by Orkhan Sattarov, Head of the European Bureau of Vestnik Kavkaza
The UNSC resolution on Nagorno-Karabakh will mark its 21st anniversary in April this year. The first resolution and the ones that followed have not been fulfilled yet. Professor Wilfried Fuhrmann of Potsdam University, has given his vision of the legal aspect of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and described the attitude the international community could show for progress to be made on the issue.
The professor reminded that many resolutions that the UNSC and the General Assembly have passed have not been fulfilled. "The United Nations call on Armenia to abandon the occupation, to give back the occupied territories, and hand them over to Azerbaijan. Other organizations such as NATO or the OSCE also claimed this. NATO professes the aim of protecting the territorial integrity of countries, particularly the countries of the former USSR," noted Fuhrmann.
Azerbaijan is a member or partner of various international organizations, or “clubs”. It works together with or even is a member of the OSCE, the Council of Europe, the Organization of Islamic Conference, the CIS, the UN, NATO and others. Armenia is also a member of several clubs and makes use of the advantages without always accepting the rules of the clubs. Maybe the clubs are too big and the rules are ignored regularly," assumes the German expert.
"If Armenia claims that Karabakh has never been an integral part of Azerbaijan or the independent Republic of Azerbaijan, and claims that it was a pure uprising of the population due to the imploding, collapsing empire of the USSR and the uprising took place without external support, this is verifiably wrong. Armenia is violating natural law as well as the positive law of nations consciously and persistently. In this sense its reputation is low, and it is in an international context near to becoming an outlaw country being isolated," Fuhrmann told Vestnik Kavkaza.
In the expert's opinion, members of the club should at least take that fact into account, if there are no compulsive mechanisms or unanimous vote. This means peaceful solutions to restore the rights, not military intervention, so that the club could maintain confidence and prevent risks of losing stability.
"In case a member of a club violates the principles of international law or specific rules of the club, then every member has to draw conclusions from this. There is no need to exclude the member. But there is a need for protection and regard for its own reputation. You don’t support international trade with these countries, you don’t give them state loans, and you don’t give securities for exports to these countries and so on. This is not pleading for an extensive trade boycott. It means that any government support is synonymous with the transfer of reputation to this country. But thereby you are indirectly strengthening the position of this country, in the case of government support for trade with Armenia you indirectly support the Armenian position in the Karabakh conflict," concludes the expert.
Professor Fuhrmann touched upon the right of peoples to self-determination Armenian diplomacy always refers to the Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks. "The principle of self-determination is not valid for the victors of a battle in case of military force with expulsion, mass murder and even genocide. The principle of self-determination is only applicable ex-ante, i.e. as an alternative and thereby prior to the potential use of violence. The principle may – circumstances permitting – be applicable ex post, in case the exiles including the descendants are involved and with agreement of both sides. This situation is a scenario as if there is an ex-ante situation.
In the case of mass murder or genocide this right doesn’t exist ex post. Such an object – built with force – is not legal, even if it exists over a longer period of time. It may be maintained through the use of power and armed forces but it remains an object which is built on injustice," emphasized the professor.
In Fuhrmann's view, Armenia is trying to drag out the negotiations as much as possible to legitimize the artificial regime in Nagorno-Karabakh: "Surely time does play an important role. Such a construction, existing for a long time span over several generations has its existence and also the possibility to gain reputation and simultaneously forgetting. Every military acting country, i.e. every nationalistic player, knows about this advantage and tries to extend it over time in order to keep it definite finally."
"Inherited hostility and hate over generations are normally the consequence. Since the aggressor, as in the case of the military invasion of Armenian troops, searches for and makes use of a situation of military superiority, an arms race starts with the option to counterattack for a bigger, final victory," Fuhrmann claims.
