US Ambassador to Armenia Lynne Tracy says the consequences of the recent war in Nagorno Karabakh have not been overcome, the conflict has not been resolved because the status of Nagorno Karabakh remains to be decided, Armenpress reports.

“We will continue to work through our position as an OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair to work towards that goal of bringing down violence, of de-escalation so that we can get to some of the other very critical issues that need to be discussed,” she told reporters in Syunik province.

Let’s start with the fact that, in all likelihood, the US ambassador to Armenia means that there is no formal peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia, which supposedly a priori excludes the normalization of relations between the parties to the conflict.

If so, then, firstly, a peace treaty formally means the final acceptance by two or more parties, which were in a state of war (armed conflict) with each other, of commitments to cease hostilities on the basis of a written agreement.

Paragraph ‘A’ of Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which regulates the criteria and norms of international treaties concluded on various issues, contains the following definition of this legal concept: “treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.

Thus, the Statements of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and the President of the Russian Federation dated November 10, 2020 and January 11, 2021, in fact, correspond to the criteria of the Vienna Convention, since they were officially signed by the three parties to the agreement represented by the legitimate leaders of these countries. True, the aforementioned Convention presupposes the ratification of such documents, as a condition for entry into force, within the laws of the participating countries, and this procedure, formally, has not been followed.

However, there are many examples in history when states, having actually concluded peace, did not formally ratify a peace treaty and sometimes did not even sign it, which in essence, affected neither their relations, nor the world order as a whole.

Let’s take a look at some of them. The most famous of these is the refusal of the US government to ratify the Treaty of Versailles, concluded on June 28, 1919, following the First World War. The Treaty of Versailles entered into force on January 10, 1920, after ratification by Germany and the four main allied powers – the UK, France, Italy and Japan. Of the states that signed the Treaty of Versailles, the US, Hashemite Kingdom of Hejaz and Ecuador subsequently refused to ratify it. The US Senate rejected the treaty due to its unwillingness to bind the country by participating in the work of the League of Nations, the charter of which was an integral part of the treaty.

Furthermore, the surrender of Germany in May 1945 marked the end of the Second World War. Then, since it was divided into sectors of occupation between the victorious powers, there was no single legal successor to the Nazi Reich, and there was no one to conclude a peace treaty with. The state of war, in a technical sense, continued until the unification of Germany in 1990.

Secondly, the Statements of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and the President of the Russian Federation dated November 10, 2020 and January 11, 2021, contain not a word about the so-called status of Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO), which existed in 1923-1991 as part of the Azerbaijan SSR, today simply doesn’t exist as a legitimate territorial entity. On November 26, 1991, the Supreme Council of Azerbaijan adopted a resolution on the liquidation of the NKAO.

The so-called ‘referendum on the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh from Azerbaijan,’ which took place on September 10, 1991, was held without the participation of the Azerbaijani population and the consent of the Republic of Azerbaijan, as a result of which it was not recognized at the international level by the UN member states.

After the collapse of the USSR, the international legal doctrine ‘uti possidetis juris’ formed the basis for the international, regional and national legalization of the borders of the post-Soviet countries that had just gained independence. According to this doctrine, the territory and borders of the Republic of Azerbaijan after the restoration of state independence are also regulated in the form of succession of territories and borders that existed at the time when it was part of the USSR. In this case, Nagorno-Karabakh, of course, is an integral part of Azerbaijan.

Since international law recognizes the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan throughout the territory within the borders of the Azerbaijan SSR at the time of the collapse of the USSR, all issues of administrative-territorial division are regulated in accordance with national legislation and the political will of its leadership.

Thus, the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast no longer exists, and the UN member countries didn’t recognize the self-proclaimed “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.”

The UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the Council of Europe and a number of other international organizations didn’t recognize the so-called Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and more than once expressed their support for the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. This position is enshrined in the relevant resolutions.

In particular, there are four UN Security Council resolutions of 1993 (822, 853, 874, 884), which condemn the use of force by Armenia against Azerbaijan, note that Nagorno-Karabakh is an integral part of the territory of Azerbaijan and require a complete unconditional withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied territories.

Moreover, the heads of the leading countries have repeatedly expressed support for the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan in the context of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

That is, it would have been possible to speak about the recognition of the borders of NKAO by the international community, only if there had been a territorial entity with such a name, possessing statehood and, accordingly, state borders. If we are talking about the territories that once belonged to the former autonomous region, then the international community really recognizes them as an integral part of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Thirdly, Baku, even during the period of hostilities, guaranteed the Armenian community of Nagorno-Karabakh all the rights and benefits of the Azerbaijani citizens. After the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh comes under the control of Baku, the security and rights of Armenians living in this territory will be ensured in the same way as for all other residents of Azerbaijan, President Ilham Aliyev said then.

“And I already many times during this active phase of the conflict made statements in this regard that those Armenians who live in Nagorno-Karabakh are our citizens and their security, their rights will be totally provided as long as the rights of all other people of Azerbaijan. <...> So, Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh can be absolutely sure that their security will be provided. And after the criminal junta in Nagorno-Karabakh is thrown away, they, as Azerbaijani citizens will live better. They will live in dignity, they will live in peace, and we will provide all the social and economic advantages for them, as we do for any other people in our country,” Ilham Aliyev said in an interview with the Japanese newspaper Nikkei, answering the question whether he can guarantee that the Armenians will be able to live safely in Nagorno-Karabakh if ​​this territory is returned to Baku’s control.

Today, the security of the Armenian community of Nagorno-Karabakh is provided by the peacekeeping forces of the Russian Defense Ministry, deployed in the region to prevent possible resumption of hostilities.

Russian peacekeepers are deployed in the region in accordance with the trilateral statement of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and the President of the Russian Federation dated November 9, 2020. Their functions include, mainly, ensuring the safety of movement of the civilian population and civilian goods along the Lachin corridor between Khankendi and the Republic of Armenia.

Another component of the current security system in the Karabakh region is the Joint Russian-Turkish Monitoring Center for Controlling the Ceasefire in Karabakh, located in the Aghdam region, which was opened on January 30 in accordance with a memorandum signed by the defense ministers of Russia and Turkey on November 11, 2020... The main task of the center, deployed on the territory of Aghdam region, is to control the implementation of the clauses of the trilateral statement signed by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the President of the Russian Federation and the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, and the agreements reached.

Fourth, US Ambassador to Armenia Lynne Tracy says that “We will continue to work through our position as an OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair to work towards that goal of bringing down violence, of de-escalation so that we can get to some of the other very critical issues that need to be discussed.”

But the fact is that the Minsk Group of OSCE member states, called upon to lead the search for ways to peacefully resolve the Karabakh conflict, has not been able to cope with this task over the past 30 years. Also, despite the persistent attempts of Yerevan, the separatist regime never received the status of a party to the conflict and a participant in the negotiation process. Moreover, the president of Azerbaijan has repeatedly criticized the OSCE Minsk Group. In short, the Minsk Group did not play any role in the settlement in Karabakh.

The co-chairs of the Minsk Group are Russia, the US and France. In addition to them, the Minsk Group includes Belarus, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Finland and Sweden, as well as Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Thus, returning to the statement of the US Ambassador to Armenia Lynne Tracy, it should be noted that the absence of ‘the status of Nagorno-Karabakh’ and even a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan is not an obstacle to the normalization of relations and peaceful coexistence of the two countries.