Nagorno Karabakh Conflict - Law and War - Essay Example

?Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict Geneva Conventions 1949 The Geneva conventions and their Additional Protocols are the basis of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) which is also known as the Law of armed conflict. The conventions set up rules to control the brutalities that take place during war. Their main purpose is to take care of those people who are not involved in armed conflicts like the civilians and health workers, and also those people who are unable take part in wars like the wounded, sick and prisoners of war. The conventions strive to put an end to all kinds of violations and anyone responsible for violations will be punished, tried and extradited irrespective of their nationality. The First Geneva Convention 1949 is composed of 64 articles. They provide regulations for protection of those soldiers who get wounded or fall sick while fighting on land. The articles also provide protection for those giving medical and religious aid. The Second Geneva Convention 1949 is composed of 63 articles and mainly provides protection for those sick, wounded and shipwrecked soldiers who are involved in fighting war at sea. The Third Geneva Convention 1949 concentrates on war prisoners and has 143 articles. The category of the prisoners and their places of captivity are more precisely mentioned in the articles. Their financial assets and legal proceedings against them are also considered. The articles also state that the prisoners should be given civilised treatment and they should be given proper medical aid. The Fourth Geneva Convention 1949 deals with civilians although they are not involved in wartime activities. It has 159 articles and they were adopted after the World War II when it was seen that absence of such convention had disastrous effects on the civilians. It deals with protection of civilians against the consequences of wars. It distinguishes between foreigners on territories belonging to parties involved in war and civilians in territories occupied during war. It also has a special clause for civilian interns. There is a common Article 3 which specifically deals with non-international armed conflicts that take place within the boundary of states. Such conflicts cover “traditional civil wars and internal armed conflicts”. This article states that all hostages should be treated in humane manner and prohibits murder and torture of the hostages. The “sick, wounded and shipwrecked” should be given proper medical aid. The Articles provides rights to the ICRC to help the parties in conflict (“The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols”). The major portion of IHL is stated in the Geneva Conventions. There are some other agreements:- 1) protection of cultural property, 2) prohibition of use of weapons in armed conflicts that can cause harm to civilians, unnecessary suffering or long lasting damage to environment, 3) prohibition of children from getting involved in armed conflicts. This law also introduced several identifiable symbols and one common example is the Red Cross. There have been innumerous violations of IHL and one major example is the Nagorno- Karabakh Conflict (“What is International Humanitarian Law?” 2) International Criminal Law is formed to prohibit atrocities on people and such perpetrators will face legal proceedings. This law can be distinguished according to the acts of atrocities. The offensive conducts may be international or transnational. International crimes include thread against world security, genocide and war crimes. Transnational crimes include drug trafficking and terrorism among other crimes (Partin). Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict Since early 1988, the area of Nagorno-Karabakh has been in dispute and been the cause of major conflicts between the South Caucasian nations of Azerbajian and Armenia. Throughout the conflict there have been thousands of deaths and even more refugees. A portion of over 14 percent of the area has been occupied by the Armenian forces after evicting all the Azeri population. The conflict is considered as internal or non-international conflict. Any attempt by international organisation to bring peace in the region has been desultory and unmotivated. The conflict is due to the demand of independence by the Armenian population in the Nargorno-Karabakh territory. Other than the Republic of Azerbajian and the Republic of Armenia, there has been a third party involvement which is the “Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh”. The conflict among these three parties has reached a state where solution has become almost impossible. The conflict has intentionally or otherwise has been the core factor for the “new geopolitics of Eurasia”. In spite of the severity and significance of the conflict, it has not been properly covered by the media and the academics (Cornell 1). IHL articles applicable and their violation There is a common Article 2 of Geneva Convention that says, “The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance” (Makili, 43). The Nagorno-Karabakh territory which belongs within Azerbaijan is occupied by Armenia. This means that any action by the Republic of Armenia can be ruled by the IHL. Even though people of Nagorno-Karabakh claim independence, but it has not been granted by the international community. Almost 180,000 people lived in this territory before the war. This conflict is a non-international armed conflict which means “a civil war characterized by intervention of the armed forces of other states on behalf of rebels” (Makili, 43). Armenia can be considered as a party of the conflict because it sends troops in Azerbaijan to fight against armed forces. The conflict that takes place between Azerbaijan and the Armenian people residing in Nagorno-Karabakh is an “internal armed conflict” and can be ruled by common Article 3. The Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan are also parties to the conflict and can be governed by common Article 2 which says “The convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them”. Any conflicting actions between two states that involve members of armed force will be accepted as armed conflict by common Article 2. It is not concerned with the duration of the conflict or how many people have been killed as a result of it. The law essential deals with a humanitarian angle rather than the number of casualties (Makili, 43-44). The treatment of combatants who are captured by the enemy camp falls under the international armed conflict but not in the internal or non-international armed conflict. The captured combatants are regarded as prisoners of war and how they should be treated is mentioned in the Geneva Convention. Prisoners of war include “the members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict as well as members of militia or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces, who have fallen into the power of the enemy”. That is why the members of the armed forces of Armenia who have been imprisoned by the Government of Azerbaijan fall under the genre of prisoners of war. Similarly, Azerbaijani armed forces captured by Armenian armed forces are also prisoners of war. Inhuman torture, mutilation or intentionally causing grave injury to the prisoners of war is severe violation of IHL. If a prisoner is denied his rights of a fair trial, then that is also violation of IHL. However, a prisoner of war may not be required to face any trial because he has not broken any rules of war. (Human Rights Watch, 154-156). In the Nagarno Karabakh conflict it has been noticed by various human rights organisations that there has been much lower number of war prisoners compared to the severity of the combat. After conducting survey, it was revealed that many prisoners were brutally tortured and mutilated. Some were slashed with bayonets and knives while others were beaten till they became unconscious. There were reports of hot water being poured on them. Many prisoners became mentally ill and many even committed suicide after failed attempts of escape. This sort of inhumane treatment of prisoners of war is extreme violation of IHL (Makili, 46). In any territories which are involved in armed conflict, people who are not directly involved with wartime activities and are not members of any armed force are known to be civilians. According to Geneva convention “Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms….shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.” Murder, cruelty, mutilation and taking hostages of civilians are strictly prohibited by IHL. Persons who are engaged in civilian occupations, but are also engaged in wartime activities like making or carrying ammunitions will not enjoy the protection given to civilians. These same people cannot be harmed once they cease participating in hostilities. Objects like residential houses, academic institutions and churches are considered as civilian objects unless they directly get involved in assisting the armed forces of the enemy. It has been observed that during Nagarno-Karabakh conflict, many such rules were breached. The members of armed forces of Karabakh and Armenia committed severe offences like “forced displacement of the civilian population, indiscriminate fire, and the taking of hostages”. These sort of activities that severely breached IHL were continued throughout the Nagarno-Karabakh conflict (Makili, 47-48). The Search for Solutions Armenia and Azerbaijan were originally parts of the Soviet Union and so the international community had no legal rights to mediate between the conflicting parties. The two Republics fell under the control of Soviet Government although at that time the conflicts did not take such severe form. The conflict took the shape of large scale as soon as the Soviet Union was fragmented and the two Republics gained independence. Other international bodies now had the right to interfere although Russia still held the major controlling power. Since early of 1992, many countries began to show interest in the conflict and this was followed by the infamous Khojaly genocide. France and Iran were two countries who offered their services. Initially, Turkey remained neutral, but President Ozal offered a negotiable solution. He was then irked by the Armenian actions in Karabakh and threatened to spread fear among the Armenians. From then on the Armenians refused any help from Turkey regarding peace building operations. The institution of Conference on Security and Cooperation (CSCE) in Europe made substantial efforts for a long lasting solution, but most of the efforts were proved to be failures. There was political interest in CSCE’s participation because shortly after its involvement, Iraq was skillfully expelled from being part of peace generating negotiations. Whether this expulsion has been coincidence or deliberate has never been clear. In the month of March in 1992, the CSCE prepared a “final peace conference” in Minsk to propose cease-fires. Rafael who was an Italian diplomat, was given the responsibility to organize matters for peace conference which was to be held in June of 1992. Both the Armenians and the Azerbaijanis did not show any interest as they believed that they can plan a solution among themselves. However, the representatives of both the Republics agreed when they were requested by Rafael to attend Rome for “emergency talks”. The whole process of mediation can be divided into four phases. The first phase was the phase of CSCE dominance by sidelining the attempts of other countries and this was mainly the year of 1992. In the second phase which was the second half of 1992, Russian interest was strengthened. In this phase Moscow supported one party or another according to its own benefit. The influence of CSCE was reduced in this phase. The third phase which lasted from late 1993 to late 1996 saw cooperation between OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) and Russia. This phase made little progress, but cease-fire was made successful in this phase. The fourth phase started in January of 1997 and lasted till the end of the year. In this phase Russia, United States and France became “co-chairs of the Minsk group” (Cornell, 118-120). War Crimes in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict It has been observed that inhuman criminal activities take place when dealing with the prisoners of war in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In February of 1994, the Armenian government declared that some prisoners of Azbejikan nationality were shot as they attempted to escape. ICRC made arrangements to transfer the bodies of 10 such prisoners to Azbejikan where their bodies were subjected to forensic examination. It was then revealed that the Armenian government lied about the nature of the killings. The prisoners were tortured and mutilated before killing. Some of them were shot in the head while others were shot from the front. Ears were cut off from three of them while internal organs of one prisoner were used as transplants. Sometimes, to prove legality of such heinous crimes, the Armenian government held mock trials where the defendants were not even given qualified lawyers although they had the right. In such trials defendants are either sentenced to death or put into long term imprisonment. There are innumerous other examples of such brutal treatment of the helpless victims of war by the Armenian government. In August of 1993, Farkhad Yousifov who was a resident in a village of Azerbaijan was captured by the Armenians and was imprisoned. He was not given any medical aid although he was a patient of diabetes. Later on, with the effort of ICRC, he was released and returned to Azerbaijan. Another such example was the case of Hajiyev who was 60 years old. He was “forced to lick the filthy floor, stand at attention for hours on end and his head was beaten against the wall, so that he went out of his mind” (“Expratiation and individual testimonies – part 2”) Khojaly genocide The government of Armenia wanted to capture the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh although this was against international rules and regulations. The Armenian government displayed enormous crime and brutality for the sake of achieving their goal. The Khojaly genocide which is considered as one of the most tragic event of the 20th century was a result of such illegal and violent policy. This event is a heinous and shameful crime not only for Azerbaijan but also for the entire humanity. During the attack by the Armenian armed force, the town of Khojaly was inhabited by 3000 people. Most of them had to flee to save their own lives. Around 613 people got killed while a thousand people became invalid because of the attack. Many children became orphans while some families were completely wiped out. Many people were killed while attempting to flee. Some were even killed by blunt instruments. There is also report of one man being scalped alive. Azerbaijan’s national leader Heydar Aliyev addressed this genocide as “merciless and cruel and the most dreadful mass terror act in the history of humankind”. By this act of genocide, the Armenian government attempted to remove one obstacle in the form of the residents in the town which was situated in the mountainous part of Nagarno-Karabakh territory. The town also represented the “history and tradition” of Ajerbaijan. There were many cultural monuments in Khojaly which were also destroyed (“Azerbaijan: Khojaly genocide - the tragedy of the 20th century”). Conclusion There is lack of coordination between the various initiatives that work towards resolving the conflicts and this makes any effects from international mediation ineffective. It is necessary for the European Union to enforce policies to put an end to armed conflicts. Instead of waiting for conflicts to occur on large scale, preventive policies should be enforced in larger extent. Any “early warning signal” should be dealt with effectively. The international community has till now taken a half-hearted approach towards Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Whenever “meditative initiatives” are taken, it is important to utilize any early opportunity for creating peace among the conflicting members. There should be institutions set up for the purpose of diagnosing situations that result in conflicts. It is then necessary to utilize those situations when the parties involved are prepared to resolve the conflict. The institutions should then select the right kind of remedy for each phase of conflict. It is also important to maintain links between the different stages of peace building processes so that the conflicts do not remain unresolved. There should be “systematic research” before implementing any peace building process (Svensson). References “Azerbaijan: Khojaly genocide – the tragedy of the 20th century”. reliefweb, 26th February, 2010, 4th February, 2012 from: http://reliefweb.int/node/346620 Cornell, Savante E., “The Nagarno-Karabakh Conflict”. Silkroadstudies, 1999, 4th February, 2011 from: http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/inside/publications/ 1999_NK_Book.pdf “Expatriation and individual testimonies – part 2”. Karabakh, 1st October, 2011, 4th February, 2012 from: http://www.karabakh.org/international-crimes/karabakh-war-crimes/expatriation-and-individual-testimonies-part-2/ Human Rights Watch, Azerbaijan: Seven years of conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, USA: Human Rights Watch, 1994 Makili, Kamal, “Failure of International Law in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict”, Lub.lu, 2007, 4th February, 2012 from: http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile& recordOId=1555213&fileOId=1563584 Partin, Gail, “International Criminal Law”. ASIL, 1st December, 2011, 4th February, 2012 from: http://www.asil.org/erg/?page=icl Svensson, Isak, “The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Lessons from the Mediation Efforts”. Initiativeforpeacebuilding, March, 2009, 4th February, 2012 from: http://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/Nagorno_Karabakh_conflict_mediation_efforts.pdf “The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols”, Icrc, 29th October, 2010, 4th February, 2012 from: http://www.icrc.org/eng/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions/overview-geneva-conventions.htm “What is International Humanitarian Law?” ICRC, July, 2004, 4th February, 2012 from: http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/what_is_ihl.pdf Read More