Payment of war reparations is based on the norms of the law of war in international law, namely the prohibition of the use of force regulated by Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter, and the violation of the requirements of international humanitarian law.
Oku.Az Armenia has violated the prohibition of the use of force and many requirements of international humanitarian law by occupying Azerbaijani territories during the First Karabakh War and at the same time continuing its crimes in the Second Karabakh War. Although Azerbaijan liberated its territories from occupation in the last war, Armenia was not held criminally responsible at the international level and the damage caused to Azerbaijan was not compensated for 30 years. Azerbaijan has the right to demand compensation from Armenia for the damage suffered during and after both wars.
The issue of compensation is based on the United Nations Charter, separate international conventions and decisions of international courts.
When we look at world history, we can see that the issue of war reparations was discussed at several conferences after World War II and was regulated in peace treaties.
For example, before the end of the war, Ivan Maisky, the representative of the USSR at the Yalta Conference held on February 4-11, 1945, stated that the reason for the failure of the system of war reparations applied after the First World War was not the large amount allocated. The main reason for this was the demand for war reparations in cash and dollars. It should be recalled that Germany’s decision to pay reparations was recorded in the Protocol of the Yalta Conference of February 11, 1945.
The issue of war reparations is also reflected in UN Security Council resolutions. Thus, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (1990-91), with resolutions No. 674, 686, 687 and 692 adopted by the UN Security Council, it was decided that Baghdad is responsible for the damage caused by the occupation and has the obligation to compensate.
However, there are times when the permanent members of the UN Security Council differ on the issue of compensation, which in turn creates difficulties. According to the “Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts” prepared by the UN International Law Commission in 2001, regardless of the theoretical and practical point of view, the solution of problems arising from war cannot be assessed in any other way than the solution of other problems between states. In this context, according to article 31 of the draft, the issue of war reparations is discussed within the framework of the responsibility of the responsible State. Paragraph 2 of this article states that this includes all types of material and moral damage.
Paragraph 1 of Article 36, entitled “Compensation”, provides that the responsible State must pay compensation when it is impossible to repair the damage caused by its internationally wrongful act. Clause 2 of Article 36 stipulates that compensation includes all types of damage that can be assessed from a financial point of view, together with identifiable loss of profits.
Article 1 of the draft law under consideration emphasizes that failure by a State to comply with its international obligation and the implementation of an act contrary to international law will lead to the liability of that State. This is also an established principle of international law.
The law of war combines the use of force (jus ad bellum) and humanitarian norms (jus in bello). The use of force, which is considered aggression and expansionism in international law, is prohibited under Article 2, paragraph 4, of the UN Charter. At the same time, it is reflected here that violation of the above-mentioned norm, as with other legal violations, gives rise to liability for compensation to the State.
In international law, harm is defined as a reflection that occurs when the rights of individuals are violated. In other words, for harm to occur as a result of an act contrary to international law, it is necessary that the rights or interests of the injured State protected by international law are harmed and, as a result, damage and loss must occur.
Damage and consequential damage are divided into direct and indirect. Direct damage methods include killing or injuring people, destroying buildings, etc. It includes the use of certain weapons for damage. In addition, excessive use of force and violation of the principle of proportionality also give rise to State liability.
In Article 91 of Additional Protocol I of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Article 3 of the Hague Agreement No. IV establishes that the State shall assume responsibility in all cases during war or armed conflict.
Let us now analyze the issues we are talking about in the context of the Karabakh wars. During the first Karabakh war, 890 residential areas of Azerbaijan were captured, more than 20 thousand people lost their lives, 50 thousand people were injured, five thousand people went missing and were captured, and more than a million people were forcibly displaced and made refugees. During the war, it was determined that Armenia caused damages worth 60 billion dollars to Azerbaijan. However, at present this amount is many times higher than the stated figure. Because these damages have been increasing every year for almost 30 years.
Article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Protocol, which deals with the protection of civilians during war, prohibits the transfer of its population to territories occupied by the occupying State. Furthermore, according to Article 85, paragraph 4, option a of Additional Protocol No. I to the Geneva Conventions, the deportation of occupied persons beyond the borders of the country is prohibited.
Armenia also caused serious damage to Azerbaijan’s cultural monuments. More than 100 archaeological monuments, museums, art galleries, 927 libraries with books and manuscripts, cultural houses and theatres were looted and destroyed. During the war crimes committed by Armenia, the 1954 Hague Convention “On the Protection of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict”, Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions and the 1972 Convention “On the Protection of Cultural Property and Natural Heritage” were seriously violated.
During the Second Karabakh War, Armenia continued its illegal actions. Thus, a large number of people were killed and injured as a result of the Armenian army’s rocket attacks on cities far from the front.
With these crimes, Armenia violated the Geneva Conventions of 1949, especially Geneva Convention No. IV, which provides for the protection of civilians, and Articles 48 and 51 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I. As we mentioned above, the State is directly responsible for all these steps. Articles 4 (acts committed by State organs are considered acts of the State) and 8 (groups that are not State organs, but commit unlawful acts on the order and instruction of the State) of the draft articles on the responsibility of States of the United Nations International Law Commission. In the case of internationally wrongful acts, the State that gave the order is also responsible for the crime) can be held legally responsible under Articles
Azerbaijan has the right to demand compensation for the damage it has suffered over 30 years. Armenia carried out the above-mentioned criminal acts both through its institutions and through separatists, armed groups and terrorists in Karabakh. Therefore, within the framework of the above-mentioned points, Azerbaijan has the right to provide indirect and cash war compensation for the damage caused in both wars.
Sohrab Ismail
