Tweet
ON THE TREATY OF SEVRES - THE NEED FOR CLARIFICATION
Ara Papian
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics-lrahos18756.html
10:02:59 - 13/08/2010
The ninetieth anniversary of the Treaty of Sèvres is an important event
for the Republic of Armenia, as well as for all Armenians. There is
a widespread opinion, however, which needs to be clarified.
Armenian territorial rights are not entirely based on the Treaty of
Sèvres. The Treaty of Sèvres did not itself declare the border between
Armenia and Turkey. By Article 89 of the Treaty of Sèvres, the parties
to the treaty appealed to the US President, for him to carry out the
arbitration which would decide that frontier. Even if the Treaty of
Sèvres were not to exist, it would not make any difference; Armenia
would have still maintained unquestionable territorial rights, as, on
behalf of the Allied Powers (the British Empire, France and Italy),
the San Remo Conference had appealed to US President Woodrow Wilson
on the 26th of April, 1920 to delimit the Armenia-Turkey frontier, a
request which the US President accepted on the 17th of May, 1920. This
took place almost three months before the Treaty of Sèvres was signed.
(The Treaty of Sèvres was signed on the 10th of August, 1920.) The
importance of the signing of the Treaty of Sèvres in terms of
territorial rights lies in the fact that, by accepting the document,
Turkey acceded to the arbitration compromise, and in so doing, the
country reconfirmed its obligation to carry out any arbitral award by
the US President. I emphasize that it reconfirmed the obligation, as,
by signing the Armistice of Moudros (on the 30th of October, 1918),
which was without question a capitulation in legal terms, Turkey had
handed over its sovereignty to the victorious powers and it was they
who had the right to decide which part of the territory of the Ottoman
Empire would form a new Turkish state. Consequently, our struggle on
the legal front must be based on two documents - the Treaty of Sèvres
(of the 10th of August, 1920) and, in particular, the arbitral award
of the US President Woodrow Wilson (of the 22nd of November, 1920)
derived from that treaty. As to the first, it must be noted that,
although it has not been ratified, it is nevertheless a binding
document, as it has been signed 'between the contracting parties' (vide
Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties, Article 2 (f)). As to the second,
it is necessary to emphasise the following: (a) the arbitral award is
inviolable, it has no time limits and it is a legally-binding decision;
(b) although the arbitral award was carried out by the US President,
it is nevertheless a binding document for 142 of the 192 current
members of the United Nations. (Due to paucity of space, the details
cannot be provided here, but this point has been fully discussed in
my strategy paper for a solution to the Armenian Question.)
In sum, the following conclusion can be drawn. The clauses of
the Treaty of Sèvres having to do with the territorial rights
of the Republic of Armenia are still absolutely valid due to the
aforementioned documents and, with the corresponding efforts and in
the right political climate, they can be put into effect.
From: A. Papazian
Ara Papian
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics-lrahos18756.html
10:02:59 - 13/08/2010
The ninetieth anniversary of the Treaty of Sèvres is an important event
for the Republic of Armenia, as well as for all Armenians. There is
a widespread opinion, however, which needs to be clarified.
Armenian territorial rights are not entirely based on the Treaty of
Sèvres. The Treaty of Sèvres did not itself declare the border between
Armenia and Turkey. By Article 89 of the Treaty of Sèvres, the parties
to the treaty appealed to the US President, for him to carry out the
arbitration which would decide that frontier. Even if the Treaty of
Sèvres were not to exist, it would not make any difference; Armenia
would have still maintained unquestionable territorial rights, as, on
behalf of the Allied Powers (the British Empire, France and Italy),
the San Remo Conference had appealed to US President Woodrow Wilson
on the 26th of April, 1920 to delimit the Armenia-Turkey frontier, a
request which the US President accepted on the 17th of May, 1920. This
took place almost three months before the Treaty of Sèvres was signed.
(The Treaty of Sèvres was signed on the 10th of August, 1920.) The
importance of the signing of the Treaty of Sèvres in terms of
territorial rights lies in the fact that, by accepting the document,
Turkey acceded to the arbitration compromise, and in so doing, the
country reconfirmed its obligation to carry out any arbitral award by
the US President. I emphasize that it reconfirmed the obligation, as,
by signing the Armistice of Moudros (on the 30th of October, 1918),
which was without question a capitulation in legal terms, Turkey had
handed over its sovereignty to the victorious powers and it was they
who had the right to decide which part of the territory of the Ottoman
Empire would form a new Turkish state. Consequently, our struggle on
the legal front must be based on two documents - the Treaty of Sèvres
(of the 10th of August, 1920) and, in particular, the arbitral award
of the US President Woodrow Wilson (of the 22nd of November, 1920)
derived from that treaty. As to the first, it must be noted that,
although it has not been ratified, it is nevertheless a binding
document, as it has been signed 'between the contracting parties' (vide
Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties, Article 2 (f)). As to the second,
it is necessary to emphasise the following: (a) the arbitral award is
inviolable, it has no time limits and it is a legally-binding decision;
(b) although the arbitral award was carried out by the US President,
it is nevertheless a binding document for 142 of the 192 current
members of the United Nations. (Due to paucity of space, the details
cannot be provided here, but this point has been fully discussed in
my strategy paper for a solution to the Armenian Question.)
In sum, the following conclusion can be drawn. The clauses of
the Treaty of Sèvres having to do with the territorial rights
of the Republic of Armenia are still absolutely valid due to the
aforementioned documents and, with the corresponding efforts and in
the right political climate, they can be put into effect.
From: A. Papazian