WITHOUT THE RIGHT OF PREDOMINANCE

Baku recently hosted the international conference "Minorities in Europe: The South Tyrol model and its relevance for the Caucasus". The conference was organized by the Centre for Strategic Studies under the president of Azerbaijan jointly with the Italian Institute of International Relations.

Noting that the purpose of their participation in the conference is to exchange experience, a law professor at the University of Trento (Italy), Roberto Toniatti, told about the origin of the conflict in South Tyrol and its peaceful resolution. He stressed the importance of resolving the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagornyy Karabakh conflict for the region and expressed his confidence in its swift settlement.

Professor Toniatti also kindly agreed to answer some questions from our journal.

- As you know, the South Caucasus is a multi-ethnic region - representatives of different nationalities live side by side in Azerbaijan and Georgia. The only mono-ethnic country in the region is Armenia, from where Azerbaijanis, Kurds and representatives of other nations have been expelled. How do you assess the situation with the rights of national minorities in the countries of our region?

- Unfortunately, we do not have a clear idea about the situation with the protection of the rights of national minorities in all three countries.

- In this case, what can you say about the principle of self-determination? As you know, having occupied one-fifth of Azerbaijani territory, including Nagornyy Karabakh, Armenia is trying to create a second Armenian state there. At the same time, it appeals to the right of self-determination of the Armenians living in Nagornyy Karabakh. To what extent does it meet the requirements of international law?

- If you look at history, you will see that the principle of national self-determination is not the fundamental principle of international law. It is one of the principles that, in fact, should not compete with another principle of international law, which is the principle of territorial integrity. I think that it is necessary to find an acceptable compromise between the high level of the colonization of a region by a self-determined minority and the territorial integrity of a country, in which that region is.

- And the last question. It is known that often, the issue of protecting the rights of national minorities is the subject of political speculation and is used as a lever of pressure on a state. What is your opinion on this?

- Of course, there is no region in which there would be no conflict. In fact, until the end of the Cold War, there were many more conflicts in the world than today, and local conflicts are more violent than conflicts and wars between countries. This is quite a significant issue at present. In my opinion, one reason is that despite the existence of a supranational entity, even in the last hundred years, the nation state system is the only acceptable solution. Perhaps, this is wrong. I say this because at the present time, nation states tend to supranational integration on the example of what is happening in Europe. But, of course, there are certain difficulties in the way of integration. Fundamentally, the system of integration works, and it is even used in Latin America and is expanding into the territory of Africa. For this reason and without making any references to statistics, I think that the nation state system will never be a solution to all problems.