On September 23, during the first session of the VII convocation of the Milli Majlis of the Republic of Azerbaijan, President Ilham Aliyev addressed several messages to Armenia and the international community. Among them, he highlighted the contrast between the fate of Nazi Germany after World War II and that of another fascist state—Armenia.
“After World War II , no one offered Nazi Germany a peace treaty. Nazi Germany was divided into several parts, and the defeated fascist state was punished. Yet here, the fascist state that surrendered has not only avoided punishment but is even being granted various privileges,” the president stated.
Despite the atrocities committed by Armenian occupiers , which became visible to the world after the 2020 war, Armenia remains calm and confident that it will not be punished or held accountable for its actions. This confidence stems from international support and a well-established lobbying network within global organizations. These factors undoubtedly pose significant obstacles to achieving justice. However, it is important to note that there are precedents within international law that, if applied properly, could be used against Armenia. The country is clearly guilty on multiple counts, and with a skilled and professional approach, it must answer for its actions.
Reparations were first introduced after World War I. The Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919, emphasized Germany’s and its allies’ responsibility for the war and imposed reparations of 269 billion gold marks—equivalent to about 100,000 tons of gold. After World War II, Germany was once again forced to pay, following a decision made at the Yalta Conference in 1945. As a result, approximately 400,000 railcars, equipment from around 3,000 factories, and 96 power plants were sent from Germany to the USSR. Additionally, 340,000 vehicles, 200,000 electric motors, 1.5 million head of livestock, 2.3 million tons of grain, 1 million tons of potatoes and vegetables, 500,000 tons of oil and sugar, 20 million liters of alcohol, and 16 tons of tobacco were also delivered as reparations. The USSR received various other items, including telescopes from Humboldt University’s Astronomical Observatory, Berlin subway cars, cruise liners, and technological equipment. Germany eventually paid reparations to other countries, including Greece, Poland, and Israel for the Holocaust, with some payments stretching over decades.
There are additional examples. After World War II, Japan paid reparations to Southeast Asian countries, such as the Philippines, Indonesia, Burma (Myanmar), and South Korea, for damages caused by occupation and warfare. These payments were part of peace treaties signed in the 1950s and 1960s. Italy paid reparations to Greece, former Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, and Albania following the war, as established in the 1947 Paris Peace Treaties. Finland paid reparations to the Soviet Union, amounting to approximately $300 million, mostly in the form of industrial goods and raw materials. A 1965 agreement saw Japan pay South Korea $800 million in reparations for damages caused during Japan’s occupation of the Korean Peninsula from 1910 to 1945. Additionally, the U.S. agreed to a reconstruction and rehabilitation program after the Vietnam War. Following the Gulf War, Iraq was ordered to pay $50 billion in reparations to Kuwait and other nations impacted by its 1990 invasion. The UN Compensation Commission managed these payments, which continued until 2020. In 2008, Italy agreed to pay Libya $5 billion as compensation for its colonial rule in the 20th century.
As seen, numerous global precedents demonstrate the application of reparations and relevant international legal mechanisms, meaning there is no need to “reinvent the wheel” in Armenia’s case.
The damage inflicted by Armenia on Azerbaijan during decades of occupation and destruction is colossal. While exact figures are yet to be finalized, preliminary estimates during the occupation placed the damage to Azerbaijan’s population and state at over $200 billion. After the liberation of territories and Azerbaijan’s access to the actual situation, these figures are expected to be recalculated, as the real damage is likely far greater than previously estimated.
Legal experts note that international institutions such as the World Bank and the UN have clear methodologies for calculating damages. According to the World Bank’s methodology, damages are assessed across four key areas: damage to property and infrastructure, loss of life and forced displacement, economic losses, and harm to human development. In addition to the destruction caused by Armenia during the occupation, experts believe that the substantial economic potential of these territories requires a separate assessment of GDP losses to be included in compensation claims.
The precedents of the 20th century demonstrate that peace agreements typically require defeated aggressors to compensate for the damages they caused. According to legal experts, the Republic of Armenia, as an aggressor state, could face the following coercive measures (sanctions): temporary restrictions on sovereignty, full or partial demilitarization of all or part of its territory, reduction of armed forces and weaponry (by type or size), or a ban on certain types of armed forces or weapons. Armenia’s jurisdiction over the prosecution of top war criminals responsible for crimes against peace, humanity, and war crimes could also be restricted. Moreover, if Armenia refuses to renounce its aggressive ambitions, territorial claims, and revanchist sentiments, it may face international legal sanctions, such as the cession of parts of its territory or post-war occupation.
According to the principles and norms of international law, a state that has caused damage to another subject of international law is liable for reparations, which may take the form of restoration, restitution, reparation, and substitution.
Temporary ad hoc tribunals could be established to resolve specific conflicts and hold accused parties accountable. These tribunals can be initiated by the UN Security Council or the UN Secretary-General based on decisions of the UN General Assembly. Precedents exist for such tribunals in cases like Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Lebanon, and Sierra Leone. Additionally, the UN Compensation Commission, created in 1991 in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 687 to ensure compensation for Iraq’s illegal occupation of Kuwait, has so far provided $350 billion in compensation for 2.7 million claims.
It is crucial to note that Armenia benefits from considerable support within international organizations and world capitals, where its interests are lobbied by forces shaping global policy. However, this does not mean that Azerbaijan should remain passive. The country must utilize all available legal mechanisms to hold the aggressor accountable. At present, the West is pushing for the creation of a tribunal for Russia. It would be unjust if Armenia, having committed even more heinous crimes against humanity, were not held accountable.
(If you possess specialized knowledge and wish to contribute, please reach out to us at opinions@news.az).