Legally and Morally Bound: Artsakh Blockaded in the Puzzle of Law, Politics, and Tolerance of Crime
Compassion, though often obscured by the fine print of legal codes, undeniably exerts a profound influence on the contours of international law and its application. While legal doctrines primarily orbit around state interests, sovereignty, and treaties, the latent force of compassion quietly infuses the international legal realm with a resounding echo of humanity's essence. This influence is particularly conspicuous within the realms of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law.
International law wades into the tumultuous waters of conflicts, disputes, and injustices that traverse borders and national identities. Its overarching mission is to cultivate order, justice, and accountability on a global canvas. In this intricate tapestry, compassion operates as an implicit compass, steering the interpretation and embodiment of international law.
Among the foundational pillars of these international legal domains stands a commitment to safeguarding the welfare and dignity of individuals trapped by armed conflicts, uprooted by displacement, and tormented by persecution. This ethical stance transcends geopolitical boundaries, rallying the international community to unite in empathy and solidarity. Compassion bridges the chasm between legal protocols and human realities, imbuing international law with a resonating humanistic ethos.
A crucial facet of compassion within international law is its evocative call to action. This aspect sets it apart, compelling responses to the distress of those in dire straits. The essence of compassion lies in its conviction that the suffering endured by individuals is unwarranted, emphasizing the imperative to address this suffering with fairness and empathy. This profound understanding of compassion enriches the human-centered approach of international law, embedding the significance of compassion in molding far-reaching decisions and actions on a global stage.Where Idealism Meets Reality: The Role of Compassion
However, as inspiring as the role of compassion in international law might sound, the real world paints a more complicated picture. While compassion should guide decision-making and responses to humanitarian crises, the application of international law can be muddied by political considerations and interests. Geopolitical dynamics, alliances, and strategic interests can cast shadows over the urgency of compassionate responses.
Artsakh: A Reality Check
The disparity between ideals and reality is nowhere more evident than in the ongoing crisis in Artsakh. While compassion should compel swift and decisive international action, political interests often take precedence. This conflict starkly highlights the challenge of aligning international law with compassion on the ground.
Rights, Compassion, and Duties
Mind you! While the resonance of compassion echoes powerfully in the tumult of the Artsakh crisis, let us not forget that the bedrock of resolution lies in the unequivocal rights of the people of Artsakh. These rights, meticulously etched into the fabric of international law, transcend the realm of mere suggestions, transforming into unassailable entitlements that demand immediate realization.
In this critical juncture, swift and resolute action becomes the conduit through which these rights are safeguarded. While compassion undoubtedly fuels the urgency, it is not the sole compass guiding our path. It is the unflinching commitment to execute and secure the rights of the people of Artsakh that commands our unwavering focus.
The international community bears a solemn duty to stand as custodians of these rights, fortified by decisive and predominantly political action. The stage is no place for diplomatic pleasantries, extended negotiations, or wavering compromise. The entwined responsibilities enshrined in international law and human morality leave no room for hesitation when it comes to Azerbaijan's obligations.
Artsakh’s Plight: A Call to Action
As we reported previously, Artskah has been effectively blockaded by Azerbaijan since December 2022, casting a shadow of deprivation over the lives of more than 120,000, including 30,000 children, Armenians who call Artsakh their home.
Access to the most fundamental requisites for survival — sustenance, fuel, and medical essentials — has been unceremoniously severed by Azerbaijan. The Lachin corridor, once a symbol of connection, now resonates with the echoes of isolation and desperation, as its blockade imprisons the dreams and aspirations of the innocent.
When Geopolitics and “Humanitarianism” Dance a Polite Tango
It is evident that Azerbaijan joined forces with Turkey and Russia to push their harsh plans in Artsakh. Turkey is backing them up with military support, while Russia sort of provides a cover, like a smokescreen, using the war in Ukraine. And guess what? Azerbaijan is taking advantage of all this chaos. They even help move Russian oil to Europe, even though it's not exactly the friendliest relationship between them.
In 2020, Azerbaijan agreed to let Russian peacekeepers in and promised to keep a road open between Armenia and Artsakh. Importantly, by doing so, Aliyev’s Azerbaijan implicitly recognized Arstakh’s de facto status. But things changed once Russia invaded Ukraine. Aliyev, the big decision-maker in Azerbaijan, did a 180. He decided, "No more special treatment for those Armenians," and started erasing anything Armenian in the area. It's like they're wiping out a whole community's existence.
So, thanks to Azerbaijan's policies, we’re witnessing a colossal humanitarian disaster unfold in Artsakh. But trust me, this is way more than just nations fighting over land. There are real people suffering – more than 120,000 Armenians. You might be surprised but they too have dreams, desires, and aspirations beyond being pawns on the grand chessboard of international politics. They might have audacious notions like riding horses, whistling and crafting melodies, skateboarding, and dreaming of a world where their lives matter more than political maneuvers. Imagine that? How dare they, right? Yet, for eight long months, they’ve been struggling without enough food, medicine, or basic healthcare. And yes, we'll keep reminding you this time and again. Can’t let that slip our minds, can we?
Their lives have turned upside down. Imagine schools and buses not running, and important things like power and water going haywire. With each passing hour, things just get worse, and it's heartbreaking to see.
Time's up for waiting around. These lives and their dignity shouldn't be some political bargaining chips. We're all in this together, and it's on us to step up with determination and compassion to put an end to this Artsakh crisis.
In this turbulent landscape, the international community has a unique and historic opportunity to prevent genocide in Artsakh. With powerful nations like the United States, Russia, and European Union member states on the stage, the potential to intervene and make a lasting impact is real.
Unveiling the Architects
Now, let's dive back into the intricacies of international law. While the urgency of relieving the blockaded population demands immediate attention, it's equally crucial to delve into the broader context of this atrocity. We must scrutinize the larger picture, including the potential legal consequences for those responsible under international law. After all, such heinous acts cannot and should not escape accountability.
Luis Moreno Ocampo, the former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, has starkly illuminated the consistent negligence of the global community in recognizing the use of starvation as a method to annihilate populations. This distressing pattern of oversight has marred various historical events, from the Armenian experience in 1915 to the sufferings of Jews and Poles in 1939, the hardships endured by the residents of Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg) in 1941, and the atrocities faced by Cambodians in 1975/1976. The tragic events in Srebrenica during the winter of 1993/1994 serve as yet another painful reminder of this negligence.
The International Court of Justice's examination of the Srebrenica case carried significant weight. It established that the "deprivation of food, medical care, shelter, or clothing" unequivocally falls under the category of genocide, as defined in Article II(c) of the Genocide Convention.
States that have ratified the Genocide Convention are not only obligated to prevent acts of genocide but also to penalize those responsible for committing them. The International Court of Justice's ruling underlines the proactive nature of this obligation – states are required to act preemptively and preventatively, rather than merely reacting when the act of genocide is already in progress. This obligation centers on the prevention or, at the very least, the attempt to prevent the occurrence of such grave acts.
"As we have previously highlighted, the International Court of Justice has already examined the blockade of the Lachin Corridor in response to Armenia's request. In its assessment, the Court shifted its focus from individual criminal responsibility for genocide to State liability concerning the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Although the Court's examination centered on a distinct array of State obligations, its findings affirmed the existence of the fundamental elements of genocide, as outlined in Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: the intentional imposition of living conditions aimed at the physical destruction of a particular group.
Preliminary conclusions from the Court deemed it "plausible" that the blockade of the Lachin Corridor posed a tangible and imminent threat to the "health and life" of a specific ethnic community – the Armenians residing in Nagorno-Karabakh. This acknowledgment underscores the real and immediate danger faced by this population due to the blockade's effects.
On February 22, 2023, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) took a resolute step by issuing a provisional measure that directly instructed Azerbaijan to ensure unrestricted movement along the Lachin Corridor. This momentous order, passed with a strong majority, mandates Azerbaijan to take immediate and necessary actions to facilitate the free passage of people, vehicles, and essential cargo in both directions along the corridor. The ICJ's order serves as a glaring reminder of the pressing urgency of the situation, underscoring the imperative need for swift action to address the ongoing crisis.
In addition to this, the ICJ also accentuated the obligations laid out in the Tripartite ceasefire agreement, which was signed on November 9, 2020. This agreement legally obligates Azerbaijan to enable unimpeded movement along the Lachin Corridor. It's crucial to note that the corridor falls under the direct control of the Russian peacekeeping contingent, making Azerbaijan's compliance a vital component of the broader efforts to alleviate the persistent humanitarian crisis.
Recognizing the gravity of the situation, Armenia further escalated its appeal by bringing the crisis to the attention of the European Court of Human Rights. On December 21, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights took decisive action by assessing the responsibility of the Azerbaijani State. The Court's instruction to Azerbaijan was clear: Utilize your jurisdiction to guarantee secure passage through the 'Lachin Corridor' for individuals in dire need of urgent medical care in Armenia. Moreover, the Court emphasized the need to provide safe passage for those left stranded on the road without shelter or even basic means of survival. This legal intervention marked a significant stride towards addressing the dire circumstances faced by the affected population.
Looking at the intricate web of international law, the crime of genocide is defined not only by the perpetration of specific prohibited acts but also by a specific intention – a special intent – aimed at achieving the intended outcome, an essential tenet of the concept of genocide.
Applying this lens to the ongoing crisis, the leaders of Azerbaijan appear to be deliberately and intentionally blocking the corridor, even in the face of clear knowledge about the potential consequences of their actions, as highlighted by the ICJ's provisional orders.
Article IV of the Genocide Convention unambiguously stipulates that individuals responsible for committing genocide must be held accountable through prosecution, irrespective of their role within a country's constitutional structure. However, since Azerbaijan has not ratified the Rome Statute that establishes the International Criminal Court, and has not accepted the Court's jurisdiction, the most viable avenue to ensure accountability for these actions lies in the potential formulation of a UN Security Council Resolution.
To transform this potential into a reality, it is imperative that nations unite and take proactive, meticulously coordinated steps. Within this context, Armenia emerges as a key player with the potential and responsibility to ignite this process by rallying willing and capable states to take a stand against the unfolding tragedy. Conversely, the Genocide Convention sets forth the obligation for all signatory nations to prevent acts of genocide. This mandate signifies that if the Armenian government faces hurdles in effectively intervening, other nations should step up and assume a leadership role.
Russia, entrusted with peacekeeping responsibilities in Nagorno-Karabakh, and the United States, actively involved in fostering negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan, are among the state parties bound by the Genocide Convention. Similarly, every member of the European Union bears this commitment. Despite the ongoing discord sparked by the Ukrainian conflict, it remains essential that the plight of the Armenians isn't relegated to the unfortunate status of mere collateral victims. The unique position these nations find themselves in should compel them to act decisively and prevent the looming threat of genocide from materializing.
Aliyev's actions paint a stark picture of his belief that employing genocide as a tool to bend his victims to his will is somehow tacitly endorsed by the international community.
The 2007 judgment of the International Court of Justice in the case of Bosnia v. Serbia further solidifies the principle that a state's responsibility to prevent, coupled with its duty to take action, arises the moment the state becomes aware of, or should have been aware of, a substantial risk of genocide unfolding. The Court stressed that this obligation isn't contingent on the commencement of the actual act of genocide; such an interpretation would be nonsensical, as the essence of this obligation is to prevent or at least strive to prevent the occurrence of the act itself.
In the year 2023, the United States, Russia, the member states of the European Union, all those who have signed the Genocide Convention, and every United Nations member find themselves at a pivotal juncture in history – a rare opportunity to put a halt to the unfolding genocide targeting the Armenian community. This unique moment demands decisive action to ensure that the fate of the Armenians isn't sealed by inaction or indifference.Prioritizing Humanity
In a world where international relations are shaped by power dynamics and geopolitical considerations, the unfolding tragedy in Artsakh stands as a stark reminder that the lives and dignity of individuals should never be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. The enduring blockade of the Lachin Corridor has revealed the depths of suffering faced by over 120,000 Armenians, a situation that demands immediate and resolute action.
Azerbaijan's strategic alliances and its role as an energy supplier to Europe have seemingly positioned it as a valuable pawn in the grand geopolitical game. However, it is crucial to recognize that no economic or strategic gain can justify the violation of fundamental human rights and the deliberate imposition of conditions leading to the destruction of a specific ethnic community. The international legal regime, built on principles of justice, compassion, and accountability, cannot be overshadowed by short-term interests.
As we reflect on the intersection of compassion and international law, it becomes clear that the principles underpinning these domains are not mere abstractions. They are meant to guide our collective actions and decisions, shaping a world where humanity takes precedence over politics. The suffering of individuals in Artsakh highlights the urgent need for the international community to come together and ensure that compassion prevails over indifference.
The case of Artsakh challenges us to reaffirm our commitment to upholding the principles of international law, even in the face of complex geopolitical realities. While Azerbaijan's role in the energy sector might hold sway in some circles, it must not eclipse the larger picture – the lives, well-being, and rights of the people affected by the blockade.
As we move forward, let us remember that the ultimate measure of our humanity lies in how we respond to the suffering of others. The voices of over 120,000 Armenians trapped in Artsakh call out for justice, compassion, and solidarity. It is our shared responsibility to ensure that these voices are heard and that their plight becomes a catalyst for meaningful change, demonstrating that the ideals of international law and human compassion can triumph over political calculations and strategic alliances.
How ironic that while energy flows freely from Azerbaijan to the West, including the sanctioned Russian gas and oil, the basic needs and rights of innocent individuals are blocked.
Comments