MEDIATION ABILITIES OF THE ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE (OSCE) IN THE CASE OF THE SETTLEMENT OF THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT
Abstract
In 1988 the Armenian representatives of local authorities of Nagorno-Karabakh decided to secede from Azerbaijan. The first Azerbaijanis were killed, and expelled from Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. As a consequence, the same occurred in some parts of Azerbaijan in relation to Armenians. In 1989 the Parliament of Armenia took a decision “on reunification of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.” These actions led to the conflict the essence of which is a territorial claim.
From the very beginning of the conflict Azerbaijan regarded Nagorno-Karabakh as its inviolable part and proceeded from the OSCE principles of sovereignty, inviolability of frontiers and territorial integrity. Whereas Armenia believed that Nagorno-Karabakh was an Armenian territory, its Armenian population was suppressed, and it must secede from the Azerbaijani sovereignty and ob-tain independence in order at a later stage to unite with Armenia. Armenians justify their claims by the OSCE principle of self-determination of peoples.
In 1991 Azerbaijan regained its independence and in 1992 was admitted to the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE, after 1 January 1995—OSCE) and the United Nations (U.N.), which implies that the U.N. and the OSCE member states recognized the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan within its present frontiers. Azerbaijan being inspired by the high expectations of and “commitments under the Helsinki Final Act... to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity ... of any State, ... to settle disputes by peaceful means” renewed in the Paris 1990 Summit Meeting1 , in 1992 agreed to settle the conflict under the OSCE auspices. The OSCE has been involved in the mediation of the settlement through its following instruments:
Downloads
References
Charter of Paris for a New Europe, Paris, 1990, p. 15.
See: First Additional Meeting of the CSCE Council. Summary of Conclusions, Helsinki, 1992, pp. 14-15.
See: The U.N. Security Council Resolutions: S/RES/822 (1993), 30 April, 1993; S/RES/853 (1993), 29 July, 1993;S/RES/874 (1993), 14 October, 1993; S/RES/884 (1993), 12 November, 1993.
See: CSCE. Budapest Document 1994. Budapest Decisions, Budapest, 1994, pp. 4-5.
See: The Fifth Meeting of Ministerial Council. Chairman’s Summary. Decisions of the Budapest Ministerial Council Meeting, Budapest, 1995, p. 10.
See: Lisbon Document, Lisbon, 1996, p. 11.
See: Istanbul Document 1999, Istanbul, 1999, p. 50.
See: OSCE. Mission Survey. High Level Planning Group, n.d. [http://www.osce.org/publications/survey/survey23htm].
See: OSCE. Mission Survey. The Personal Representative of the Chairman in Office on the Conflict dealt with by the OSCE Minsk Conference, n.d. [http://www.osce.org/publications/survey/survey22htm].
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2004 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
