With the ethnic cleansing of the Armenians of Artsakh and the collapse of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, many felt that international law has no influence when it comes to safeguarding Armenian interests. Is the law as culpable as it seems? What can be expected?

The ICJ handed down provisional measures against Azerbaijan, demanding that Azerbaijan ensure the rights of Armenians forcibly displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh, including their right to return. This article breaks down the significant pronouncements made by the Court and explores their potential impact on Armenia’s legal strategy.

International Humanitarian Law constitutes a critical set of rules with the purpose of mitigating the humanitarian impact of armed conflicts. It has never set out to eradicate all human suffering during conflicts and violations, heinous as they are, do not render the law null and void.

The Armenian public’s expectations and perceptions of international law has played a weighty role in the nation’s life. As Armenia has grappled with geopolitical challenges and crises, the role of international law has often been thrust into the spotlight, evoking both hope and frustration. Davit Khachatryan explains.

In the constantly evolving landscape of international diplomacy, resolutions and rulings often carry the weight of hope, accountability and change. However, the international community’s weak response to Azerbaijan’s devastating hostilities has left many Armenians disillusioned.

Azerbaijan, emboldened by impunity, is aggressively pursuing an irredentist foreign policy, now targeting Armenia proper. Yerevan must swiftly undertake measures and adopt a robust and unequivocal legal strategy to safeguard its sovereignty and deter further acts of aggression.