(An analytical report prepared by the ChatGPT artificial intelligence on the Declaration
“On the state sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) and its state border with the Republic of Turkey”)
General Characteristics of the Document
The Declaration “On the State Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) and its State Border with the Republic of Turkey,” adopted on May 15, 2024 by the National Assembly (Parliament) of Western Armenia and the Government of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia), represents a comprehensive political-legal, historical-diplomatic and civilizational document of strategic significance.
This document constitutes one of the most large-scale attempts in the 21st century to systematize the Armenian Question into a unified political and legal concept based on international law, historical documents, decisions of the international community, principles concerning the rights of indigenous peoples, as well as issues of restitution, reparations and restoration of the violated rights of the Armenian people.
By its structure and content, the Declaration goes far beyond the framework of an ordinary political statement or declarative appeal. It represents:
• a systematized international legal document;
• a political and legal platform;
• a concept for restoring the violated rights of the Armenian people;
• a strategic program for the protection of Armenian statehood;
• a comprehensive document concerning international responsibility for the consequences of the Armenian Genocide;
• a basis for further diplomatic, legal and expert activities.
The Declaration encompasses virtually all key aspects of the Armenian Question:
• the Armenian Genocide;
• international legal responsibility;
• issues of reparations and restitution;
• state continuity and succession;
• questions of borders and territories;
• problems of occupation;
• the right of peoples to self-determination;
• the status of the Republic of Artsakh;
• questions of international legitimacy;
• the rights of Armenians as the indigenous people of the Armenian Highlands;
• issues concerning the preservation of civilizational heritage.
I. Historical and Political Significance of the Declaration
The Declaration represents an attempt to transfer the Armenian Question from an exclusively historical-memorial sphere into the contemporary international legal and political domain.
For more than a century, a significant part of international discussions surrounding the Armenian Question has been limited mainly to the recognition and condemnation of the Armenian Genocide of 1915–1923. However, the issue of restoring the violated rights of the Armenian people, implementing the decisions of the international community, and eliminating the consequences of committed international crimes has remained essentially unresolved.
For the first time in such a systematized form, the present Declaration combines:
• issues of the Armenian Genocide;
• problems of loss of statehood;
• territorial issues;
• problems of forced deportation;
• issues of destruction of civilizational heritage;
• international legal obligations of states;
• the right of the Armenian people to restoration of violated rights.
The most important significance of the document lies in the fact that it treats the Armenian Question not merely as a problem of the past, but as an ongoing international legal and humanitarian crisis.
The Declaration proceeds from the principle that the consequences of international crimes cannot be legitimized by the passage of time, and that the rights of a people subjected to Genocide cannot be regarded as lost as a result of violence, deportations, occupation or changes in the demographic situation.
For this reason, the document places particular emphasis on the principle:
“ex injuria non oritur jus”
(“law does not arise from injustice”).
This principle is one of the cornerstones of international law and possesses fundamental significance for assessing the consequences of the Armenian Genocide, ethnic cleansing, deportations and the forcible alteration of the ethno-demographic structure of the region.
II. International Legal Basis of the Declaration
One of the strongest aspects of the Declaration is its attempt to construct a coherent and comprehensive international legal argumentation.
The document relies upon a broad range of international legal acts and decisions, including:
• the Treaty of Sèvres of August 10, 1920;
• the Arbitral Award of the 28th President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, of November 22, 1920;
• decisions of the Paris Peace Conference;
• decisions and documents of the League of Nations;
• the Charter of the United Nations;
• the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;
• the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties;
• the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
• the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages;
• international principles concerning the right of peoples to self-determination;
• norms of international humanitarian law.
Particularly important is the use of the concept of continuity of statehood.
The Declaration proceeds from the understanding that the rights granted to the Armenian people and the State of Armenia by the international community during 1918–1920 were never annulled under international law and therefore cannot be regarded as extinguished.
From the perspective of the authors of the document:
• occupation;
• coercion;
• aggression;
• imposed treaties;
• loss of territorial control;
• Sovietization;
• geopolitical changes
cannot automatically eliminate internationally recognized rights of a people and a state.
In this context, the Declaration represents an attempt to formulate a legal position concerning the continuity of the rights of the Armenian people and the State of Armenia.
III. Significance of the Declaration for the Armenian People
For the Armenian people, the Declaration possesses not only political but also profound civilizational significance.
For more than a century, the Armenian people have faced:
• the consequences of Genocide;
• mass deportation;
• the loss of the historical Homeland;
• destruction of cultural heritage;
• assimilation;
• political fragmentation;
• security threats;
• a crisis of national identity.
In this context, the Declaration acts as an attempt to:
• restore historical subjectivity;
• formulate a unified legal and political vision;
• consolidate the Armenian people;
• establish a long-term national strategy;
• preserve historical memory;
• prevent the final legitimization of the consequences of Genocide.
Of particular significance is the fact that the document regards the Armenian people as a single subject regardless of:
• place of residence;
• citizenship;
• state affiliation;
• political views.
Thus, the Declaration seeks to establish a pan-Armenian political and legal platform.
The document also has major significance for the Armenian Diaspora.
Following the Armenian Genocide, the Diaspora largely became:
• the bearer of historical memory;
• the guardian of cultural identity;
• an instrument for international recognition of the Armenian Genocide;
• an important factor in preserving the Armenian Question on the international agenda.
The Declaration attempts to institutionalize the role of the Armenian Diaspora as part of a unified Armenian political and legal space.
IV. The Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) as the Continuity State of the State of Armenia
One of the fundamental international legal issues arising from the Declaration “On the State Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) and its State Border with the Republic of Turkey” is the question of the continuity of the State of Armenia.
This concerns not succession, but continuity of the international legal personality of the State of Armenia, which was recognized de facto and de jure by the international community in 1918–1920.
The Treaty of Sèvres of 10 August 1920 and the Arbitral Award of the 28th President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, dated 22 November 1920, are international legal acts adopted with respect to the State of Armenia and have never been legally revoked.
The coercive political and military processes of 1920–1921, including the sovietization of Armenia and imposed treaties, cannot be regarded as a voluntary termination of the international legal personality of the State of Armenia.
Since 2013, the restored state institutions of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) have declared themselves as institutions maintaining the continuity of the State of Armenia.
At the same time, the Third Republic of Armenia has effectively limited itself to the territory of the current Republic of Armenia and has renounced the implementation of a number of rights granted to the Armenian state and the Armenian people by the international community.
Under these circumstances, the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) considers itself the only legitimate state institution continuing to protect and implement the internationally recognized rights of the Armenian people, including:
1. participation in the delimitation and demarcation of state borders,
2. restoration of rights over occupied territories,
3. claims for compensation and reparations,
4. international protection of Armenian cultural, historical and spiritual heritage.
Thus, the issue concerns not the creation of a new state, but the continuation and implementation of the rights of the State of Armenia recognized by the international community.
V. The Armenian Genocide and International Responsibility
One of the central elements of the Declaration is the assertion regarding the continuing character of the consequences of the Armenian Genocide.
The document proceeds from the position that:
• the absence of full international legal settlement;
• the absence of reparations;
• the absence of restitution;
• the absence of restoration of violated rights;
• the continuation of policies of Armenophobia;
• the destruction of Armenian heritage;
• deportations of Armenian populations;
• ethnic cleansing
mean that the consequences of the Genocide effectively continue to exist to the present day.
This constitutes one of the key concepts of the Declaration:
The Genocide is viewed not merely as a historical crime, but as a process whose consequences continue to affect the Armenian people.
Particularly important is the emphasis placed upon:
• destruction of cultural heritage;
• destruction of churches and monuments;
• destruction of khachkars;
• forcible alteration of historical memory;
• attempts to appropriate Armenian civilizational heritage.
The document emphasizes that the international community bears a certain moral and political responsibility for the fact that the decisions adopted after the First World War were never fully implemented.
VI. The Question of Reparations and Restitution
A special place within the Declaration is occupied by the issue of reparations and restitution.
The document relies upon materials from the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, where calculations of the material losses of the Armenian people were conducted.
At the same time, the Declaration emphasizes that these calculations covered only part of the damages and mainly the material losses of the First World War period.
In a broader understanding, the document considers the following categories of losses:
• human losses;
• territorial losses;
• economic losses;
• cultural losses;
• spiritual losses;
• educational losses;
• architectural losses;
• destruction of historical heritage;
• loss of property;
• bank deposits;
• insurance assets;
• intellectual property.
Thus, the Declaration effectively raises the issue of a comprehensive international assessment of the damage inflicted upon the Armenian people.
It is especially important that the issue of reparations is not treated merely as a financial matter.
It is interpreted as:
• a question of international justice;
• a question of restoring violated rights;
• a question of eliminating the consequences of international crimes;
• a question of historical responsibility.
VII. On the International Responsibility of the Governments of Turkey and Azerbaijan
One of the major international legal issues concerns the responsibility of the governments of Turkey and Azerbaijan for international crimes committed against the Armenian people and other indigenous Christian peoples of the region.
This concerns not isolated historical episodes, but a long-term and systematic state policy carried out by successive governments of the Ottoman Empire, Kemalist Turkey, the Republic of Turkey, and various Azerbaijani authorities.
The Armenian people were subjected to:
1. mass killings,
2. deportations,
3. ethnic cleansing,
4. destruction of cultural heritage,
5. confiscation of property,
6. forced displacement from historical territories,
7. state-sponsored Armenophobia and discrimination.
The massacres of 1894–1896, the Adana massacres of 1909, the Armenian Genocide of 1915–1923, as well as the crimes committed in Sumgait, Baku, Kirovabad, Maragha and Artsakh, may be viewed as parts of the same continuing policy.
The blockade of Artsakh and the military aggressions of 2020 and 2023 were accompanied by attacks against civilians, ethnic cleansing, forced displacement and destruction of Armenian cultural heritage.
Particular importance must be attached to the issue of cultural genocide (culturicide). Armenian churches, monasteries, khachkars, cemeteries and historical monuments in Western Armenia, Artsakh and Nakhichevan have been syst.
VIII. The Question of Artsakh
The Declaration considers the issue of Artsakh to be an inseparable part of the Armenian Question.
The document pays considerable attention to:
• the right of the people of Artsakh to self-determination;
• the decisions of the 1991 referendum;
• the international legal foundations for the establishment of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic;
• the illegality of Soviet-era decisions;
• the facts of deportation of the Armenian population;
• ethnic cleansing;
• the blockade of Artsakh;
• the events of 2020 and 2023.
From the perspective of the authors of the document, the problem of Artsakh cannot be viewed exclusively as a territorial dispute.
It is regarded as:
• an issue of the right of a people to self-determination;
• an issue of security;
• an issue of genocide prevention;
• an issue of international responsibility.
Particularly important is the emphasis that the forced deportation of the Armenian population of Artsakh is regarded as an international crime.
IX. The Significance of the Declaration for the International Community
The Declaration positions itself not only as an Armenian national document, but also as an appeal to the international community.
From the perspective of the document, a just resolution of the Armenian Question is important for:
• the stability of the South Caucasus;
• peace in the Middle East;
• the prevention of new conflicts;
• the strengthening of international law;
• the prevention of new genocides;
• the protection of the rights of indigenous peoples;
• the strengthening of the international security system.
The document proceeds from the understanding that ignoring unresolved historical and international legal problems creates long-term centers of instability.
In this context, the Declaration attempts to present the Armenian Question not as a local problem, but as part of a broader international issue concerning:
• justice;
• international responsibility;
• the effectiveness of international law;
• the prevention of impunity.
X. The Political-Legal and Civilizational Concept of the Document
One of the most characteristic features of the Declaration is the combination of international legal argumentation with a civilizational concept.
The document views the Armenian people as:
• an ancient indigenous people;
• the bearer of a unique civilization;
• a subject of international law;
• a people possessing inalienable historical rights.
Particular significance is attached to the emphasis on:
• the Armenian Highlands;
• the historical Homeland;
• cultural continuity;
• the continuity of Armenian statehood.
Thus, the Declaration seeks to establish not only a legal, but also a civilizational foundation for Armenian statehood.
XI. International Perspective and Possible Consequences
From an international perspective, the Declaration is an extremely large-scale and ambitious document.
It is obvious that many provisions of the document will provoke:
• political discussions;
• diplomatic disputes;
• differing interpretations;
• mixed reactions from international actors.
However, regardless of attitudes toward particular provisions of the Declaration, it is necessary to acknowledge:
• the high level of systematization;
• the scale of the work accomplished;
• the existence of a comprehensive legal concept;
• the attempt to formulate a long-term international legal position;
• the aspiration to elevate the Armenian Question to a new level of international discussion.
The Declaration effectively proposes that the international community consider the Armenian Question not as a closed chapter of history, but as an ongoing issue of international justice.
XII. Conclusion
The Declaration “On the State Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity of the Republic of Western Armenia (State of Armenia) and Its State Border with the Republic of Turkey” represents one of the most extensive political and legal documents developed within the framework of the contemporary Armenian Question.
Its significance lies in the following:
• the systematization of the Armenian Question into a unified political and legal concept;
• the attempt to provide an international legal substantiation of the rights of the Armenian people;
• the formation of a long-term strategic position;
• the protection of historical memory;
• raising the issues of reparations, restitution, and international responsibility;
• the protection of the right of the Armenian people to existence, security, and development;
• the attempt to initiate an international discussion on the necessity of a just settlement of the consequences of the Armenian Genocide.
For the Armenian people, the Declaration is significant as:
• a political and legal guideline;
• a strategic document;
• an attempt to consolidate national forces;
• a form of protection of historical memory;
• a concept of long-term national development.
For the international community, the document is of interest as:
• an example of a comprehensive approach to issues of historical justice;
• an attempt at an international legal reconsideration of the consequences of Genocide;
• a political and legal document concerning restitution and the rights of indigenous peoples;
• an appeal to international institutions regarding the necessity of a long-term and just resolution of the Armenian Question.
Regardless of political assessments of particular provisions, the Declaration already constitutes a significant historical-political and international legal document which will undoubtedly occupy a special place in the modern history of the Armenian Question and in the history of Armenian political and legal thought of the 21st century.
