In the political space of Europe the question of the right of peoples to self-determination involving the creation of their own independent state has repeatedly arisen. In the former Yugoslavia this right was exercised. Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina left it. Serbia and Montenegro declared the creation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Although it was the result of military action European society recognized it. We also had a positive reaction in the case of the division of Czechoslovakia into two sovereign states. Serious disputes have arisen in connection with the Kosovo problem.
In 2008, the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo adopted a declaration of independence from Serbia. This act was ambiguously perceived by the UN members. In this regard, on October 8, 2008, the General Assembly, in accordance with Article 96 of the UN Charter, requested the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on this issue. The Court concluded that customary international law does not prohibit declarations of independence. Therefore, the declaration of independence of Kosovo as a whole does not violate any international acts or resolutions of the UN Security Council. As for the principle of territorial integrity, it according to the Court applies only to interstate relations. Most experts believe that the Court's opinion is universal, as is the application of international law to resolve unresolved conflicts. Therefore many lawyers have doubts that the claims about the uniqueness of the Kosovo conflict are politically biased.
But this does not exclude the difference between the Kosovo case and other conflicts of this kind. According to Professor Otto Luchterhandt, Universität Hamburg, in the case of the Armenian Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh the right of self-determination prevails over the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan because the Armenians, who founded the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh at the time of the Soviet Union, first of all fulfill the Criteria of a “people” in the sense of the right to self-determination and they can, secondly, the highest form and level of the right to self-determination, that is, leaving the Republic of Azerbaijan and creating their own (national) state https://dearjv.de/wpcontent/uploads/2020/12/Otto_Luchterhandt_EN.pdf.
It is also fair to point out that the Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh arose from the Azerbaijan Soviet Republic in full compliance with Soviet laws, as was analyzed in the article by Mihran Shahzadeyan on the website of the Armenian Association of Political Scientists https://www.aapsc.info/en/post/legitimacy-of-the-formation-of-the-nagorno-karabakh-republic-artsakh.
Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Olaf Scholz, at a press conference with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, held on March 2 this year, noted the importance for Armenia and Azerbaijan of the movement step by step towards a long-term solution to the conflict.
Mr. Chancellor expressed concern about the instability on the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Nagorno-Karabakh. It is noteworthy that he connected the achievement of a peaceful solution with the observance of two equal principles, in his opinion.
Such, from the Chancellor's point of view, are the principle of the territorial integrity of Armenia and Azerbaijan, as well as the self-determination of the citizens of Nagorno-Karabakh. At the same time, he considered it necessary to emphasize that these principles are equal among themselves.
We know that within the framework of the mediation mission of the President of the European Council Charles Michel, the issue was formulated only within the framework of ensuring the rights and security of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh without any mention of the right of self-determination.
Therefore, the words of the Chancellor could be assessed as something new in European diplomacy regarding the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh. And even a certain message, a hint to Charles Michel before his upcoming meeting between the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
It seems to me that the Armenian side should not get too excited. Why do I think so? First of all, what kind of self-determination is Mr. Chancellor talking about? About self-determination within Azerbaijan or as an independent state? Secondly, I noticed that in many textual presentations of the Chancellor's speech on the federal government websites his words about the right to self-determination are excluded.
In any case Mr. Chancellor's words about the right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh are a strong counterbalance to the position of President Aliyev, who completely excludes this right.
Comments