The ex-speaker of the National Assembly of RA, Doctor of Political Science Tigran Torosyan answered NEWS.am’s questions:

Mr. Torosyan, what is your opinion on the U.N. International Court’s opinion on Kosovo, which says that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo does not run counter to international law?

Of course, the opinion of the International Court of Justice is known to be an advisory one. However, this fact can by no means diminish its importance. Moreover, this is a unique opinion in that it has to do with a European conflict, as the ICJ passed similar opinions on other regions before. In this respect, this opinion is important for  Nagorno-Karabakh conflict resolution process. In brief, to the ICJ’s credit, it can be said that it remained committed to international law norms.

There is an opinion that the World Court passed the judgment for political rather than legal reasons?

Any issue, especially the settlement of conflicts, has a number of aspects –political, legal, historical, psychological, and so on. And the side efficiently working at all of them can hope for success. Unfortunately, the importance of the legal aspect has always been underestimated in Armenia. However, it is the strongest support for the Armenian side in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict resolution process. Nagorno-Karabakh’s right to self-determination and exercise of this right cannot be called into question. It is not mere words. Unlike those making empty statements, I, by means of articles and a monograph, which was published in English a few days ago, managed to prove this by analyzing the conflict in the context of international legal norms. Moreover, I demonstrated a number of advantages Nagorno-Karabakh has over Kosovo.

Can the international community be expected to show a similar approach to similar conflicts? What are the possible consequences, particularly for the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process?

Precedent is an important factor. However, it does not play a rule-proclaiming role within international law. Even in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh’s self-determination, which was a perfect step in the context of international law, the Armenian side needs to carry out tremendous work and radically revise its strategy to hope for success. It is not only because the ICJ – like any other court – passes judgments not only on the basis of international legal norms, but also on the facts and arguments presented by the sides. Even the most reasonable and just demand may be rejected if it is not thoroughly formulated. It is not the duty of the court, but that of the interested sides, especially in the context of Azerbaijan’s efforts to misrepresent the essence of the problem, as well as adverse interests of a number of sides. And the most important thing: if the Republic of Armenia seriously expects the issue to be settled on the basis of the right to self-determination, it should first of all respect Nagorno-Karabakh’s right to self-determination. It is not Armenia’s representative, but that of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic that must represent Nagorno-Karabakh’s interests in the negotiation process. Otherwise, we cannot expect success. On the contrary, we will actually be backing up Azerbaijan’s claim that it is a conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, not between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh. Moreover, by continuing to represent the NKR’s interests in the negotiation process, the Armenian authorities are supporting the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs’ absurd viewpoint that Nagorno-Karabakh will join the negotiations after the basic principles have been specified. Unfortunately, this is not the only blunder. In particular, without any grounds, the Armenian side disregarded the results of the referendum on the NKR’s independence in 1991, whereas Kosovo did not hold a new referendum.

At least now the Armenian authorities must realize the need to reject a childish approach and stereotype and completely faulty ideas of the opportunities for settling conflicts, particularly the ones of applying international legal norms for this purpose – the ideas formed in early 1990s.