After US President Donald Trump recognized the Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a speech at a hearing in the US Senate.
In his speech, Mike Pompeo, explaining the logic of Trump’s statement, touched upon Artsakh with a proposal to grant Artsakh the legal right to establish its sovereignty, including the territories lost by Azerbaijan in the war that Azerbaijan imposed on Artsakh and Armenia in 1992-1994.
Answering the question of Democratic Senator Durbin about whether the decision of the US President to recognize the sovereign territory of Israel is identical to the “annexation of the Crimea”, Secretary of State Pompeo said that the two questions (Artsakh and Golan Heights) cannot be compared with Crimea since Israel occupied the Golan Heights to ensure vital security and to prevent further aggression from Syria towards Israel, while Russia “annexed” Crimea with a security threat to another sovereign state.
Let us leave Crimea alone as in the existing realities, it is clear that for us, Armenians, it is a sensitive issue, especially given the weak diplomacy of the current government and the Kremlin’s constant pressure on Armenia across all channels, in all spheres, and along the border.
But one must understand the simple truth that a new reality has been established in international law, which is the source of modern, regular international law.
In regard to the Golan Heights, if a defending state succeeds in capturing the internationally recognized territory of an aggressor state as a result of clear aggression against it, the protected state gets the legal right to international recognition of its sovereignty over the seized territory.
Almost a month passed after the signing of the decree recognizing the Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and about ten days after Mike Pompeo’s statement to the US Senate regarding the granting of a legal right to Artsakh to establish its sovereignty.
Will the current government of Armenia be able to make use of the changes favorable for Armenians? Especially considering the fact that these territories are of vital importance for the protection against repeated aggression against the 150,000 civilians of Artsakh, such as in April 2016, not to mention the permanent sabotage preceding the April War.
Or will we remain at the level of conversations – the so-called “negotiations” – about some Lavrov plans and Kazan and Madrid principles which imply the return of vital territories and can guarantee only one thing – the complete destruction of Armenia and the Armenian ethnos?