پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,240 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,871 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,429,798 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,198,602 |
تعامل حق تعیین سرنوشت و اصل یکپارچگی سرزمینی درمنطقۀ خومختار اوستیای جنوبی و جمهوری خودمختار آبخازیا | ||
| مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 16، شماره 1، شهریور 1402، صفحه 197-221 اصل مقاله (526.96 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jcep.2023.345056.450081 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| روح الله رهامی* 1؛ محمد علی بهمنی قاجار2 | ||
| 1استادیار،گروه روابط بین الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2دانش‌آموخته دکتری حقوق بین الملل عمومی، دانشکده حقوق و وعلوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| همواره بر تعامل اصل حق تعیین سرنوشت و مصونیت یکپارچگی سرزمینی کشورها به‌عنوان دو قاعدۀ بنیادینِ حقوق بین‌الملل تأکید شده است. ازاین‌رو حق تعیین سرنوشت در چارچوب بازداشتن اشغالگری و استعمار‌زدایی تعریف شده است تا با یکپارچگی سرزمینی دولت‌ها سازگار باشد. در دوران پسااستعماری نیز جنبۀ داخلی حق تعیین سرنوشت به معنای مشارکت برابر سیاسی و حفظ حقوق و آزادی‌های فرهنگی قرار گرفته و بارها بر مشروعیت‌نداشتن جدایی‌خواهی تأکید شده است. با وجود این، نظریۀ جدایی چاره‌ساز مستندِ گروه‌های جدایی‌خواه و برخی کشورها شده است تا مدعی حقِ جدایی‌خواهی در شرایط استثنایی باشند. در سال 2008 جدایی‌خواهان استان اوستیای جنوبی و جمهوری خودمختار آبخازیا با استناد به نظریۀ جدایی چاره‌ساز با صدور بیانیه‌ای از گرجستان اعلام استقلال کردند و دولت روسیه نیز بی‌درنگ استقلال این مناطق را به‌رسمیت شناخت. این پرسش مطرح است که مشروعیت استقلال اوستیای جنوبی و آبخازیا از گرجستان از دیدگاه حقوق بین‌الملل چگونه قابل ارزیابی است؟ در پاسخ این فرضیه مطرح می‌شود که جدایی اوستیای جنوبی و آبخازیا با برقراری نوعی تعامل و توازن میان دو اصل حق تعیین سرنوشت و مصونیت یکپارچگی سرزمینی دولت‌ها قابل تحلیل است. روش این نوشتار کیفی مبتنی بر تحلیل محتوا با رویکرد توصیفی-تحلیلی است و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای و اینترنتی شامل اسناد، آرا، گزارش، کتاب، مقاله‌های چاپی و اینترنتی انجام شده است. براساس دستاوردهای این نوشتار، توسل به مفهوم جدایی چاره‌ساز در مورد اعلام استقلال آبخازیا و اوستیایی جنوبی به‌دلیل اهمیت اصل یکپارچگی سرزمینی در حقوق بین‌الملل و نبود پیش‌شرط‌هایی چون نسل‌کشی و توسل به این مفهوم به‌عنوان آخرین راه‌حل، مشروعیت قانونی ندارد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| جدایی چاره‌ساز؛ حق تعیین سرنوشت؛ ممنوعیت پیوسته‌سازی؛ یکپارچگی سرزمینی؛ منطقۀ خومختار اوستیای جنوبی؛ جمهوری خودمختار آبخازیا | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Interaction of the Right to Self-Determination and the Principle of Immunity of Territorial Integrity in Autonomous Region of South Ossetia and Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Roohollah Rahami1؛ Mohmmad ali Bahmani Ghajar2 | ||
| 1Assistant Professor.Department of International Relations, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran. Tehran. Iran | ||
| 2PhD in Public International Law. Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran. Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction: The interaction between the principle of the right to self-determination and the immunity of countries' territorial integrity as two fundamental rules in contemporary international law has always been emphasized in the legal order arising from the United Nations Charter. Therefore, the right to self-determination is defined in the framework of the prohibition of territorial occupation and decolonization, so as not to conflict with the territorial integrity of states. In the post-colonial era, the internal aspect of the right to self-determination in the sense of equal political participation and preservation of cultural rights and freedoms has been recognized internationally, on the other hand, the illegitimacy of any separatism has been repeatedly emphasized. Despite this, the theory of secession as a solution has become a document for separatist groups and some countries to claim the existence of secessionist rights in exceptional circumstances. For example, the separatists of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, citing this theory, declared the independence of these regions by issuing a statement in 2008 after holding a referendum, and the Russian government immediately recognized the independence of these regions. Research Question: The main question of this article is whether the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia has legal legitimacy or not? Research Hypothesis: The hypothesis of the research is based on the premise that this separation has no legal legitimacy and the problem of South Ossetia and Abkhazia can be analyzed by establishing a kind of interaction and balance between the two principles of the right to self-determination and the immunity of the territorial integrity of the states. Methodology: The current research method is qualitative based on content analysis with a descriptive-analytical approach and it was carried out by using library and internet sources including international and national documents, opinions, judgments, reports, books and articles. Results and Discussion: According to the findings of this research, due to the importance of the principle of territorial integrity and the lack of preconditions such as the occurrence of genocide and resorting to this concept as a last resort, the legal conditions for resorting to reformed separation have not been met. Having the specific language, culture, customs and myths of South Ossetia and Abkhazia have introduced them as a special people with a distinct identity both in terms of objective and mental characteristics, they can be considered a special demographic group. Although the people in the sense given in the United Nations Charter refers to the inhabitants of a country or a colonial land under a guardianship, but perhaps they can be regarded as the people and therefore entitled to benefit from the right to self-determination, but in this framework, they have the internal aspect of the right to self-determination and not the external one. Of course, the only hypothesis that exists in relation to the external aspect of the right to self-determination outside the colonial framework and under trust is the theory of reformed separation which has seriously been questioned as a rule of international law. But assuming that we make separation as a criterion, this issue cannot be considered as an example of separation as a solution regardless of the fact that reformed separation is associated with genocide more than any other fundamental human rights violation. But if we want to have a broader interpretation of the reformed separation inspired by the decision of the Canadian court in the case of Quebec, in cases where people have been oppressed and deprived of participation in the administration of affairs, it should be applied and certainly separation should be the last resort. Therefore, the Georgian government and the representatives of the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazia should conduct negotiations in good faith and it should respect the right to political participation and guarantee their economic, social, cultural development and internal autonomy. Conclusion: It can be said that Ossetians and Abkhazians enjoy the right to internal self-determination, but all the prerequisites and grounds for their benefit from the external aspect of the right to self-determination have not been provided and therefore, the declaration of independence of these territories cannot be considered in accordance with the principle of the right to self-determination. Their separation from Georgia was done illegally and as a result of Russia resorting to illegitimate force against Georgia. The Russian government prepared the ground for this separation by military action and campaigning in Georgia and expelling Georgians and by violating the rules of international law regarding the prohibition of resorting to force and non-interference in the internal affairs of governments, which is a violation of the rules of international law. Granting Russian passports to the residents of these two regions and Russia's effective control over the security and administrative institutions of these regions has practically meant their annexation to Russia. From the point of view of neutral observers, these regions have become Russian states instead of an independent country and lack the necessary criteria to be a state, so what happened here was an act of occupation and annexation similar to what happened in the Northern Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh lacks legitimacy and is not compatible with the principle of the right to self-determination. It seems that the best way to solve this problem is to recognize the right of internal self-determination of the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazia within the framework of the country of Georgia. Therefore, the two mentioned regions can be autonomous and maintain their identity. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Reformed Separation, Right to Self-Determination, Prohibition of Annexation, Territorial Integrity, Autonomous Region of South Ossetia, Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
African Union (2007), Advisory Opinion on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Available at: https://www.iwgia.org/images/ publications/Advisory_Opinion_ENG.pdf (Accessed on: Arbitration Commission of the European Conference on Yugoslavia (the ‘Badinter Commission’) (1992), Opinion No. 2, International Legal Materials, Vol. 31, No. 6, pp. 1488-1526, Published By: Cambridge University Press, Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20693759, (Accessed on: 08/02/2020) Bagapsh, Sergei and Eduard Kokoity (2009), “The West’s Moral Failure over Georgi”, The Guardian, 6 August 2009, Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/commentisfree/2009/aug/06/georgia-abkhazia-south-ossetia, (Accessed on: 12/10/2021) Bering, Juergen (2015), Prohibition of Annexation Lesson from Crimea, Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3035817, (Accessed on: 02/05/2019) CIS Declaration on Respect of Sovereignty, Territorial Integrity and Inviolability of Boundaries of Member States (1994), 15 April 1994, Available at: https://cis-legislation.com/document.fwx?rgn=3921, (Accessed on: 07/05/2020). Constitution of the Republic of Georgia, (1995), Available at: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL(2004)041-e, (Accessed on: 12/03/2021). Constitution of the Republic of the South Ossetia, (2001), Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20081006092114/http://cominf.org/2004/10/15/1127818105.html, (Accessed on: 18/11/2020). Declaration by the Presidency on Behalf of the European Union on the Referendum on “Adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of South Ossetia”, (2006), Available at: https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_PESC-01-82_en.htm, (Accessed on: 04/09/2021). Eide, Asbjorn and United Nations (1993), Possible ways and Means of Facilitating the Peaceful and Constructive Solution of Problems Involving Minorities (Report). Geneva: United Nations, Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/ record/170889?ln=en, (Accessed on: 22/10/20121). Heerten, Lasse (2017), The Biafran War and Postcolonial Humanitarianism, Cambridge University Press International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2008), Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation) Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/140, (Accessed on: 17/08/2020). Hewitt, George (2001), TIM POTIER: Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. A legal appraisal. xvi, 314 pp. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2001. Euro 102. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 401-455, (doi:10.1017/S0041977X01350243). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2010), Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Accordance with International law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 16/09/2019). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2010), Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma, Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 12/10/2020). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2010), Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Yusuf, Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 09/07/2021). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2010), Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Separate Opinion of Judge Cancado Trindade, Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 17/05/2021). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2009), Written Statement of France, Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Request for An Advisory Opinion Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 14/02/2019). International Court of Justice (ICJ) (2009), Written Statement of the Russian Federation, Accordance with International law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Request for An Advisory Opinion, Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/141, (Accessed on: 07/03/2020). Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada (1998), Reference re Secession of Quebec. Supreme Court Judgments Report: [1998] 2 SCR 217, Available at: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do, (Accessed on: 12/07/2021). Kazemzadeh, Hamed (2008), Ossets: Iranian Cultural Heritage Holders in the Caucasus (based on Field Studies in 2007-2008), National Studies Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 38, pp. 153-182, Available at: https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/ creator/113539, (Accessed on: 17/04/2021). [In Persian] Koolaee, Elaheh and Meysam Hadipoor (2020), “Analysis of Russian Foreign Policy in the South Caucasus based on Gene-Geopolitics”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 645- 664, (doi:10.22059/jcep.2020.204960.449646) Kelsen, Hans (1951), “The Law of the United Nations”, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 60, No. 1, Available at: https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/ 20.500.13051/13765/28_60YaleLJ209_February1951_.pdf, (Accessed on: 22/08/2020). Landru. Nicolas, Two Referendums and Two Presidents in South Ossetia (2006), Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20061128064202/ http://www.caucaz. com/home_eng/breve_contenu.php?id=279, (Accessed on: 16/10/2021). Marxsen, Christian (2015), “Territorial Integrity in International Law – Its Concept and Implications for Crimea”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, Forthcoming, Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2515911, (Accessed on: 19/1/2020). McCorquodale Robert and Hausler Kristin (2010), “Caucuses in the Caucasus: The Application of the Right of Self-Determination” in: C. Waters and JA Green (eds), Conflict in the Caucasus: Implications for International Legal Order, pp. 26-53, Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=2088785, (Accessed on: 24/05/2019). Medvedev’s Statement on South Ossetia and Abkhazia’ (2008), New York Times, 26 August 2008, Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/ world/europe/27medvedev.html, (Accessed on: 03/07/2021). Medvedev, Dmitry (2008), “Why I Had to Recognize Georgia’s Breakaway Region”, Financial Times, 26 August 2008, Available at: https:// ft.com/content/9c7ad792-7395-11dd-8a66-0000779fd18c, (Accessed on: 08/02/2020). Mirzayev, Farhad (2014), Abkhazia, Self-Determination and Secession in International Law, Oxford University Press. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan (2008), Complication of the UN Documents on the Armenia – Azerbaijan Nagorno Karabakh Conflict, Report on the Fundamental Norm of the Territorial Integrity of States and the Right to Self-Determination in the Light of Armenia’s Revisionist Claims Minority Rights Group (MRG), Georgia, Abkhaz, Available at: https://minorityrights.org/minorities/abkhaz, (Accessed on: 12/03/2021). Nodia, Ghia (1997), The Conflict in Abkhazia: National Projects and Political Circumstances, Available at: https://www.vub.be/sites/vub/files/nieuws/ users/bcoppiet/212chapter_2.pdf, (Accessed on: 15/06/2020). Nuβberger, Angelika (2009), “The War between Russia and Georgia—Consequences and Unresolved Questions”, 1 GJIL Göttingen Journal of International Law, Vol. 1, No. 2, Available at: https://journaldatabase.info/ articles/war_between_russia_georgia.html, (Accessed on: 25/09/2020). Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (1996), Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - General comment, No. 21, “Right to self – determination”, Available at: https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/, (Accessed on: 08/11/2019). Pellet, Alain (1992), The Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee a Second Breath for the Self-Determination of Peoples, Available at: https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article-abstract/3/1/178/425287?redirectedFrom= fulltext, (Accessed on: 23/05/2020). Peters, Anne (2014), The Principle of Uti Possidetis Juris, Self-Determination and Secession in International Law, Oxford University Press. Reza, Enayatolah (2000), “A Look at the Foreign Policy of the Sassanid Government in the West Caucasus”, Foreign Relations History Quarterly, No. 4. pp. 6-26, Available at: https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/804016/text, (Accessed on: 15/04/2019), [in Persian] Sammut, Dennis and Nikola Cvetkovski (1996), Confidence-Building Matters, The Georgia—South Ossetia Conflict, ISBN: 1-89954806-8, Available at: https://www.vertic.org/media/Archived_Publications/Matters/Confidence_Building_Matters_No6.pdf, (Accessed on: 18/09/2021). Schwartz, Michael (2011), ‘Political Standoff Escalates in South Ossetia Over Vote’, New York Times 30 November 2011, Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/01/world/europe/political-standoff-escalates-in-south-ossetia-over-disputed-vote.html, (Accessed on: 12/11/2019). Smith, Graham (1998), Nation Building in the Post-Soviet Borderlands: The Politics of National Identities, Cambridge University Press. Shaw, Malcom (1997), “People, Territorialism and Boundaries”. European Journal of international law, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 478-507, Available at: https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/8/3/478/388043, (Accessed on: 18/09/2021). (doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejil.a015594) Shenfield, Stephen David (2008), Origins and Evolutions of the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict, Abkhazworld, 15 October 2008, Available at: https://abkhazworld.com/ aw/conflict/31-origins-and-evolutions-of-the-georgian-abkhaz-conflict, (Accessed on: 16/03/2020). Tancredi, Antonello (2014), Secession and Use of Force, Self-Determination and Secession in International Law, Oxford University Press. Takhshid, Mohammad Reza and Morteza Shoja (2019), “Maintaining the Sphere of Influence: An Explanation of Russia’s Foreign Policy on Syria Crisis”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 309-325, (doi: 10.22059/jcep.2019. 269981.449810). The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia (2008), Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/HUDOC_38263_ 08_Annexes_ENG.pdf, (Accessed on: 17/05/2019). The Security Council, Resolution 1716 (2006), 13 October 2006, the Situation in Georgia, Available at: http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/1716, (Accessed on: 19/09/2021). The Security Council, Resolution 1808 (2008), 15 April 2008, the Situation in Georgia, Available at: http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/1808, (Accessed on: 22/10/2019). Thomas, Ronald (2009) “The Distinct Cases of Kosovo and South Ossetia: Deciding the Question of Independence on the Merits and International Law”, Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 32, No. 6, Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol32/iss6/6/, (Accessed on: 07/06/2020). United Nations. General Assembly (1970), Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, 2625 (XXV), Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/202170?ln=en, (Accessed on: 19/08/2019). UN Refugee Agency (Unchr) (1999), Chronology for Abkhazians in Georgia, Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/469f388ca.html, (Accessed on: 28/05/2021). Waters, Christopher (2014), South Ossetia, Self-Determination and Secession in International Law, Oxford University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 252 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 166 |
||