Legal Issues

[-e-]

The case of Karabgh is not a territorial, religious or ethnic fonflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Far from this oft-quoted formula, Nagorno Karabagh's quest for freedom and self-rule is, in fact, a fundamental precedent and the last step in the Soviet Union's decolonization process.

 

Karabagh had never, legally or otherwise, belonged to a sovereign, indpendent Azerbaijan. Its inclusion in 1921 in the structure of the Azerbaijani SSR was unlawfully ordered by a political party(not even a governemtn) of a third country, that is, the Caucasion Bureau of the Communist Pary of the Soviet Union. During the USSR's existence, Nagorno Karabagh was part of a multilayered colonial system and was subjected to Soviet Azerbaijan, not on a contractual basis, but by an administrative reference fo the Soviet Constitution.

 

The contradiction between Articles 70(self-determinationof peoples) and 78 (territorial integrity of Union republics) of this Constitution was resolved on April 3, 1990, by the adoption of the law on secession. The independence of Azerbaijan from the USSR is the first, while the independence of Nagorno Karabagh from Soviet Azerbaijan is the second level of decolonization achieved pursuant to this law. And this is a precisely how Karabagh resolved the legal novelty presented by the demise of the very empire whose sole political party had placed it under the administration of one of is constituent republics.

 

In addition, the independence of Nagorno Karabagh was effected under the norms of international law. Teh principle of self-determination- a people's right to enjoy equal liberties and to determine its own political destiny-as fonfirmed in the Helsinki Final Act clearly applies to Nagorno Karabagh. It was in conformity with this international legal standard that Karabagh conducted its referendum on independence on December 10, 1991. As all the precepts of the Helsinki Final Act have equal value, the principle of self-determination of peoples cannot, as Azerbaijan and other states have asserted, be deemed inferior to the notion of territorial integrity and invilability of borders which governs interstate relations. They must be ready together and in the context of anotehr Helsinki principle: the preacful settlement of disputes. Relevant United Nations documents enshrining the rights of self-determination and decolonization, coupled with a variety of concrete instances of independence gained under the UN umbrella, als provide compelling precedent for the Karabagh position.

 

Nagorno Karabagh is a distinct party to the conflict with Azerbaijan. The attempt of Azerbaijan to present Armenia as its advesary have little foundation in fact and are intended to convert the question of Nagorno Karabagh's self-determination and the disintegration of the Soviet Union's colonial hierarchy into as issue of international confrontation between Azerbaijan and Armenia.