Should Azerbaijan Support Armenia in the Illegal Occupation of Karabakh: Debunking Misconceptions

The debate surrounding the conflict in Karabakh has been long and complex. While some argue that Azerbaijan should support Armenia in this illegal occupation, others vehemently disagree, citing the illegality and the occupation of numerous regions beyond Karabakh. This article aims to clarify misconceptions and provide a balanced perspective.

The Legality of Occupation

Regardless of one’s stance, there is no denying the fact that the occupation by Armenia of Nagorno-Karabakh is illegal. According to international law, the creation of a "republic" inside someone else's territory is not acceptable. The international community has repeatedly called for the respect of territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Moreover, the illegal occupation stretches beyond Karabakh. Armenia has also invaded seven other regions and villages, including Qazakh. This aggressive stance from Armenia is a clear indication of its occupational intentions, rather than a call for self-determination for the people of Karabakh.

The Validity of Self-Determination Claims

It is often stated that the people of Artsakh (Karabakh) wanted to express their Armenian identity and that it is only fair for Azerbaijan to accept this.

From a legal standpoint, self-determination is a complex issue in international law. The principle of self-determination generally refers to the right of peoples to determine their own political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. However, the application of this principle requires a specific historical and legal context.

The Historical Context and International Reactions

Historically, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict involves a complex interplay of ethnic, cultural, and political factors. The annexation of the territories by Armenia is a geopolitical event with far-reaching consequences. Azerbaijan and its allies have consistently condemned Armenia's actions, appealing to the international community for support.

It is crucial to understand that the response from the international community has mainly not been immediate and direct. Instead, it has called for a peaceful resolution and the withdrawal of occupying forces. The status quo has remained largely unchanged, with the occupation continuing and negotiations ongoing.

The Argument for Official War

Some argue that if Armenia does not receive a proper response from the international community, they might resort to resorting to military means. The threat of an official war is real, especially given the historical tensions and military capabilities of both sides.

Azeri support for Armenia's occupation, in this context, would be seen as reinforcing an illegal and destabilizing situation. This could draw Azerbaijan further into a conflict that is neither in its nor the wider regional interest.

Conclusion

The debate on whether Azerbaijan should support Armenia in the illegal occupation of Karabakh is multifaceted and involves complex legal, political, and cultural issues. While the people of Artsakh may have a desire to express their identity, this does not justify illegality and occupation.

International law and the international community’s stance are clear on the need to respect territorial integrity. Supporting such actions would not only contravene international norms but also entangle Azerbaijan in a conflict that is neither justifiable nor in its long-term interest.

The way forward should involve continued diplomatic efforts, guided by international law, to find a peaceful and just resolution to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.