The month of August 2025 saw major political upheavals. First came the Alaska Summit, where President Trump met President Putin. Days later, in the White House, President Trump met several European Union leaders, most importantly, President Zelensky. The purpose of these meetings is to cease the Russia-Ukraine war, which has been ongoing since February 2022. According to the reports and statements until the time of this writing, the cessation of this war is now centered around the demands made by the Russian President in the Alaska summit involving the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from its territories of Donetsk and Luhansk, in exchange of Russia’s promise to halt further advances and freezing the frontline in the occupied regions of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. However, President Zelensky rejected the demand for a land cession, calling for a ceasefire as the basis for further negotiations.

These developments now unfold almost daily through press releases and statements by the concerned leaders. Yet behind the political stage lies a critical legal question: how does international law view territorial cession under political and military coercion? A cession concluded under political or military coercion cannot create a lawful title over the ceded territory, but rather amounts to the acquisition of territory by force, a practice that international law prohibits.

Prohibition on Forceful Acquisition

International law is clear with its rule that territory cannot be acquired by force. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of any state, and this rule has become part of jus cogens, a peremptory norm allowing no derogation. Moreover, the Friendly Relations Declaration of 1970 made this principle explicit by declaring territorial acquisition through force as illegal. It was the experience of two world wars that shaped this rule. The objective was to outlaw conquest as a legitimate means of expansion of territorial borders. However, States remain free to adjust their boundaries, but only through lawfully recognised methods such as peaceful cession, negotiation, or mutual agreement. With force and coercion entering the picture, the resulting arrangement is treated as an invalid transfer of sovereignty under international law.

Consent and Coercion in Treaty Law

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties reflects a principle familiar even in domestic contract law: an agreement made under duress is no agreement at all. Article 52 makes this explicit, declaring void any treaty........

© Courting The Law