RECOGNITION OF THE NKR FACTUAL INDEPENDENCE SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE INTERNATIONAL POLICY AGENDA
Ruzan Ishkhanian
Thursday, 27 January 2011 06:04
For already two weeks, the international community has attentively
followed the events taking place in South Sudan, where the referendum
results testified that the population living in this territory had
elected the way of independence and free management of its own fate.
In the process of conflicts’ peaceful settlement, the factor of
nations’ free expression of will seems to be more important.
Recently, the attention of the international community has been also
drawn to the known article of USA President Barack Obama published in
New York Times periodical, in which he expressed special concern about
the people of South Sudan: “It isn’t every generation that can turn
the page of the past and write a new paragraph in the history. The
people of South Sudan have gained this possibility after a 50-year
civil war, which ended in over two million of deceased people and
millions of refugees”. According to the USA President, this will have
its consequences not only in Sudan, but also in Africa and the whole
world. In his article written before the referendum, B. Obama noted
that the south and north parts of Sudan should respect the commitments
of each other, refrain from any statements and actions aggravating
the situation, and the disputes over the borders should be resolved
in a peaceful way.
Surely, we appreciate the attitude of the USA President towards the
African nation, which underwent long oppression, had great losses and,
finally, on the consent of the central power (North Sudan), held a
referendum and declared its independence. At the same time, we should
note that for the last 20 years, similar concern towards the Karabakh
people hasn’t been displayed by the White House leadership. The matter
is that South Sudan enjoys the support of the USA, and the latter,
which has the repute of democratic beacon worldwide, doesn’t refuse
of its intention to use dual standards. It would be better if in
the process of the Karabakh conflict peaceful settlement the USA,
as a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, displayed similar concern
in the issue of implementation of the Karabakh people’s right to
self-determination.
Commenting on the South Sudan referendum on independence, Chairman of
the NKR NA Standing Committee on Foreign Relations Vahram Atanesian,
first of all, underlined that the resolution on holding a referendum
in South Sudan had been adopted on the parties’ agreement and the
central authorities stated that they would admit any outcome of the
referendum. According to him, it is quite another situation. Earlier,
a similar referendum was held in Canada, but the majority of the
population of Quebec voted for the maintenance of a united state. So,
it isn’t new that the international community considers significant
the free expression of nations’ will. It is the so-called cornerstone
of international law. The UN Charter obligates its member-states to
respect the right to self-determination, and provides the societies
seeking self-determination with the right to appeal for foreign
assistance and to get it, in accordance with the corresponding
procedure. Nothing unusual has taken place. Merely, the Government
of Sudan acted in accordance with the international law and its
own commitments.
Answering the question how the OSCE MG Co-Chairmen will comment
on the sample of South Sudan as another precedent and whether a new
statement is expected to confirm that the Karabakh conflict settlement
needs another approach, as it was in the case of Kosovo, the committee
chairman noted that the co-chairmen would not recur to the referendum
in Sudan as a precedent or non-precedent for the Karabakh settlement.
Kosovo was another case. The former Serbian region’s independence
was recognized in opposition to Belgrade. And no referendum took
place there. By its consultative resolution, the UN International
Court of Justice didn’t recognize Kosovo’s independence; it provided
that unilateral declaration of independence didn’t contradict the
international law. And the rest, including the statement on the
exceptionality of Kosovo’s withdrawal, are the products of the
political conjuncture.
According to V. Atanesian, the conception of the Karabakh settlement,
elaborated by the mediators, includes a principle of respecting the
right to self-determination. The negotiating parties interpret this
in their own ways. We, in the NKR, consider that the international
community, including Azerbaijan, should recognize the established
fact that the Armenian majority of Nagorno Karabakh declared its
independence at the December 10, 1991 referendum, which fully
corresponded to both the international law and the then USSR laws.
“Thus, I think that the manifestations of the realization of the
right to self-determination, at least, create a favorable atmosphere
that recognition of the NKR factual independence be included in the
international policy agenda. This is indisputable”, concluded the
parliamentary committee chairman.
From: A. Papazian