What Happened?
Last week’s fighting, which killed at least sixteen people, represented the bloodiest few days since the two countries fought their brief Four Day War in April 2016.
Since the late Soviet era, Armenia and Azerbaijan have fought over Nagorno-Karabakh, a mostly ethnically Armenian breakaway region of Azerbaijan. After the Soviet Union collapsed, ethnic Armenians in the territory declared their independence from Azerbaijan. But Azerbaijan still considers the area part of its sovereign territory.
In 1994, the two sides reached a ceasefire, which led to a period of relative stability. Occasional skirmishes still took place along the Nagorno-Karabakh line of contact. But this week’s escalation went much further. Fighting boiled over along the Tavush region in Armenia, on the far northeast side of the disputed territory, and in areas populated with civilian villages on both sides. One elderly Azerbaijani civilian was killed in this week’s violence.
Who Started It?
It is still unclear who initiated this latest round of fighting. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan have tossed accusations against each other, as they generally do whenever their forces clash.
Azerbaijan blamed Armenia for launching an assault against the frontline troops of Azerbaijan and shelling Azerbaijani villages in the Tovuz district, bordering Armenian Tavush, with mortars and howitzers. Armenia, in response, accused the Azerbaijani army of a breakthrough attempt on the border. Then, on July 16, Azerbaijan threatened to strike Armenia’s nuclear power plant, which is close to the country’s capital and provides almost half of Armenia’s electricity. Armenia’s Foreign Ministry called this threat “genocidal.”
Meanwhile, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev removed Elmar Mammadyarov from his former position as foreign minister, which he had held since 2004, accusing him of conducting “meaningless negotiations” with Armenia. Aliyev appointed former education minister Jeyhun Bayramov, who has limited foreign policy credentials, as Mammadyarov’s replacement. The situation is still volatile, as Yerevan claimed it repelled a July 21 Azerbaijani attack in the same region, an accusation Baku denies.
How Are Ordinary Citizens in Both Countries Reacting?
Both countries are experiencing a rally-around-the-flag moment. At first, opposition figures put their differences aside and pledged to support the troops. In Azerbaijan, however, pro-war sentiment got out of hand on the night of July 14, when thousands took to Baku’s Azadilq Square for a demonstration that turned into a fracas. What started as a largely spontaneous nationalist march in support of the war somehow devolved into antigovernment and anti-police outbursts of anger. A small group stormed the parliament building as police used tear gas, rubber bullets, and water cannons to break up the melee. Protesters were angry at the country’s high death toll in the fighting, including a well-respected and decorated general. These demonstrations are the biggest and most visible expression of grassroots discontent in Azerbaijan recently, highlighting that war can have unpredictable consequences. The protests come on the heels of rising social grievances and anger over police brutality as the country’s social contract has frayed amid stagnating economic performance and the coronavirus pandemic.
In Armenia, political polarization remains high, especially in light of the government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashiniyan’s widely criticized response to the coronavirus. The fighting appears to have put those issues on the back burner, at least for the parliamentary opposition. Far-right elements and members of the former government, which was ousted in the 2018 Velvet Revolution, have been more critical. Pashiniyan and his My Step Alliance, however, continue to enjoy broad legitimacy and will likely weather this storm. Yet, with positions hardening in both countries, the prospects for a negotiated solution to the conflict remain dim.
How Is the Coronavirus Pandemic Reshaping the Humanitarian Situation and Conditions on the Ground?
Military conflict is the last thing that either country needs right now. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are struggling to contain the coronavirus pandemic. Neither country benefits from an escalating conflict right now. Fighting complicates what already is a delicate humanitarian situation across the region. Russia, Iran, and Central Asia are all coping with extremely high infection rates from the coronavirus, rising unemployment, and struggling economies.
How Has the International Community Responded?
The Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, co-chaired by France, Russia, and the United States, has mediated the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict since the ceasefire. It urges both sides to abide by the ceasefire, return to negotiations, and curb their inflammatory rhetoric.
So far, Russia has been the most active mediator with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov brokering a telephone discussion between both sides. The Russian Security Council held a closed session on the conflict, and Russian President Vladmir Putin also urged de-escalation. Russia, however, has also been part of the problem. It has supplied arms to both sides—a move that irks Armenia, Russia’s official ally. On July 17, Russia unnerved Azerbaijan with a combat readiness check in its southern and Western military districts, which includes the Russian-Azerbaijani border region.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is publicly backing Turkey’s ally Azerbaijan. Baku sent a deputy defense minister to Ankara, where Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar promised to help and claimed Yerevan would “pay” for the recent escalation—words viewed as an escalatory threat in Armenia. Israel in recent years has apparently provided high-tech arms to Azerbaijan. On July 21, Armenia showcased alleged Israeli-made drones that it claims to have shot down during the fighting. Meanwhile, neighboring Iran pledged to help mediate between the two sides.
What About the United States?
In the United States, however, senior government officials are paying little attention. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did not appear to raise the issue in his July 13 phone call with Lavrov and waited two more day before commenting on the issue in a press conference. Despite being in its fourth year of office, the administration of President Donald Trump has yet to issue a policy on the South Caucasus region, creating a vacuum that other powers—including Iran and Russia—appear eager to fill. The lack of senior level response to the latest violence shows once again that Washington does not see the Caucasus as a priority.
Comments(21)
Just because the US has appeared passive does not mean it is not vitally concerned. Azerbaijan hosts western-bound gas and oil pipelines that traverse Georgia, Turkey, and beyond. Those pipelines are vulnerable to attack by Armenians and everyone knows it. The US is vitally concerned with those and future Azeri pipelines and so has always sympathized with authoritarian and corrupt Azerbaijan. Plus, Israel and Azerbaijan are allies, which means that certain domestic US organizations are pro-Azerbaijani. If NATO/US could bring Armenia (Russia's only ally in the region, and a democracy) on their side, they would be able to throw Russia out of the entire Caucasus, and move right up to the Caspian Sea and beyond. That is one reason why America, especially the US Congress, has always maintained excellent relations with Armenia. For the same reason, Russia needs Armenia. Unfortunately, since the US/NATO have traditionally kowtowed to Turkey, which has threatened several times to attack Armenia and which committed Genocide against Armenians from 1915-23, the US/NATO have no credibility when it comes to providing Armenia any meaningful security. By the way, Karabagh/Artsakh has been majority Armenian since ancient times. Azerbaijan, which was only established in 1918 and is not ancient in the slightest, has no valid moral, historical, or legal claims over Karabagh/Artsakh, regardless of what one may read.
Dave sounds as someone knowledgeable about Caucasus, but in fact he provides very messy and inaccurate account of the situation on the ground, and very few of his assessments would pass any political, historical or military test. Yet, it is commendable that he strives to follow developments in Caucasus, which should be taken for granted nowadays amid evolving global crisis at multiple sectors.
Dave knows his history and tells it well.
Dave, your comments are full of hate, false information and bias. Let's fact-check your claims: 1. "Pipelines are vulnerable to attack by Armenians and everyone knows it": A tiny armenia would not dare to attack the pipeline that supplies the energy to Europe and controlled by the International consortium of energy giants. 2. "US sympathized with authoritarian and corrupt Azerbaijan." Below you say that congress have good relations with Armenia?! US have never sympathized Azerbaijani government, there is not any single evidence to prove this claim. Especially after the Trump's presidency there were not any contact between the governments. 3. "Plus, Israel and Azerbaijan are allies": Do you have any evidence to prove this claim? Just because one country purchase weapons from another, does not mean that they are allies. It is pure business and if you have money, you can as well purchase it which again will not make you ally to any country. If the weapons were supplied for free, you may have some validity to your claim. İn this case this is fake claim. 4. "If NATO/US could bring Armenia on their side, they would be able to throw Russia out of the entire Caucasus." USA will never be able to throw Russia out of Caucasus simply because Caucasus is Russia's south west border and will always have say in any case. USA and all the world know and understands this. Russia is also the guarantor of the stability in the region. USA or Europe does not want another Syria or Livia. 5. "Armenia (Russia's only ally in the region, and a democracy)": If Armenia is democracy then, we have to double check the concept of democracy or the meaning behind it. A government that came to power through revolution cannot be democracy and will never be. 6. "the US Congress, has always maintained excellent relations with Armenia": above you say USA sympathetic to Azerbaijan?! Plus Are you talking about a person or a company? There are 535 voting members which are replaced from election to election. This cannot be a serious claim. 7. "Genocide against Armenians from 1915-23": Even Israel and other nations who witnessed true genocide stopped crying about it. If there were genocide, that would be supported by the UN and accepted by the world. Each and every war crimes cannot be claimed as genocide especially during world war one. 8. "By the way, Karabagh/Artsakh has been majority Armenian since ancient times." In this case armenia is eligible to commit an ethnic cleansing? There are international rules that you have to obey. There are internationally recognized territories. One cannot just claim some territory because "the majority" is another ethnic background. In conclusion, the sooner you understand that armenia is in the dead-end with this claims, the sooner the region will develop. The territory claims or historical falsification would not granted any nation prosperity in the 21st century. There should be collaboration and coordination for sustainable development. If Armenia wouldn't start this war, South Caucasus would be one of the shining stars of Europe. Thanks for not letting whit happen.
The comments here are accurate. One can dismiss Farhad’s coronets as just the rant of a Turkish fanatic.
"Nagorno-Karabakh, a mostly ethnically Armenian breakaway region of Azerbaijan." No my friend, this is not a breakaway region. This is Armenia's historical land which Armenian's have lived on for thousands of years. Stalin stupidly gave the land to Azerbaijan in 1922 to appease Turkey. He had no business doing so as Armenians have lived in this region and in the Caucuses in general for thousands of years, long before the Turkic people every came to the region and started raping, pillaging, taking our land, culture and everything else. Please learn your history.
Very well said Dave.
Fighting seems unrelated to N-K. Reinforces my belief there are only two parties to the conflict--Baku and Yerevan. Like the April 2016 "four-day war," parties need no outside help (i.e., Russia) to start fighting, but only outside help (probably Russia) to stop it. US policy is about right for the moment, given that neither side wants to negotiate directly.
I agree, Rich. Of course objective comments like yours are catnip for the Turkish and Azeri fanatics posting here. Russia is the kingmaker here, not petty, second rate powers like the Turks and Azeris, both ruled by ruthless dictators. If the Turks and Azeris attack Armenia because it corrected the error of Stalin in excluding N-K from Armenia, Putin will take them out. Turkey and the Azeris are only useful if it is in Russia’s interest to exploit them. Russian troops in Istanbul? Every patriotic Russian’s dream.
The author might want to read a description of the events that lead to the escalation before writing an article about it. Azeris opened fire on Armenians first, and Armenian sharpshooters responded immediately. Azeris were trying to retake a position their soldiers abandoned, after Armenia had stealthily captured it without firing a shot. There is no "both sides are equally to blame" and coddling Azerbaijan who ranks 168 out of 180 on the Freedom of Press Index is just dishonest and cowardly. You might want to do some research on the fact that Azerbaijan literally recruited Jihadists in the original war. Azerbaijan has launched 2 failed offensive operations in a span of a few days while Armenia maintains border defence and calls for independent 3rd party monitoring to aid in peacekeeping. Enough with the coddling of dictatorships.
Just to clarify. These were not 'flare-ups'. This was a full-on provocation from Armenians, who are using their powerful diaspora money to pay off politicians to go on record and say something they have absolutely no knowledge about. Those kinds of politicians only feed into the shameful propaganda. 12 Azerbaijani soldiers died, including a civilian 77-year-old resident. In addition, recent brutal attacks by Armenians on peaceful Azerbaijani protestors in Los Angeles (their 3000 to Azeri 50 people) and Brussels further shows that Armenians will commit crimes, even outside of their homeland, just to get what they want. The dozens of protesters who were assaulted, some in critical condition, deserve justice for the unprovoked attack. Even seeing those videos chills my blood. One day ago, an Instagram account was created to pay people for information on whereabouts of Azerbaijanis in California just to stalk and beat them up. Two days ago, a Facebook employee said that if Armenians see Facebook posts they don't like and want to flag them, she'll pull strings just because she works there. How crazy is that? Armenian side needs to stop the spread of fake information. Karabakh has always been and still is Azerbaijani land. Four UN Resolutions say so, and every single country supports the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and condemns Armenian aggression. 20% of our land has been taken away from us for 30 years. Imagine the state of CA taken away from Americans. Well, this is the reality for Azerbaijanis, who haven't been able to visit their hometowns in decades. Armenian brutality and misinformation towards Azerbaijani people needs to stop.
Not only Azerbaijan, but the entire international community considers Karabakh a sovereign territory of Azerbaijan. And Armenia, with the help of Russia of course, occupied this land representing 20% of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognised sovereign territory. Four resolutions of the UN Security Counsel (822, 853, 874 and 884) call for immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops from occupied Azerbaijani territories, including Karabakh. The rest of the is immaterial.
Citing the UN or states is not a valid argument. States oppose self-determination because many states have ethnic minorities that demand autonomy/independence. If Spain supported self-determination in Nagorno-Karabagh then Spain would have to recognize the Catalan and Basques as independent states. Second, Azerbaijan was ruling Nagorno-Karabagh because Stalin gave the territory to the Azeris to please their older brother Turkey although more than 85 percent of the population was Armenian and the territory was a historic part of Armenia. Thirdly during the 70 years Baku ruled Nagorno-Karabagh, it oppressed the Armenians and settled Azeris in the region to change the demographic picture. There are more reasons why N-K belongs to Armenians but these three should suffice.
That is a lie and you know it. Azerbaijan, Turkey and its respective despots needs to get used to the status quo ante, with some minor border adjustments.
Your so-called international community is the United Nations--a PR podium for pols and an assembly dominated by the US. In other words, biased and irrelevant, as its toothless multiple condemnations of Israel (Azerbaijan's bedmate) attest. The UN has a bias against the "self-determination" concept because many of its members are in conflict with ethnic groups that demand independence (Catalonia and the Basque country vs Spain; Scotland vs the UK; Kashmir vs India vs Kashmir; Ouyghoors vs Chinas; Quebec vs Canada). Thus, states do not support the legitimate demands of minorities--ethnic or otherwise. The UN is hypocritical because it supported "self-determination" in Yugoslavia over that country's territorial integrity and now preaches territorial integrity. States also turn a blind to the illegal way (thanks to dictators Lenin and Stalin) Karabagh became part of Azerbaijan by wresting it from Armenia. There's ample evidence by Greek historians that Karapagh was part of Armenia as early as 6th century BCE when the Tatar/Turk Azeris of Central Asia didn't even exist. Those who demand that Armenia give Karapagh to the trespassing Azeris should consider that 90% of Armenia is illegally occupied by Turkey--the state which describes its relationship with the Az as "two states, one nation." It's amazing Azerbaijan and Turkey--which unprovoked conquered Armenia destroying the Armenian kingdom, killing and enslaving its people now prance as arbiters of international law. Two dictators demanding justice.
Rosee, Armenians did not start this latest battle. Azeris did. Armenians have no reason to restart hostilities. Armenians hold land and, most importantly, are in defensive mode. Armenia has at most 3 million people. Azerbaijan has 10 million people, and many more weapons because it has the money from gas and oil receipts. Armenians recognize this and have no wish to widen the conflict. But Armenians must defend themselves. Armenians have also long asked that 3rd parties and fire detection systems be placed on the line-of-contact. But Azerbaijan has consistently turned that down. Why? Because it is the one that starts these battles. There is another important and well-known international principle at work here besides upholding Soviet borders: self-determination of people. I have explained Azeri repression of the Armenians of Artsakh/Karabagh elsewhere in my comments. Artsakh/Karabagh always had a majority Armenian population. I have explained how Azerbaijan depopulated a similar region, Nakhichevan, of its Armenians. The Armenians of Artsakh/Karabagh were not going to let that happen to them. They declared independence and fought to achieve what they have now, which is a democracy. We know Azeris are aggrieved at this. I am genuinely sorry. But Azerbaijan surely understands that Armenians can never allow themselves to be placed under Azeri rule ever again. And why would you want to rule over Armenians? It makes no sense.
The problem here is the dual dictators Erdogan and Aliyev. Erdogan is a Muslim fanatic and ruthless dictator attempting to resurrect the long dead Ottoman Empire. Aliyev is cut from the same dictatorial cloth. No one can forget the Armenian genocide carried out by the Turks, which obliterated much of the Armenian people. It is a war crime for which Erdogan makes no acknowledgement or apology. He has flooded and desecrated Christian sites, including the desecration of Hagia Sophia. Former President Obama had the opportunity to take out Erdogan but like, with Syrian war crimes, he was too much a coward to act. At some point, either the Russians or the Americans will deal with these petty thieves and dictators. If Azerbaijan or Turkey start a war with Armenia, Russia will destroy them. It is also in Russian interests to take the Baku pipeline to cut off its acccess to the West. So if both dictators value their lives and their territorial integrity, I would suggest they not attack Armenia. Turkey is an enemy of NATO already. Russia can then attain its centuries long goal, control of the Straits and the dissolution of Turkey.
Here are some of the reasons why Karabakh does not belong to Azerbaijan. 1. When the Armenian King Tigran the Great (140 – 55 BC) negotiated with the Roman general Pompey, there was no notion of a country called Azerbaijan anywhere in the world.” Azerbaijan in its current territory ONLY since 1918’’. In the times of Tigran the Great (95-55 BC) there were only two nations in the region – Armenians and Georgians 2. Karabakh was placed under Azerbaijan by Stalin to only form the Soviet Union economic system. 3. Karabakh was never part of independent Azerbaijan. 4. Azerbaijan became independent country from Soviet Union just like Karabakh did. 5. The Collapse of the Soviet Union disqualify Azerbaijanis claims. 6. No Cristian nation should be ruled by neighboring Islam nation. 7. Most facts familiar with the most popular ancient historical records, such as the Histories of Herodotus, Xenophon's Retreat, Strabo’s Geographica, the works of Pliny the Elder, Plutarch, Cassius, Appian, Tacitus, Ammianus Marcellinus. The works of famous European travelers such as Rubruck and Marco Polo, which have a large-scale coverage of the Godly Hayastan-Armenia country and its indigenous Armenian people. Many facts also can be found in Georgian, Persian, Arabic and Greek sources. If Azerbaijanis do not trust the mentioned authors, they could at least have read the Ottoman writers of 16-19 centuries such as Mustafa Naima, Rashid, Ismail Asim Efendi, Suleiman Izghi, Katib Chelebi, Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, Evliya Çelebi. Some of whom not only have provided vast information about the Armenian world, but traveling to Armenia-Ermenistan, contacted with its Armenian-Christian residents. Of course, they did not write anything about Azerbaijan, but it's not their fault that they did not encounter a country named Azerbaijan in its current territory until 1918''
Brilliant! Fact is fact!
On August 10, 1920, the victorious Allied Powers of World War I, including the Dominion of Canada and the defeated Turkey signed an important treaty—the Treaty of Sèvres in the French city of Sèvres near Paris to settle their conflicts with the Ottoman Empire, to redraw the map. The Treaty of Sevres is a historical fact. it remains such up to this day. Just as the Treaty of Versailles established peace in Europe, in the same way, the Treaty of Sevres was meant to bring peace to the former Western Asian territories of the Ottoman Empire. It put an end to the war-driven sufferings and deprivations experienced by Armenians. among other obligations, provided for an independent Armenia with a 160,000 square kilometer territory. The subject that the Armenian delegations underlined at the Paris Peace Conference was that Armenians had supported and helped the Allied Powers during the war and therefore, they had to benefit from the gains/spoils of the war, and this had to be a great Armenian state between the Mediterranean- the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea Not only does the Treaty of Sèvres recognize Turkey as responsible for its war crimes, it also demands that Turkey take steps to facilitate the process of punishing those directly involved in the crime. The Treaty also demands that Turkey repeal the 1915 Abandoned Property laws and the supplementary provisions thereof, compelling it to return all confiscated properties to individual or community owners. Finally, the Treaty of Sèvres provides a legal basis for the arbitration appeal to US President Woodrow Wilson to determine the Armenia-Turkey border. One of the signatories of the Treaty of Sèvres was the Republic of Armenia, which had declared its independence on May 28, 1918. The Republic of Armenia acted as an equal party to the Treaty. On behalf of Armenia, the treaty was signed by the head of delegation of the Republic of Armenia Avetis Aharonyan with a golden pen especially ordered for this occasion. On 22 July 1920, that is when the terms of the Treaty were already known, the Sultan invited the Shoray-e Saltant (the Crown Council) to examine and decide on the execution of the Treaty. The execution of the Treaty was approved in that meeting and the Treaty was signed on behalf of Turkey by a delegation headed by Damad Ferid Pasha (the other members of the delegation were General Hamdi Pasha, Riza Tavfik Bay and Rishad Halis Bay (the Turkish Ambassador in Bern). Treaty was submitted, by the representatives of the Allied Powers, to Turkey’s representatives in May 1920. Tabled and approved in the 22 July 1920 session of Shuray-e Saltanat (Crown Council) which means that the representatives of Turkey had signed the Treaty within and without exceeding the powers granted to them. Thus, it is undeniably clear that the Treaty was signed for Turkey by its duly authorized representatives. It consisted of 110 large pages, 13 chapters and 433 articles. highlighted the principle of self-determination and equality of peoples. It put an end to the centuries-old subjugation imposed by empires, bringing freedom and independence to the peoples of the region. Not only does the Treaty of Sèvres recognize Turkey as responsible for its war crimes, it also demands that Turkey take steps to facilitate the process of punishing those directly involved in the crime. The Treaty also demands that Turkey repeal the 1915 Abandoned Property laws and the supplementary provisions thereof, compelling it to return all confiscated properties to individual or community owners. Finally, the Treaty of Sèvres provides a legal basis for the arbitration appeal to US President Woodrow Wilson to determine the Armenia-Turkey border. Moreover, the arbitral award of the President of the United States of America Woodrow Wilson, published on November 22, 1920, continues to be the only international document delineating the legal border between Armenia and Turkey. There were six articles in the Treaty (88-93) that related Section 6 entirely concerning Armenia. These articles demanded that Turkey recognize Armenia as a free and independent State (88). The signatories agreed to let US President Wilson determine the boundary between Turkey and Armenia, which would pass through the provinces of Erzerum, Trebizond, Van and Bitlis and prescribe an outlet for Armenia to have maritime access to the Black Sea (89). Article 89 of the Treaty of Sevres was stating and affirming the Armenian people’s historic and undisputed relation with the Armenian Highlands, where the Armenian people were born, lived and shaped statehood and culture for millennia. Turkey renounced any claim to the ceded land. Articles 91-93 referred to the establishment of a boundary commission; to accept obligation in the repatriation and restoration of the Armenian survivors; the prosecution of the perpetrators of the Armenian massacres; and the protection of non-Armenian citizens within Armenia. The Treaty of Sevres Article 89 was a legally binding verdict. It had to come into force without ratification. * Article 88: Turkey, in accordance with the action already taken by the Allied Powers, hereby recognizes Armenia as a free and independent State. * Article 89: Turkey and Armenia, as well as the other High Contracting Parties, agree to submit to the arbitration of the President of the United States of America the question of the frontier to be fixed between Turkey and Armenia in the vilayets of Erzerum, Trebizond, Van and Bitlis, and to accept his decision thereupon, as well as any stipulations he may prescribe as to access for Armenia to the sea, and as to the demilitarization of any portion of Turkish territory adjacent to the said frontier. * Article 90: In the event of the determination of the frontier under Article 89 involving the transfer of the whole or any part of the territory of the said Vilayets to Armenia, Turkey hereby renounces as from the date of such decision all rights and title over the territory so transferred. * Article 92: The frontiers between Armenia and Azerbaijan and Georgia respectively will be determined by direct agreement between the States concerned. If in either case the States concerned have failed to determine the frontier by agreement at the date of the decision referred to in Article 89, the frontier line in question will be determined by the Pricipal Allied Powers, who will also provide for its being traced on the spot. * Article 93: Armenia accepts and agrees to embody in a Treaty with the Principal Allied Powers such provisions as may be deemed necessary by these Powers to protect the interests of inhabitants of that State who differ from the majority of the population in race, language, or religion. * Article 230: The Turkish Government undertakes to hand over to the Allied Powers the persons whose surrender may be required by the latter as being responsible for the massacres committed during the continuance of the state of war on territory which formed part of the Turkish Empire on August 1, 1914. Turkey was obliged to immediately and unconditionally accept this document because a legally binding verdict doesn’t have to be ratified by this or that country. In terms of international law, from the very first day of presentation in November 22, 1920 the Treaty of Sevres remains in force up to this day, and de jure the Armenian-Turkish border isn’t defined by the current Akhuryan-Araks line, but actually the borderline including the major part of the provinces of Trabzon, Erzurum, Bitlis and Van, with Western Armenia’s 90,000 square kilometer territory and 70,000 square kilometer of Eastern Armenia – including the territory of the Republic of Armenia, On November 22, 1920, President Wilson announced that he had drawn the map of Armenia under the terms of the Treaty of Sèvres. “Wilsonian Armenia” awarded the Armenian nation a territory that encompassed approximately 155,000 square kilometers. It included vast areas of historic Armenia with the exclusion of southernmost and westernmost sectors. Undoubtedly, the Treaty of Sèvres was an internationally binding document. However, it wasn’t realized, because unfortunately the international situation abruptly changed in autumn of 1920. The treaty wasn’t ratified because of the onset of the Turkish-Armenian war in late September of 1920, which resulted in Armenian defeat by the December 3 Treaty of Alexandropol. The Allied Powers had made a commitment to accept President Wilson’s Award as the final settlement. But unfortunately, they did not honor their pledge to their ally, Armenia. Treaty of Sèvres based on international law, Turkey is obliged to: 1. End the 27-year illegal land blockade of the Republic of Armenia 2. Stop its aggressive steps against Armenia, especially recently 3. Stop its anti-Armenian policies within Turkey – including on our historic and occupied lands – or outside, against the Armenian diaspora formed as a result of the Genocide Another fact which states the Treaty of Sevres’ was the first valid international document active status, none of the signatories have announced that the treaty is null and void, thus it is still active. Moreover, the document doesn’t contain any deadlines or timeframes. Although it has not been ratified by all signatories, it has not been legally replaced by any other international instrument. At least from the point of view of the Armenian Cause, and the interests of the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian nation, it remains a legal obligation based on international law, compelling it to return all confiscated properties to individual or community owners. Thus, it can be concluded that Treaty of Sevres is a valid document under public international law legally binding and non-appealable legal documents. As per Article 2-F of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, treaties that are signed by high contracting parties such as the Treaty of Sèvres are enforceable whether they are ratified or not. Turkey must bear its responsibility and compensate all losses of the Armenian people.
Since 1991 the Armenian military has occupied the Upper Karabakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) region, an internationally recognized territory of Azerbaijan. 4 UN Security Council Resolutions and 2 UN General Assembly Resolutions, as well as decisions by many international organizations, refer to the illegal occupation and demand the withdrawal of Armenian forces from Upper Karabakh and seven other occupied regions of Azerbaijan. What happened in Khojaly (Hocalı) on 26 February 1992?
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.