SOFIMUN 2013 1st Committee of the General Assembly - DISEC Topic B: The situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan

Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Historical Background 3. Nagorno-Karabakh i. Outcome of the War ii. International Reaction iii. The next decade iv. Azerbaijani and Armenian position on the issue 4. Conclusion 5. Questions to be thought about 6. Maps 7. Bibliography 8. Further Reading 3 4 8

13 14 15 17 18

1. Introduction Azerbaijan is a country in the Middle East facing the Caspian Sea. On the East it faces the Caspian Sea while on the West it has borders with Armenia, on the North with Russia and Georgia and its South borders are with Iran. Its population according to the CIA World Fact Book is estimated to reach about 9.5 million by July 2013, huge majority of which are Azeri (90%) while there are also three main ethnic minorities: Dagestani (2.2%), Russian (1.8%) and Armenian(1.5%), which explains why the majority of the population is Shia Muslim and Turkic but there is also a small proportion of Christian Orthodox population. 1 It should also be underlined that Azerbaijan was independent after the collapse of the Russian Empire but it became a member of the Soviet Union for seventy years. At this moment Azerbaijan has yet to find a feasible solution regarding its dispute with Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. On the other hand, Armenia is also a Caspian, Middle Eastern country, which however prides itself on being the first nation to formally adopt Christianity during 4th Century. Armenias population is roughly expected to reach 3 million by this July, with much lesser ethnic differences since almost 98% are Armenian and only a small percentage of 1.3 are Kurds and 0.5 are Russians. As far as religion is concerned, at this moment the majority of Armenians are Armenian Apostolic but there is also a 4% proportion of Christians and a 1.3% of Yedizi.2 Armenias borders include Turkey in the West, Georgia in the North, Iran in the South and Azerbaijan in the East. Armenia is also another state that was rarely independent as it has become part of various empires, from Romans and Persians to Arabs and Ottomans. During First World War Ottoman Turkeys decision to implement forced resettlement in the Western part of Armenia resulted in the death of approximately 1 million Armenians, while the Eastern part was ceded to Russia and then became independent in 1918, only to be conquered by Soviet Union two years later. This resulted in the region of Nagorno- Karabakh to be assigned to Soviet Azerbaijan although it was primarily an Armenian populated region. According to the CIA World Fact Book the fights over the region started in 1988 and the collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in an escalation of the dispute as both countries attained their independence and wanted the control of the area (1991). As the years passed Armenians managed to gain control over the area and by 1994 the ethnic Armenian forced held the region and a significant proportion of Azerbaijan. Then a cease- fire was secured as both countries had suffered great socio-economic losses and they had failed in reaching a sustainable peaceful solution to the issue.

1 2

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/aj.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/am.html

International interest in this area has been kept alive with Turkey, France, United States of America and Russia holding an active role. The conflicts over this landlocked, mountainous and forested land of Southern Caucasus, lead to the closure of the borders of Armenia and Turkey in 1993, since Turkey decided to support Azerbaijan, and although Armenians have tried to approach Turkey the situation still remains the same. Moreover, various reports have been produced by the Secretary General of the United Nations, the General Assembly and the Security Council have shown their keen interest over the topic and reached resolutions such as Resolution 60/285 and A/63/804 of the General Assembly and 822,853,874 and 884 of the Security Council.

2. Historical Background Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are countries which have been conquered in the past and have been parts of other bigger and very important empires throughout history. This combined with the different ethnical and religious backgrounds of the habitants of the regions lead us to the conclusion that the region suffered from conflicts in the past. Therefore, the reader should not be surprised to know that the roots of the conflict date more than a hundred years back and to the fights between Christian Armenians and Muslim Turkic and Persians. Various ethnicities have passed by Nagorno- Karabakh through the centuries, from Caucasian Albanians and Christians during 1st -6th Century AD and Arabs, who were the first Muslims to enter the region in the 8th century AD, to Seljuk Turks, who invaded the region in the middle of the 11th century, Mongols (1230- when its name changed from Artsahk to Karabakh), Iranians and Turks, who continuously fought in the region, and Russians, who gain control over the region in 1805 although formally it was with the Treaty of Gulistan that Persians ceded Karabakh to the Tsar in 1813, which was the culmination of the Russian-Iranian War (1804-1813).3Although Russians showed some tolerance to the Muslims of the region soon a military administration was formed and the main population of the area consisted of soldiers, administrators and traders. It was in 1828, with the end of the Russian Iranian War of 1826-1828 and the Treaty of Turkmenchai, that the Armenians started immigrating in the region. It is estimated that approximately 57000 Armenians migrated to the region and Yerevan, as a result of the Persian hostilities, and around 35000 Muslims, including Azeris, Kurds and Lezgins, out of an entire population of 117000.4 These migration waves continued during the Russian-Turkish Wars and the nineteenth century, with Armenians

http://books.google.gr/books?id=JL9N4F1SgyYC&pg=PA1&dq=treaty+of+Gulistan+Karabakh&hl=n l&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=treaty%20of%20Gulistan%20Karabakh&f=false 4 ibid

occupying the places that were previously habited by Turks who now fled to the Russian Empires grounds. The Karabakh region belonged to the Elizavetpol Province (Gandzak) since 1867 but in 1917 after the October Revolution it became part of the Independent Republic of Azerbaijan. It has to be underlined that although the Republic was independent the control over the Karabakh region was still a much debated issue between not only Armenians and Azerbaijanis but also between the Ottoman and British forces, the latter reaffirming the jurisdiction of the Azerbaijanis by appointing a Muslim as a governor in Susha. For the reader to be able to understand the importance of such a move it has to be underlined that by that time Susha was a region which was regarded by the Armenians as an Armenian cultural centre and we should also keep in mind the religious difference between the two parts. It was only in the 1920 that the elders of Susha recognized the authority of Azerbaijanis since they had no option but to act so. During the same year, in March, Susha was transformed in an Azeri city because of an Armenian mass exodus to Khankende.5 Furthermore, the Armenians of the Karabakh region accepted to be incorporated in Azerbaijan providing that the Paris Peace conference of 1919s resolution would ensure the autonomy of the region. With the Red Army in Baku and Azerbaijan being a stronghold in the region, the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region was established in 1920 by the Soviet Union. This meant that an Armenian majority was autonomous within the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan as result of the Soviet acts, with many blaming the Soviet Union leaders for their lack of respect towards regional ethnicities, their insensitivity and their will to implement a divide and rule policy. After many meetings, approvals and disapprovals of decisions that lead to contradicting statements, a one month war between Azerbaijan and Armenia and instability, it was in 1923 that an agreement was finally made. In 1920, a statement was made by the Soviet Azerbaijan was made public by Stalin, that all three regions, Karabakh, Zangezur and Nakhchivan, should be under Armenian control. This transfer was however later rejected by Azerbaijan leader, Narimanov. Later on and due to the interest Bolshevik Russia had in Turkey, a second approach was introduced. The new proposal, the Treaty of Brotherhood and Friendship or Treaty of Moscow, which was a treaty whose aim was to establish good relations between the two parties, suggested that the Nakchivan and Karabakh would be put under Azerbaijans control while the rest of the region would remain in Armenia. It has been assumed that although this was a result of the intention to ensure Turkeys interests in the area, Russia would have acted the same way so as to ensure the division in both nations.

ibid

On 4th of July of the same year a new meeting was held, the Kavburo meeting, where Karabakh was voted to pertinent to Armenia, a decision which was strongly opposed by Narimanov who suggested that it should be reconsidered by the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party, in which he succeeded. Thus, the following day it was decided that the Karabakh region would belong to Azerbaijan. It should be underlined that the decision also stated that the region should be granted substantial autonomy.6 More meetings were held during the following year and it was on July of 1923 that the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast was established.7 The decree that confirmed this was form Baku and it was signed on 24 July 1923. It has been noted that according to the Great Soviet Encyclopaedia the region touched the borders of Armenia but at some point the Nagorno-Karabakh region was completely cut from Armenia because of the border changes that were made, something at which Armenians were opposed to but only came on light after Gorbachev introduced it by giving a new meaning to freedom with his policys of perestroika. By 1930 the maps had been completely adjusted and the Lachin corridor was left under the control of Azerbaijan.8 Moving our interest back to the Nakhchivan region it should be said that in 1924 it became autonomous as well, the Autonomous Nackhchivan SSR within Azerbaijan was a fact. Despite the disappointment from the Armenian sides, since they were promised they would hold the region, and under the control of the Soviet Union the region was peaceful for the next seventy years, although some demonstrations were held in Armenia by people demanding the region to either become Autonomous or return back to Armenia or Russia. On April of 1965 the famous Letter of Thirteen was sent to Russian Officials. The letter was the first official intention to address the issue. With open discussions about the issue, the continuous efforts of Armenian officials to convince Russia to hand them the region and demonstrations being held during the 1960s it was only in the end of 1980s that the Soviet Union started to loosen its control over the region, mostly because of the issues it faced itself as it could be assumed. With the introduction of the Glasnost, which called for transparency, and
6

http://edoc.bibliothek.unihalle.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/HALCoRe_derivate_00003079/NagornoKarabakh%20Conflict.pdf?hosts=local" 7 According to the Free dictionary Online (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/oblast) an oblast is an administrative and territorial division in some republics of the former Soviet Union . Another definition can also be found at the Merriam Webster Dictionary (http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/oblast ) which defines the oblast as : a political subdivision of Imperial Russia or a republic of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or of the Russian Federation 8 Mutafian, Karabagh in the Twentieth Century, op. cit. [12], p. 134 : as noted in http://edoc.bibliothek.unihalle.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/HALCoRe_derivate_00003079/NagornoKarabakh%20Conflict.pdf?hosts=local"

Perestroika more letters were signed and sent to Moscow as the Union was now more Open and Freedom had a new meaning. The situation drastically changed in 1987 and onwards and after the collapse of the Soviet Union the region became host of fights and conflicts. An example of the letters sent to Moscow was the Petition of August 1987 which was prepared by the Armenian Academy of Sciences. The petition was signed by thousands of people and asked for the control of the entire region of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhchivan. Moreover, during this period it was common for demonstrations about environment to be transformed into political, religious, ethnical demonstration about the NagornoKarabakh region. These were empowered by the lack of any response from Moscow and many were convinced that a possible transfer of control could happen.9 An important statement was that of Gorbachev: There was a time when this proposal was on the point of being implemented. However, it was just at this moment that the Supreme Soviet in Yerevan passed a resolution to incorporate Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Armenia and so everything fell apart. It fell apart because of internal antagonism, because the battle for power, for replacement of the ruling elite, was already in full swing there. If fell apart because the Armenian national movement, which was formed on the basis of the Karabakh committee, was in a hurry to seize power.10 This statement is related to the possible solution of handing to the NagornoKarabakh region the status of an Autonomous SSR and it was made in 1989. 11 On 1988, with the decision of the Supreme Soviet in Yerevan, which was to give the Nagorno-Karabakh region to Armenia, the situation deteriorated even more. According to Gorbachevs memoirs the reason for this was internal antagonism, because the battle for power, for replacement of the ruling elite, was already in full swing there. If fell apart because the Armenian national movement, which was formed on the basis of the Karabakh committee, was in a hurry to seize power.12 Another solution that was also considered, during the Politburo meeting, was to preserve that status quo in favour of Azeraijan.13
9

http://edoc.bibliothek.unihalle.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/HALCoRe_derivate_00003079/NagornoKarabakh%20Conflict.pdf?hosts=local" 10 For Gorbachevs account of the eruption of the conflict, see Mikhail Gorbachev, The Karabakh Explosion, in Memoirs, New York & London: Doubleday, 1996, pp. 333-340: As cited in http://edoc.bibliothek.unihalle.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/HALCoRe_derivate_00003079/NagornoKarabakh%20Conflict.pdf?hosts=local" 11 He proposed the creation of a Republic. Gorbachev believed that the only possible solution would be for the two parts to come together and peacefully resolve the issue through discussions. However, the condition was continuously deteriorating in the region. Moreover, with corrupted officials fearing they would lose their privileges because of Perestroika and taking advantage of peoples feelings on the issue, they decided to make the situation publicly known, take the decision to the USSR Supreme Soviet and publish the reports on the region. The decision was taken to the Supreme Soviet but with tension keep rising he proposed the creation of a new republic. It seems that although this solution could have worked earlier at that point it could not provide any solution. 12 http://www.cilicia.com/armo19g.html 13 ibid

The most important time for the region was right after the collapse of the Soviet Union when control over the region was lost and both Armenia and Azerbaijan were ready to fight for it. By the end of 1991 a full scale war between the two states was declared, also because of the fact that Karabakh declared itself an independent state right after the initiation of the SSR of Azerbaijan to become and independent republic. On October of 1991 Azerbaijan confirmed its independence and on November the parliament abolished the autonomous status of Nagorno-Karabakh.14 With the majority of the population being in favour of the independence and the Declaration of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh the creation of the Republic was a fact in 1992 the state petitioned to become a member of the United Nations and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Moreover, it started petitioning to various countries in order to be recognised. To this date the state remains a de facto independent unrecognised republic. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan lasted till 1994 when a ceasefire was signed but the efforts to find a solution have been ongoing since February of 1992. During the Helsinki meeting of Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) it was decided to convene a conference on the issue in Minsk so that a peaceful solution could be achieved. The conference was held with the chairing of Italy and the participation of Czechoslovakia, Sweden, Germany, Russia, United States of America, France, Turkey, Belarus, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Despite their effort the meeting held during 1992 were unsuccessful which led to a Russian initiative in September of 1992. This initiative was Sochi Agreement according to which Russian observers were to be sent to Azerbaijan, Armenia and NagornoKarabakh regions. While there were discussions being held the war was ongoing and resulted in the formation of two land corridors. The first was made in May of 1992 between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia, Lachin, and the second was formed in March of 1993 when Armenia took over the Kelbajar in North Western Azerbaijan. This resulted in the Resolution of the United Nations Security Council 822 and Europes statement of April 1993. During 1993, Turkey decided to close its borders with Armenia in support to Azerbaijan, thus hampering Armenian economic growth, a decision which remains such till this day despite the efforts of Armenian leaders.

3. Nagorno-Karabakh i. Outcome of the War

The Nagorno-Karabakh war resulted in serious socio-economic distraction of both countries and had huge impacts on the entire region. Economic set back and damage was unavoidable, approximately a million people were internally displaced while there were a huge number of people who died. Thousands of refugees, provocation of mutual intolerance and hatred and polarization of the two sides, rise of the nationalistic sentiments and forced movement of population were also some of its results. Human beings and human dignity were no longer significant as both sides committed atrocities towards each other and their main goal was to take control over the area.
14

Nagorno-Karabakh held a referendum regarding its independence where the massive majority of the population (99%) voted in favour of the independence from Azerbaijan. However, it should be noted that the Azeri population boycotted the referendum.

Moving to the issue of the control over the area, it was not stable during the war as region were conquered and then liberated. In 1993, Armenians were in control of the whole Karabakh; Agdam, Fizuli, Kelbajar, Kubatly and Zangelan. Azerbaijan managed to take under its control Shahumyan, Martakert and Matuni while the neighbouring districts remained under Nagorno-Karabakh control. As it was stated above two land corridors were made in 1993, one was passing through Lachin and the second through Kelbajar. By 1994, Armenia had managed to have under its control the Karabakh region and part of Azerbaijani territories around it. ii. International Reaction

All these, especially the fight against Kelbajar, resulted in the beginning of the international communitys response to the ongoing war in the region. In 1993, the United Nations Security Council passed the 822 Resolution. This first Resolution on the issue was adopted on 30th April of 1993 and it demanded the immediate cessation of all hostilities and hostile acts with a view to establishing a durable ceasefire, as well as immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces from the Kebladjar district and other recently occupied areas of Azerbaijan. Furthermore it urged for the immediate resumption of the negotiations and it called for unimpeded access for international humanitarian relief efforts in the region while it also reaffirmed that all parties are bound to comply with the principles and rules of international humanitarian law.15 This United Nations resolution was preceded by European Political Cooperations statement on Nagorno-Karabakh of 7th April of 1993. The statement stated that: The Community and its member States are seriously concerned about the latest degradation of the relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The Community and its member States regret the enlargement of the combat zone to Kelbajar and the Fizuli area. The Armenian government is strongly urged to use its influence on the Nagorno-Karabakh forces for an immediate withdrawal from the Azeri territory and to stop the fighting in the area. All parties are requested not to withdraw from the ongoing negotiations in the Minsk group of the CSCE due to recent events.16 With the conflict in the region ongoing on 29 and 30 April of the same year a meeting was held between representatives of United States of America, Russia and Turkey in Moscow on the initiative that was introduced on 8 April by the President of the Russian Federation. The Urgent Measures Schedule called for the cessation of military operations for sixty days. In May consultation between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh region, with Russia as a mediator and in June the Urgent Measures Schedule is suggested to the parties. During the same month a cessation of artillery bombardments is achieved between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh Region. 17

15

Security Council, Resolution 822, Full text available at : http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/247/71/IMG/N9324771.pdf?OpenElement 16 EU Document, Press Release, P.34/93, as cited in : http://www.xankendi.az/europe_article,383/lang,en/ 17 http://www.nkrusa.org/nk_conflict/chronology.shtml#year1993

On 29th July of 1993 the United Nations Security Council passed the Resolution 853 on NK. The Security Council reaffirmed its first Resolution and expressing it concern at the deterioration of relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijani Republic and reaffirming the territorial integrity of the states of the regions it condemned all hostile actions in the region and demanded the immediate cessation of all hostilities and the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces involved from the district of Agdam and all other recently occupied areas of the Azerbaijan Republic.18 The 853 Resolution was followed by Resolution 87419 and 88420, both in the same year the first on 14th of October and the second on 11th of November. At the Resolution 874 SC expressed its hope that the high-level meetings which took place in Moscow on 8 October 1993... will contribute to the improvement of the situation and the peaceful settlement of the conflict. It once again called for the immediate implementation of a permanent cease-fire; it reiterated its full suport for the peace process being pursued within the framework of the CSCE, and for the tireless efforts of the CSCE Minsk Group and it called on all parties to refrain from all violations of international humanitarian law and renews its call in resolutions 822 (1993) and 853 (1993) for unimpeded access for international humanitarian relief efforts in all areas affected by the conflict. All these were further expressed in the 884 Resolution which reaffirming the inviolability of international borders and the inadmissibility of the use of force for the acquisition of territory called upon the Government of Armenia to use its influence to achieve compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorny Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic with resolutions 822 (1993) , 853 (1993) and 874 (1993) ,to ensure that the forces involved are not provided with the means to extend their military campaign further and demanded from the parties concerned the immediate cessation of armed hostilities and hostile acts, the unilateral withdrawal of occupying forces from the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz, and the withdrawal of occupying forces from other recently occupied areas of the Azerbaijani Republic in accordance with the Adjusted timetable of urgent steps to implement Security Council resolutions 822 (1993) and 853 (1993) (S/26522, appendix), as amended by the CSCE Minsk Group meeting in Vienna of 2 to 8 November 1993. iii. The next decade (2000s)

Despite the cease-fire that was achieved there are still accusations from both parts about violations and of disrespect towards the decisions made by international organizations. Despite the continuous efforts the issue remains unresolved after more than a decade. The negotiations are held within the OSCE Minsk Group on the basis of the Madrid

18

United Nations SC, Resolution 853 on NK: Full text available at : http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/428/34/IMG/N9342834.pdf?OpenElement 19 UNSC, Resolution 874: http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/557/41/PDF/N9355741.pdf?OpenElement 20 UNSC, Resolution 884: http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/631/20/PDF/N9363120.pdf?OpenElement

10

proposals21 represented by co-chairs in November, 2007, but remained unsuccessful. In 2006 a referendum that approved a new constitution in the area was declared illegitimate by Azerbaijan but the meetings between Armenia and Azerbaijan had not stopped and in 2010 various violations of the cease-fire were reported.22 The United Nations have adopted more resolutions on the issue and the Secretary General prepared a report on the situation in the area in 2009 23. More specifically the Resolutions adopted are General Assemblys Resolution 59/23624, which asked for the inclusion of the topic in the agenda of the 60th meeting, 60/28525, 62/24326, which reaffirmed continued respect and support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan within its internationally recognized borders, demanded the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of all Armenian forces from all the occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan and expressed its support to the international mediation efforts, in particular those of the CoChairmen of the Minsk Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Council of Europe has been also interested in the evolvement of the negotiation and it has issued various recommendations on the issue. These are Recommendation 1059(1995),1263(1995)27, 1305(1996)28, 1570(2002)29 and Resolution 1416 of 2015 30 . All the documents expressed the concern of Europe about the situation in the region and the status of the displaced people and the refugees. Moreover, at the Resolution 1416 recall the UNSC Resolutions on the issue and urged all parties to comply with them. It further recalled that both Armenia and Azerbaijan committed themselves upon their accession to the Council of Europe in January 2001 to use only peaceful means for settling the conflict, by refraining from any threat of using force against their neighbours, it recalled that Armenia and Azerbaijan are signatory parties to the Charter of the United Nations and, in accordance with Article 93, paragraph 1 of the Charter, ipso facto parties to the statute of the International Court of Justice. Therefore, the Assembly suggests that if the negotiations under the auspices of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group fail, Armenia and Azerbaijan should consider using the International Court of Justice in accordance with Article 36, paragraph 1 of its statute: and it called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to foster political reconciliation among themselves by stepping up bilateral inter21 22

http://mfa.am/u_files/file/statementseng.pdf http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18270325 23 http://www.refworld.org/cgibin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=country&category=&publisher=UNGA&type=&coi=aze&rid=&docid=49f ab4242&skip=0 24 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/59/236&Lang=E 25 GA Resolution 60/285, full text : http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/60/285&Lang=E 26 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/62/243&Lang=E 27 http://www.assembly.coe.int//Main.asp?link=http://www.assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ TA95/EREC1263.htm 28 http://www.assembly.coe.int//Main.asp?link=http://www.assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ TA96/EREC1305.htm (the recommendation is regarding the refugees and although it is about Georgia it refers to Armenian and Azerbaijan topic as well) 29 http://www.assembly.coe.int//Main.asp?link=http://www.assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ TA02/EREC1570.htm 30 http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta05/ERES1416.htm#_ftn1

11

parliamentary co-operation within the Assembly as well as in other forums such as the meetings of the speakers of the parliaments of the Caucasian Four. It recommends that both delegations should meet during each part-session of the Assembly to review progress on such reconciliation. Last but not least another international organization has shown a keen interest in the area. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference and more specifically its Council of Minister of Foreign Affairs passed two resolutions in 2008 and 2010, resolution No 10/1131 and 10/3732 respectively. According to the Administrative Department of the Republic of Azerbaijan33, the Organization of Islamic Conference was the first that acknowledged the fact of aggression by Armenia against Azerbaijan, which can also be shown in the Resolution 9/39 on the Aggression of the Republic of Armenia Against the Republic of Azerbaijan. At the Resolution the Organization strongly condemns the aggression of the Republic of Armenia against the Republic of Azerbaijan, it considers the actions perpetrated against civilian Azerbaijani population in the occupied Azerbaijani territories as crimes against humanity, it strongly condemns any looting and destruction of the archaeological, cultural and religious monuments in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan and it strongly demands the strict implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884, and the immediate, unconditional and complete withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied Azerbaijani territories including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and strongly urges Armenia to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan.34

v.

Azerbaijani and Armenian position on the issue

Azerbaijan: According to Azerbaijan the Nagorno-Karabakh region was an autonomous oblast within the Azerbaijan SSR, following both the USSR Constitution and that of Azerbaijani SSR. Therefore the legal status of the region was governed by the Supreme Soviet of the Azerbaijan SSRs Law On the NKAO. Azerbaijan considers the creation of the republic of NK illegal and contradicting to the Constitution of USSR. Furthermore, it is underlined that the internationally acknowledged borders of the Republic of Azerbaijan are the former administrative borders of ASSR, borders which are respected and protected by the international law and do include the NK region. 35 Armenia: Armenia on the other hand supports that a feasible solution can be reached only through the recognition of the Nagorno-Karabakh peoples right to self determination, the uninterrupted land communication between the region and Armenia and the internationally guaranteed security of the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Furthermore, it shall be noted that it underlined the importance of the full participation of the Nagorno-Karabakh as a conflict party in the negotiations. It also believes in the importance of OSCE Minsk Group in the negotiations process and it
31 32

http://www.oic-oci.org/is11/english/res/11-SUM-POL-RES-FINAL.pdf http://www.oic-oci.org/37cfm/en/documents/res/37-CFM-POL-RES-ENGLISH-FINAL.pdf 33 http://files.preslib.az/projects/azerbaijan/eng/gl7.pdf 34 http://www.oic-oci.org/english/conf/fm/39/POL-RES-39%20-FINAL_rev2.pdf 35 http://www.azembassy.be/EMBASSY/41.html

12

underlines that Armenia seeks a peaceful solution. Armenia cannot see NK as a part of Azerbaijan and it argues that Azerbaijan has no moral or legal grounds to claim over the region.36 4. Conclusion Nagorno-Karabakh is a landlocked region in the South Caucasus, in south-western Azerbaijan, and is mostly mountainous. The conflict for the control over the NagornoKarabakh region was and is to this day one of the most serious issues the region has to face, an issue that risks the security and peace in the area. Relations between Azerbaijan deteriorated after the collapse of the Soviet Union which led to the creation of an independent state, the occupation by Armenian forces of the region and the fact the Azerbaijan was also interested in the region as it was in its territories. By 1991 the conflicts have reached the level of a full scale war.The NagornoKarabakh war had tremendous impacts on Armenia, Azerbaijan, NK region and the countries of the area. Thousands were killed, even more became refugees, were displaced and forced to move. Economic impact was also enormous with infrastructure being destroyed while the consequences on cultural heritage shall not be undermined. Both sides do not lack of arguments. Armenia, focusing on the fact that most of the population of the area are Armenians, supports the right of the people of NK region to self determination and independence. Azerbaijan on the other hand strongly opposes to that as the area is within its borders and it underlines that the region cannot be autonomous basing its arguments on international law. All these mentioned above, resulted in the will of the international community to become involved and find a solution to the problem. Although Nagorno-Karabakh declared its de facto independence and has applied to the United Nations and individual countries to recognise to this day there is no international organization that has recognised and is a de jure part of Azerbaijan. According to United Nations resolutions the territory belongs to Azerbaijan and is occupied by Armenian forces. European Union, following United Nations, also supports this idea and both UN Organization and the Union underline that a peaceful solution within the OSCE Minsk Group framework shall be achieved, only through negotiations. Organization of Islamic Conference is a step forward towards Azerbaijan as it has also acknowledged that there has been aggressive behaviour from Armenia to Azerbaijan. Despite all these ongoing efforts there are still complaints of violation of the ceasefire in the region and the need for a sustainable, permanent solution to the issue is now visible more than ever before.

36

http://www.mfa.am/en/artsakh/#a5

13

5. Questions to be thought about The issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh region is one the greatest challenges that the area has faced and it remains to this day a topic of great concern for both Azerbaijan and Armenia and the countries of the region. When tackling this problem the delegates of this committee should try to answer the following questions: Is the conflict territorial, religious and national or both? How could the issue be resolved today? Should the Nagorno-Karabakh region belong to a state or become an autonomous and recognised state? How could the issue of refugees be tackled? Has the world done enough during all these years? What are the measures that have not yet be taken, which have been taken and is it possible to use them today? Would they be helpful? On which topic? What are the challenges of keeping peace in the region? How can they be faced? What was the impact on the relations of the countries neighbouring to the key actors of the region? Could they help to the solution of the issue? Do they make things worse? What should the stance of the international community be on this topic?

14

6. Maps 1. Azerbaijan

Source: CIA https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/aj.html

World

Fact

Book:

2. Armenia

Source: CIA World Factbook http://www.ou.edu/mideast/country/armenia.htm

(2001)

as

cited

in

3. Nagorno-Karabakh

15

Source:http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/ai101_folder/101_articles/101_goltz_speech.h tml : The cross-hatched area of the map shows the Azerbaijani territory currently being occupied by Armenia

Source: Economist: The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Still just about frozen, [ Online], Available at :

http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2011/03/nagorno-karabakh_conflict

4. Susha and Lachin

Source:

http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/ai101_folder/101_articles/101_goltz_speech. html

16

7. Bibliography http://academia.edu/524700/WHAT_ARE_ARMENIANS_CLAIMS_AND_A ZERBAIJANS_POSITION_OVER_NAGORNOKARABAKH_AND_PEACE_EFFORTS http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/TA05/ERES1416.htm http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta05/ERES1 416.htm#_ftn1 http://www.azembassy.gr/?page_id=976&lang=el http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/610150/Treaty-of-Turkmenchay http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/393465/Treaty-of-Moscow http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18270325 http://books.google.gr/books?id=JL9N4F1SgyYC&pg=PA1&dq=treaty+of+G ulistan+Karabakh&hl=nl&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=treaty%20of%20Gulist an%20Karabakh&f=false http://books.google.gr/books?id=cELfINDAH0oC&pg=PA8&dq=treaty+of+G ulistan+Karabakh&hl=&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=treaty%20of%20Gulista n%20Karabakh&f=false http://caucasusedition.net/analysis/nagorno-karabakh-conflict-warhumanitarian-challenge-and-peacekeeping/ https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/aj.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/am.html http://www.cilicia.com/armo19g.html http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2011/03/nagornokarabakh_conflict http://edoc.bibliothek.unihalle.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/HALCoRe_derivate_00003079/Nagor no-Karabakh%20Conflict.pdf?hosts=local" http://www.azembassy.be/EMBASSY/41.html http://www.xankendi.az/europe_article,383/lang,en/ http://www.mfa.gov.az/index.php?options=content&id=729 http://www.nkrusa.org/nk_conflict/chronology.shtml#year1993 http://www.refworld.org/cgibin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=country&category=&publisher=UNGA&type=&c oi=aze&rid=&docid=49fab4242&skip=0 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10576109408435961?journalCo de=uter20#preview http://files.preslib.az/projects/azerbaijan/eng/gl7.pdf http://www.oic-oci.org/english/conf/fm/39/POL-RES-39%20FINAL_rev2.pdf http://usa.mfa.am/en/karabagh/ http://files.preslib.az/projects/azerbaijan/eng/gl7.pdf http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/10/13/nagorno-karabakh-conflictarmenias-victory-or-nightmare-2/ http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/ga10693.doc.htm
17

 http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/428/34/IMG/N9342834.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/557/41/PDF/N9355741.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/631/20/PDF/N9363120.pdf?OpenElement

8.

Further Reading http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Oblasts http://files.preslib.az/site/soyqirim/31mart_en.pdf http://www.mfa.gov.az/?language=en http://www.mfa.gov.az/?options=content&id=544&language=en http://www.mfa.am/en/ http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00263209808701209?journalCo de=fmes20#preview http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/59/49%20(VOL.%20II I)%20(SUPP)&Lang=E http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/russ.2012.71.issue-3/issuetoc http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/49/13&Lang=E http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/48/114&Lang=E &Area=RESOLUTION http://unbisnet.un.org:8080/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=W3J289X428966.288762 &profile=bibga&menu=search&submenu=alpha&ts=1372899430303 Russian text of the Treaty of Turkmechai: http://www.hist.msu.ru/ER/Etext/FOREIGN/turkman.htm Russian text of the Treaty of Brotherhood: http://www.amsi.ge/istoria/sab/moskovi.html In Russian : Great Soviet Encyclopedia : http://slovari.yandex.ru/~%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8/ %D0%91%D0%A1%D0%AD/ In Russian: The Great Russian Encyclopedia : http://www.greatbook.ru/index.php

18