at the end of September and presented estimates that the Russian will...

jamestown.org

 

[Feanor]

It appears Putin is cleaning house in the Ministry of Defense. We have Shoygu, the eternal reindeer herder replaced with an economist and a complete civilian; Belousov. We also have two Russian high level generals, one that deals with logistics and the other with personnel, who are fired and are being criminally charged. Lastly we have another ranking rear-end deputy-Minister dismissed, though so far without criminal charges, and replaced with a professional auditor. It's clear Russian leadership has some questions about what's going on with funds being spent on the war. It's also clear that at least at this time the displeasure is aimed at the bean counters, and administrators, not at the actual commanders. In principle this is logical. An important question arises, the last time there was a civilian MinDef, this was part of a major reform of the armed forces. Is another major reform coming? One is certainly due. Many lessons have been learned in the current war and many problems remain, well identified but unsolved. However launching a major reform during a war is also quite challenging, and this isn't just any war, it's the largest war Russia has fought since WWII. It's also possible the current shakeup will only be aimed at the rear echelons, the administrators and bean counters. Belousov himself is famous for a ~30 second clip where he makes some unpleasant remarks about Russian UAV production being completely and totally dependent on imported components. For this he has the reputation of a truthsayer, though whether this is real or PR is unclear. He himself made the following remarks shortly after assuming the position of Minister of Defense;

- The first order of business is providing weapons to the grouping in the war zone. There is a large circle of questions on this part in every direction, there are monthly plans, but their realization requires daily and even hourly involvement.
- The enemy learns quickly. We have to get ahead of them, develop new methods of fighting.
- First order of business - staffing the armed forces, we're not talking about mobilization. We need to work on military education, there are certain accumulated problems here.
- There are questions about timely payment of wages and providing housing to military personnel.
- Everything we have effective in this country needs to work towards victory.
- The principle is one can be mistaken but one cannot lie.

To me this suggests a shakeup of the rear-end bureaucrats, an attempt to ensure military personnel are paid appropriately, and get all their benefits, and a focus on the defense industry.

VK.com | VK

vk.com

Аудитор Счетной Палаты стал зам.министра обороны РФ

Путин назначил заместителем министра обороны РФ аудитория Счетной Палаты Олега Савельева. Олег Савельев, новый замглавы Минобороны: ▪️Родился в 1965 году в Ленинграде, закончил Ленинградский политехнический институт; ▪️Занимался пиар-консультированием, политтехнологиями, политическими…

colonelcassad.livejournal.com

Биография Андрея Белоусова

Андрей Рэмович Белоусов родился 17 марта 1959 года в Москве в семье советского экономиста Рэма Белоусова. Его мать — Алиса Павловна — была радиохимиком,... РИА Новости, 11.09.2024

ria.ru

Начальник Главного управления кадров Минобороны арестован по делу о взятке

Начальник Главного управления кадров Минобороны РФ Юрий Кузнецов задержан по подозрению в получении крупной взятки, сообщила официальный представитель Следственного комитета РФ (СКР) Светлана Петренко.

www.interfax.ru

https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/20630375

 

[Terran]

It appears Putin is cleaning house in the Ministry of Defense. We have Shoygu, the eternal reindeer herder replaced with an economist and a complete civilian

Just to counter point.
Shoigu just took the head of the security council a move like going from American Sec def to National Security adviser. This isn’t a firing nor a demotion it’s a major shift but still in the machine.
Next Shoigu may wear a uniform but he is no General or military officer. In fact I am not even sure he has served any military service outside of his office holdings. The Uniform comes with the office. This is a hold over from the czars when said positions were held by Royalty.
Finally Belousov moving into the position of Defense minister is a surprise but may have implications that the Russians are moving to a reconstruction and longer term war.

 

[Feanor]

Just to counter point.
Shoigu just took the head of the security council a move like going from American Sec def to National Security adviser. This isn’t a firing nor a demotion it’s a major shift but still in the machine.
Next Shoigu may wear a uniform but he is no General or military officer. In fact I am not even sure he has served any military service outside of his office holdings. The Uniform comes with the office. This is a hold over from the czars when said positions were held by Royalty.
Finally Belousov moving into the position of Defense minister is a surprise but may have implications that the Russians are moving to a reconstruction and longer term war.

Shoygu comes from the MChS, which isn't quite a military organization, but has para-military functions in wartime (including civil defense and some security functions), and it has a relevant rank structure. Shoygu was awarded a Major General rank in the 1990s. So technically he is a general, but you're right more in the sense that general ranks were awarded in the empire then in any modern sense. As for whether this is a demotion or not, it's coming at the same time as a cleaning of house for multiple other positions, so no, not a demotion, but certainly part of a picture where a change of leadership has been decided on.

 

[Terran]

Well true…. The MChS or Ministry of Emergency situations was established in December 1990. And in April 1991 Shoigu was made its head. It’s first head.
So again the Rank came with the office. The Uniform came with the office.
He was a civil engineer and a functionary in the Soviet system. Ergo all the military experience Shoigu had was as being Minister of Defense.

 

[KipPotapych]

ICC issues arrest warant for President Vladimir Putin[…]

Hopefully this will wake up more people in e.g., Asia, Africa and South America. It's about time to get off the fence.

I remembered about this specific post when reading the news today, the bolded part specifically (bolding is mine). In the news last spring:

On Friday, six Democratic and Republican Senators sent a letter to Biden urging him to support the ICC, which issued a warrant for Putin’s arrest last week, more than a year after Russia invaded Ukraine.

“Despite the urgent need to hold the perpetrators of atrocities accountable, as evidenced by the ICC’s arrest warrant for Putin, recent reporting suggests that your administration has not yet used this new authority to provide much-needed assistance to the ICC’s efforts,” the letter reads.

US Senators ask Biden to help ICC with Putin war crimes probe

The US has not agreed to provide information to ICC out of concern that the court could one day scrutinise US officials.

www.aljazeera.com

In the news today:

Across the Capitol, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) vowed to “feverishly work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle in both chambers to levy damning sanctions against the ICC.”

In a statement, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that “Khan’s kangaroo court has no jurisdiction in Israel to pursue these anti-Semitic and politically motivated ‘charges,’” adding that he looks “forward to making sure neither Khan, his associates nor their families will ever set foot again in the United States.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/20/republican-lawmakers-icc-netanyahu-warrant-00158914

Last spring:

“Well, I think it’s justified,” Biden said of the warrant on Friday. “But the question is – [the ICC is] not recognised internationally by us either. But I think it makes a very strong point.”

‘It’s justified’: Joe Biden welcomes ICC arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin | Joe Biden | The Guardian

US president says Russian leader has clearly committed war crimes and move makes ‘a very strong point’

amp.theguardian.com

Today:

In a statement on Monday, Biden called the ICC’s efforts “outrageous.”

Biden denounces ICC for ‘outrageous’ implication of equivalence between Israel and Hamas | CNN Politics

The Biden administration on Monday forcefully denounced efforts by the International Criminal Court to seek arrest warrants for top Israeli officials and Hamas leaders, saying the court’s efforts put the terrorist organization and a top US ally on equivalent footing.

amp.cnn.com

Without a doubt, helps those “on the fence” a lot.

 

[Rob c]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that the US does not recognize the ICC's jurisdiction.

 

[KipPotapych]

No, they do not. Neither does Russia nor Israel. But the contrast of messaging is sure something else, which why I remembered that specific post when reading.

 

[Feanor]

The arrests continue. Lt. Gen. Shamarin, head of comms, was arrested for corruption as well as the head of the state defense order Vladimir Verteletskiy, and Lt. Gen. Suhrab Ahmedov. They also arrested the former commander of the 58th Army Major General Ivan Popov, allegedly for stealing resources allocated to the construction of the defense line last summer. It remains to be seen where things stop but the clean-up continues.

VK.com | VK

vk.com

VK.com | VK

vk.com

Арестован начальник управления департамента Минобороны по гособоронзаказу

Суд арестовал главу управления департамента Министерства обороны по обеспечению гособоронзаказа Владимира Вертелецкого по обвинению в превышении полномочий,... РИА Новости, 27.05.2024

ria.ru

https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/20863315

EDIT: Rybar provides some good context. Lt. Gen. Ahmedov is the commander of the 20th Army and his forces have been pushing in the Terny-Torskoe area with lackluster outcomes for quite some time. He's also alleged to be responsible for organizing formations of personnel within striking range of Ukrainian missile units that caused mass casualties as a result.

Рыбарь

О предполагаемой отставке генерал-лейтенанта Сухраба Ахмедова Что ж, изменения и перестановки коснулись не только состава органов военного управления ВС РФ, но и ситуации на фронте. Старше Эдды пишет, что командующего 20-ой армией Ахмедова сняли с должности. По нашей информации, пока речь идёт...

t.me

 

[Big_Zucchini]

No, they do not. Neither does Russia nor Israel. But the contrast of messaging is sure something else, which why I remembered that specific post when reading.

I doubt legislators expressing a need to support ICC due to standing arrest warrants against Putin, whole heartedly believe that.

The ICC may be an international body, but that does not make it the only body able to investigate and issue arrest warrants on international events. Any country's local justice system can do that, and they can request any country to support that. Whether or not others respect that request depends on the requesting party's soft power.

The US can simply use the same evidence presented to the ICC and ICJ in its own supreme court and issue their own arrest warrants against Putin, all while applying sanctions on the ICC.

An arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant would effectively signal to the entire west that if nothing changes and they become entangled in a war, their leaders can too face the same threat.

 

[Feanor]

An arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant would effectively signal to the entire west that if nothing changes and they become entangled in a war, their leaders can too face the same threat.

Well in theory that's the way it's supposed to work. Any leader can face the threat of prosecution if they commit potentially criminal acts. One of the problems is that this hasn't been consistently or equally applied to all parties at all times to the same extent. And I think this issue goes to the heart of the divide between Russia and the west. It's certainly not the sole, or even the main reason, but it's a substantial one.

 

[KipPotapych]

I doubt legislators expressing a need to support ICC due to standing arrest warrants against Putin, whole heartedly believe that.

The ICC may be an international body, but that does not make it the only body able to investigate and issue arrest warrants on international events. Any country's local justice system can do that, and they can request any country to support that. Whether or not others respect that request depends on the requesting party's soft power.

The US can simply use the same evidence presented to the ICC and ICJ in its own supreme court and issue their own arrest warrants against Putin, all while applying sanctions on the ICC.

An arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant would effectively signal to the entire west that if nothing changes and they become entangled in a war, their leaders can too face the same threat.

I don’t disagree at all. And I also agree with Feanor. This is just playing the side of the field that is convenient in the circumstances. I feel like we already had this discussion (maybe even with you, Zucchini?) that none of these organizations, this court, UN SC, etc matter to the big boys, even the regional powers - those with might will do what they see fit.

As for the Americans, this is not a new thing either with this particular court. They had their first (or most recent?) personal run in with it a few years ago when the court attempted to investigate the crimes committed by the American troops in Afghanistan. It didn’t turn out well for the court, lol.

The US has imposed sanctions on senior officials in the International Criminal Court (ICC), including chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused the court of "illegitimate attempts to subject Americans to its jurisdiction".

The Hague-based ICC is currently investigating whether US forces committed war crimes in Afghanistan.[…]

President Donald Trump issued an executive order in June, which allows the US to block the assets of ICC employees and stop them entering the country.

Addressing reporters on Wednesday, Mr Pompeo said Ms Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko, the head of the Jurisdiction, Complementarity and Cooperation Division, were to be sanctioned under this order.

Dismissing the ICC as a "thoroughly broken and corrupted institution", he said those who continued to "materially support those individuals risk exposure to sanctions as well".

The US state department has also restricted the issuance of visas for ICC staff involved in "efforts to investigate US personnel".

International Criminal Court officials sanctioned by US - BBC News

The chief prosecutor at the Hague-based ICC, Fatou Bensouda, is among those sanctioned.

www.bbc.com

Unlike in many (developed) countries in the world, in the United States nothing tops their internal legislation (theirs also supersedes everyone else’s -> sanctions they impose are expected to be followed by everyone is the simplest example). Russia had passed similar legislation fairly recently. Before that they obliged by the decisions of European Court of Human Rights, for example, and it is no longer the case.

I just thought it was funny when reading and immediately thought there must people lining up to jump off that fence all over the place right about now.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

I don’t disagree at all. And I also agree with Feanor. This is just playing the side of the field that is convenient in the circumstances. I feel like we already had this discussion (maybe even with you, Zucchini?) that none of these organizations, this court, UN SC, etc matter to the big boys, even the regional powers - those with might will do what they see fit.

As for the Americans, this is not a new thing either with this particular court. They had their first (or most recent?) personal run in with it a few years ago when the court attempted to investigate the crimes committed by the American troops in Afghanistan. It didn’t turn out well for the court, lol.

The US has imposed sanctions on senior officials in the International Criminal Court (ICC), including chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused the court of "illegitimate attempts to subject Americans to its jurisdiction".

The Hague-based ICC is currently investigating whether US forces committed war crimes in Afghanistan.[…]

President Donald Trump issued an executive order in June, which allows the US to block the assets of ICC employees and stop them entering the country.

Addressing reporters on Wednesday, Mr Pompeo said Ms Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko, the head of the Jurisdiction, Complementarity and Cooperation Division, were to be sanctioned under this order.

Dismissing the ICC as a "thoroughly broken and corrupted institution", he said those who continued to "materially support those individuals risk exposure to sanctions as well".

The US state department has also restricted the issuance of visas for ICC staff involved in "efforts to investigate US personnel".

International Criminal Court officials sanctioned by US - BBC News

The chief prosecutor at the Hague-based ICC, Fatou Bensouda, is among those sanctioned.

www.bbc.com

Unlike in many (developed) countries in the world, in the United States nothing tops their internal legislation (theirs also supersedes everyone else’s -> sanctions they impose are expected to be followed by everyone is the simplest example). Russia had passed similar legislation fairly recently. Before that they obliged by the decisions of European Court of Human Rights, for example, and it is no longer the case.

I just thought it was funny when reading and immediately thought there must people lining up to jump off that fence all over the place right about now.

I think it has less to do with "might makes right" and more to do with:
1. Sovereignty.
2. Protection vs political activism.
3. Incompatibility of fixed treaties with dynamic wars.

What do I mean by these?
1. A court above your own means someone can dictate your actions. This is often neglected if one thinks the court will never look at them, but when it does, the natural reaction is to be defensive and reject its authority. Sovereignty is something every nation strives to.

2. Courts like the ICC and ICJ, and treaties about warfare, exist within the framework of the UN. Democracies are a minority in the UN. So naturally any UN organization has the potential of being hijacked to become a political rather than productive tool. Therefore the more democratic, progressive, and liberal a country is - the more reason it has to be skeptical of such organizations.

3. If treaties are to be compatible with modern warfare, they must be very general, or update rapidly.
Take a look for example at cluster munitions. Banned by convention, one might say the majority of the world's nations have signed on so there is little to no danger. But those that haven't signed on, just so happen to be those that are actually frequently involved in warfare.
This treaty may have made sense 30 years ago, but today there are munitions with far lower dud rates. And of course the reality is that those who need to use certain weapons for survival - will use them.

 

[Feanor]

I think it has less to do with "might makes right" and more to do with:
1. Sovereignty.
2. Protection vs political activism.
3. Incompatibility of fixed treaties with dynamic wars.

What do I mean by these?
1. A court above your own means someone can dictate your actions. This is often neglected if one thinks the court will never look at them, but when it does, the natural reaction is to be defensive and reject its authority. Sovereignty is something every nation strives to.

2. Courts like the ICC and ICJ, and treaties about warfare, exist within the framework of the UN. Democracies are a minority in the UN. So naturally any UN organization has the potential of being hijacked to become a political rather than productive tool. Therefore the more democratic, progressive, and liberal a country is - the more reason it has to be skeptical of such organizations.

3. If treaties are to be compatible with modern warfare, they must be very general, or update rapidly.
Take a look for example at cluster munitions. Banned by convention, one might say the majority of the world's nations have signed on so there is little to no danger. But those that haven't signed on, just so happen to be those that are actually frequently involved in warfare.
This treaty may have made sense 30 years ago, but today there are munitions with far lower dud rates. And of course the reality is that those who need to use certain weapons for survival - will use them.

The problem is that when two sovereignty-based arguments clash then it does become might makes right. And of course an international treaty that limits what you can or can not do is a binding voluntary surrender of some piece of your sovereignty to the authority of a document or an organization.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

The problem is that when two sovereignty-based arguments clash then it does become might makes right. And of course an international treaty that limits what you can or can not do is a binding voluntary surrender of some piece of your sovereignty to the authority of a document or an organization.

Yes but I don't believe "might makes right" is dominant in the west. International treaties are typically western initiatives. And every western armed force essentially invests enormous resources into fighting in a way that isn't ultra genocidal. But these treaties are usually created under the framework of the UN, and that's where the issue of political activism comes in, to the point where it seriously undermines these treaties.

Let's say that entirely hypothetically the west initiates an anti-cluster munitions treaty. The idea is they decide to limit themselves, and don't delude themselves thinking authoritarian regimes would comply. A group of experts sets the dud rate at 5% and establishes that anything below that is safe to use and UXO can be easily removed.
Then in a vote by a general council including all nations, the authoritarian regimes band together to change that to 0.5%. Now it no longer follows the scientific method, and western nations are crippled in some forms of combat capabilities.