State-Sponsored Terrorism and the Legitimacy of Ukrainian Self-Defense: Why Counter-Strikes on Russian Ports Are Justified

Russia’s systematic destruction of Ukrainian ports, grain elevators, and terminal facilities in the Odesa region has crossed the line of a conventional military conflict. International legal experts and foreign analysts are unanimous: targeted bombings of civilian logistics—aimed at manufacturing artificial food shortages and forcibly seizing foreign markets—qualify strictly as international terrorism. The Kremlin is weaponizing food, holding nations across Africa and the Middle East hostage to its geopolitical ambitions.

In light of these realities, Ukraine holds a full and undeniable legal right to a symmetrical response.

Mirror strikes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine against Russian military and port infrastructure on the Black Sea—including the export terminals in Novorossiysk and Tuapse—can by no means be considered terrorism. Unlike the aggressor, which strikes commercial vessels and civilian food corridors, Ukraine’s retaliatory actions constitute legitimate self-defense. This is a necessary step aimed at protecting its own economy, dismantling enemy logistics, and compelling a terrorist regime to halt its criminal assaults.