User:Pocopocopocopoco/sandbox/nkr current/
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Current situation
Today, Nagorno-Karabakh is a de facto independent state, calling itself the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.[1] It is closely tied to the Republic of Armenia and uses the same currency, the dram. According to Human Rights Watch, "from the beginning of the Karabakh conflict, Armenia provided aid, weapons, and volunteers. Armenian involvement in Karabakh escalated after a December 1993 Azerbaijani offensive. The Republic of Armenia began sending conscripts and regular Army and Interior Ministry troops to fight in Karabakh."[2] The politics of Armenia and the de-facto Karabakh republic are so intermingled that a former president of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Robert Kocharian, became first the prime minister (1997) and then the president of Armenia (1998 to the present).
Still, successive Armenian governments have resisted internal pressure to unite the two, fearing reprisals from Azerbaijan and from the international community, which still considers Nagorno-Karabakh part of Azerbaijan.[citation needed] In his case study of Eurasia, Dov Lynch of the Institute for Security Studies of WEU believes that "Karabakh's independence allows the new Armenian state to avoid the international stigma of aggression, despite the fact that Armenian troops fought in the war between 1991-94 and continue to man the Line of Contact between Karabakh and Azerbaijan." Lynch also cites that the "strength of the Armenian armed forces, and Armenia's strategic alliance with Russia, are seen as key shields protecting the Karabakh state by the authorities in Stepanakert."[3] At present, the mediation process is at a standstill, with the most recent discussions in Rambouillet, France, yielding no agreement. Azerbaijan's position has been that Armenian troops withdraw from all areas of Azerbaijan outside Nagorno-Karabakh, and that all displaced persons be allowed to return to their homes before the status of Karabakh can be discussed.[citation needed] Armenia does not recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as being legally part of Azerbaijan, arguing that because the region declared independence at the same time that Azerbaijan became an independent state, both of them are equally successor states of the Soviet Union.[citation needed] The Armenian government insists that the government of Nagorno-Karabakh be part of any discussions on the region's future, and rejects ceding occupied territory or allowing refugees to return prior to talks on the region's status.[citation needed]
Representatives of Armenia, Azerbaijan, France, Russia and the United States met in Paris and in Key West, Florida, in the Spring of 2001.[4] The details of the talks have remained largely secret, but the parties are reported to have discussed non-hierarchical relationships between the central Azerbaijani government and the Karabakh Armenian authorities.[citation needed] Despite rumours that the parties were close to a solution, the Azerbaijani authorities — both during Heydar Aliyev's period of office, and after the accession of his son Ilham Aliyev in the October 2003 elections — have firmly denied that any agreement was reached in Paris or Key West.
Further talks between the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents, Ilham Aliyev and Robert Kocharian, were held in September 2004 in Astana, Kazakhstan, on the sidelines of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit. Reportedly, one of the suggestions put forward was the withdrawal of the occupying forces from the Azeri territories adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh, and holding referenda (plebiscites) in Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan proper regarding the future status of the region. On February 10 and 11, 2006, Kocharian and Aliyev met in Rambouillet, France, to discuss the fundamental principles of a settlement to the conflict, including the withdrawal of troops, formation of international peace keeping troops, and the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.[citation needed] During the weeks and days before the talks in France, OSCE Minsk Group co-chairmen expressed cautious optimism that some form of an agreement was possible.[citation needed] French President Jacques Chirac met with both leaders separately and expressed hope that the talks would be fruitful.[citation needed] Contrary to the initial optimism, the Rambouillet talks did not produce any agreement, with key issues such as the status of Nagorno-Karabakh and whether Armenian troops would withdraw from Kalbajar still being contentious.[5]
The latest talks were held at the Polish embassy in Bucharest, Romania.[6] Again, American, Russian, and French diplomats attended the talks that lasted over 40 minutes.[7] Earlier, Armenian President Kocharian announced that he was ready to "continue dialogue with Azerbaijan for the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and with Turkey on establishing relations without any preconditions."[8]
Unfortunately, according to Armenian foreign minisiter, Vartan Oskanian, no progress was made at this latest meeting. Both presidents failed to reach a consensus on the issues from the earlier Rambouillet conference. He noted that the Kocharian-Aliyev meeting was held in a normal atmosphere. "Nevertheless," he added, "the foreign ministers of the two countries are commissioned to continue talks over settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and try to find common points before the next meeting of the presidents."[9]
The major disagreement between both sides at the Bucharest conference was the status of Karabakh. Azerbaijan's position was a promise to give Karabakh the "highest status of autonomy adopted in the world."[10] Armenia favored a popular vote by the inhabitants of Karabakh to decide their future, a position that was also taken by the international mediators.[11] The response to the Armenian position from Baku was that of a threat to Azerbaijan's territorial integrity.[citation needed] On June 27, the Armenian foreign minister said both parties agreed to allow the residents of Karabakh to vote regarding the future status of the region.[12] The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs officially refuted that statement.[13] According to Azeri opposition leader Isa Gambar, however, Azerbaijan did indeed agree to the referendum. Still, nothing official has confirmed this yet.[14]
The ongoing "Prague Process" overseen by the OSCE Minsk Group was brought into sharp relief in the summer of 2006 with a series of rare public revelations seemingly designed to jump-start the stalled negotiations. After the release in June of a paper outlining its position, which had until then been carefully guarded, American State Department official Matthew Bryza told Radio Free Europe that the Minsk Group favored a referendum in Karabakh that would determine its final status. The referendum, in the view of the OSCE, should take place not in Azerbaijan as a whole, but in Nagorno-Karabakh only. This was a blow to Azerbaijan, and despite talk that their government might eventually seek a more sympathetic forum for future negoltiations, this has not yet happened.[15]
Also in 2006, Russia published its 63-volume Great Encyclopedia which described Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent entity that belonged to Armenians historically, in its introduction to the region.[16] Azerbaijan has protested this passage in the Russian encyclopedia. It handed a protest letter to the Russian ambassador to Azerbaijan demanding that the encyclopedia be confiscated and amended.[17]
[edit] International status
The sovereign status of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is not recognized by any state, including Armenia. Three United Nations Security Council Resolutions (853, 874, and 884) and United Nations General Assembly resolutions 49/13 and 57/298 refer to Nagorno-Karabakh as a region of Azerbaijan. According to a report prepared by British parliamentarian and rapporteur David Atkinson, presented to Political Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), "the borders of Azerbaijan were internationally recognised at the time of the country being recognised as independent state in 1991," and "the territory of Azerbaijan included the Nagorno-Karabakh region."[18]
The latest resolution, #1416, adopted by PACE, stated that "Considerable parts of the territory of Azerbaijan are still occupied by Armenian forces, and separatist forces are still in control of the Nagorno-Karabakh region." The resolution further stated: "The Assembly reiterates that the occupation of foreign territory by a member state constitutes a grave violation of that state’s obligations as a member of the Council of Europe and reaffirms the right of displaced persons from the area of conflict to return to their homes safely and with dignity." Recalling the Resolutions 822, 853, 874, and 884 (all 1993) of the UN Security Council, PACE urged "the parties concerned to comply with them, in particular by refraining from any armed hostilities and by withdrawing military forces from any occupied territories." The resolution also called on "the Government of Azerbaijan to establish contact, without preconditions, with the political representatives of both communities from the Nagorno-Karabakh region regarding the future status of the region." [19]
The Council of Europe called on the Nagorno-Karabakh de facto authorities to refrain from staging one-sided "local self-government elections" in Nagorno-Karabakh. "These so-called 'elections' cannot be legitimate," stressed Council of Europe Committee of Ministers' Chairman and Liechtenstein Foreign Minister Ernst Walch, Parliamentary Assembly President Lord Russell-Johnston and Secretary General Walter Schwimmer. They recalled that following the 1991–1994 armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, a substantial part of the region's population was forced to flee their homes and are still living as displaced persons in those countries or as refugees abroad.[20] This position was reiterated by Walter Schwimmer, Secretary General of the Council of Europe on 4 August 2004 with regard to the next elections, staged in the province.[21]
The European Union declared that "The European Union confirms its support for the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and recalls that it does not recognise the independence of Nagorno Karabakh. The European Union cannot consider legitimate the 'presidential elections' that were scheduled to take place on 11 August 2002 in Nagorno Karabakh".[22]
The US Department of State's annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006, released on March 6, 2007 stated that "Armenia continues to occupy the Azerbaijani territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven surrounding Azerbaijani territories. During the year incidents along the militarized line of contact separating the sides again resulted in numerous casualties on both sides".[23]
The declaration of establishment NKR's states that "The Nagorno Karabakh Republic enjoys the authorities given to Republics by the USSR Constitution and legislation and reserves the right to decide independently the issue of its state-legal status based on political consultations and negotiations with the leadership of Union and Republics."[24]
According to an analysis by New England School of Law's Center for International Law & Policy, as well as Public International Law & Policy Group (PILPG), "Nagorno Karabagh has a right of self-determination, including the attendant right to independence, according to the criteria recognized under international law ... The principle of self-determination is included in the United Nations Charter, [and] was further codified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ... The right to self-determination has also been repeatedly recognized in a series of resolutions adopted by the U.N. General Assembly." ... [as NKR's] independence was declared not from the Soviet Union but from Azerbaijan, ... [and as Nagorno Karabakh] at that time was part of a still existent and internationally recognized Soviet Union, ... NKR's declaration of independence fully complied with existing law. ... [In particular,] the 1990 Soviet law titled 'Law of the USSR Concerning the Procedure of Secession of a Soviet Republic from the USSR,' provides that the secession of a Soviet republic from the body of the USSR allows an autonomous region and compactly settled minority regions in the same republic's territory also to trigger its own process of independence. ... [Furthermore,] the USSR Constitutional Oversight Committee did not annul the declaration to establishment the Nagorno Karabagh Republic, since that declaration was deemed in compliance with the then existing law".[25]
A background paper prepared by the Directorate General of Political Affairs of the Council of Europe for the seminar "Youth and Conflict Resolution" (Strasbourg, 31 March - 2 April 2003), on the other hand, states, "The Armenian side maintains that the N-K independence referendum was conducted in accordance with the USSR law on the 'Procedure for Solving Issues of Secession of a Soviet Republic from the USSR' of 3 April 1990. Article 3 of this law provided autonomous regions within the Soviet republics with the right to determine independently, by referendum, whether they wished to remain within the USSR or join the republic seceding from the USSR. It would however seem that according to this law N-K would have the choice of two options – to remain within the USSR or to join independent Azerbaijan; N-K independence does not seem possible".[26]
The OSCE Minsk Group has allowed the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (referring to it as the "leadership of Nagorny Karabakh"), as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan, to participate in the peace process as "parties to the conflict," and the Azerbaijani community of the region--as an "interested party". The Chairman of the CSCE Minsk Conference mentioned that "the terms 'party to the conflict' and 'leadership of Nagorny Karabakh' do not imply recognition of any diplomatic or political status under domestic or international law".[27][28] The Azerbaijani community is led by Nizami Bakhmanov, the head of the executive power of Shusha region.
At a recent press conference in Yerevan,Yuri Merzlyakov, the OSCE Minsk Group Russian Co-Chair stated, "At the press conference in Baku I underlined that Nagorno Karabakh was a part of Azerbaijani SSR and not of Azerbaijan. I perfectly know that till 1917 Nagorno Karabakh was a part of the Russian Empire. The history is necessary in order to settle conflicts, but it is necessary to proceed from international law".[29] Meanwhile, on June 10 2007 after US-Azerbaijani security consultations in Washington D.C. with Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov, Deputy Assistant Secretary of US Department of State, US Co-Chairman of OSCE Minsk group Matthew Bryza in a joint press conference announced: "In the circles of international law there is no universal formula for the supremacy of territorial integrity over the right of self-determination of people.".[30]
[edit] Human rights
The Nagorno Karabakh conflict has resulted in the displacement of 528,000 (this figure does not include new born children of these IDPs) Azerbaijanis from Armenian occupied territories including Nagorno Karabakh, and 220,000 Azeris, 18,000 Kurds and 3,500 Russians fled from Armenia to Azerbaijan from 1988 to 1989.[31] The Azerbaijani government has estimated that 63 percent of internally displaced persons (IDPs) lived below the poverty line as compared to 49% of the total population. About 154,000 lived in the capital, Baku. According to the International Organization for Migration, 40,000 IDPs lived in camps, 60,000 in underground dugout shelters, and 20,000 in railway cars. Forty-thousand IDPs lived in EU-funded settlements and UNHCR provided housing for another 40,000. Another 5,000 IDPs lived in abandoned or rapidly deteriorating schools. Others lived in trains, on roadsides in half-constructed buildings, or in public buildings such as tourist and health facilities. Tens of thousands lived in seven tent camps where poor water supply and sanitation caused gastro-intestinal infections, tuberculosis, and malaria.[citation needed]
The Azerbaijani government has been unwilling to integrate the IDP's into the rest of the population as this could be interpreted as acceptance of the permanent loss of Nagorno-Karabakh.[citations needed] The government required IDPs to register their place of residence in an attempt to better target the limited and largely inadequate national and international assistance due to the Armenian advocated and US imposed restrictions on humanitarian aid to Azerbaijan. Many IDPs were from rural areas and found it difficult to integrate into the urban labor market. Many international humanitarian agencies reduced or ceased assistance for IDPs citing increasing oil revenues of the country forgetting to condemn the Armenian imposed suffering.[32] The infant mortality among displaced Azerbaijani children is 3-4 times higher than in the rest of the population. The rate of stillbirth was 88.2 per 1,000 births among the internally displaced people. The majority of the displaced have lived in difficult conditions for more than 13 years.[33]
280,000 persons—virtually all ethnic Armenians who fled Azerbaijan during the 1988–1993 war over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh—were living in refugee-like circumstances in Armenia.[citations needed] Some left the country, principally to Russia. Their children born in Armenia acquire citizenship automatically. Their numbers are thus subject to constant decline due to departure, and de-registration required for naturalization. Of these, about 250,000 fled Azerbaijan-proper (areas outside Nagorno-Karabakh); approximately 30,000 came from Nagorno-Karabakh, which is in Azerbaijan but controlled by Armenians. All were registered with the government as refugees at year’s end.[34]
[edit] Constitutional referendum
On November 3, 2006 Arkady Gukasyan signed a decree[35] to carry out a referendum on draft on Nagorno-Karabakh constitution, which was held on December 10 of the same year.[36] According to official preliminary results from December 10, as many as 98.6 percent of voters approved the constitution.[36] The 142nd article of the document describes the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic as "a sovereign, democratic legal and social state"; however, the European Union, OSCE and GUAM rejected the referendum.[37] The EU announced it was "aware that a 'constitutional referendum' has taken place," but reiterated that only a negotiated settlement between Azerbaijan and ethnic Armenians can bring a lasting solution.[38] In a statement, the OSCE chairman in office Karel De Gucht called the vote potentially harmful to the ongoing conflict settlement process, which, he said, has shown "visible progress" and is at a "promising juncture".[36] The outcome was also criticised by Turkey, which traditionally sides with Azerbaijan because of common Islamic faith and ethnic Turkic roots.[39]
