Karabakh

SC Resolution #853 (1993)

---

UNITED NATIONS
Security Council Distr.

GENERAL

Original: ENGLISH

RESOLUTION 853 (1993)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 3259th meeting, on 29 July 1993

The Security Council,

Reaffirming its resolution 822 (1993) of 30 April 1993,

Having considered the report issued on 27 July 1993 by the Chairman of the Mink Group of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) (S/26184),

Expressing its serious concern at the deterioration of relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijani Republic and at the tensions between them,

Welcoming acceptance by the parties concerned at the timetable of urgent steps to implement its resolution 822 (1993),

Noting with alarm the escalation in armed hostilities and, in particular, the seizure of the district of Agdam in the Azerbaijani Republic,

Concerned that this situation continues to endanger peace and security in the region,

Expressing once again its grave concern at the displacement of large numbers of civilians in the Azerbaijani Republic and at the serious humanitarian emergency in the region,

Reaffirming the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Azerbaijani Republic and of all other States in the region,

Reaffirming also the inviolability of international borders and the inadmissability of the use of force for the acquisition of territory,

1. Condemns the seizure of the district of Agdam and of all other recently occupied areas of the Azerbaijani Republic;

2. Further condemns all hostile actions in the region, in particular attacks on civilians and bombardments of inhabited areas;

3. Demands the immediate cessation of all hostilities and the immediate complete and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces involved from the district of Agdam and all other recently occupied areas of the Azerbaijan Republic;

4. Calls on the parties concerned to reach and maintain durable cease-fire arrangements;

5. Reiterates in the context of paragraphs 3 and 4 above its earlier calls for the restoration of economic, transport and energy links in the region;

6. Endorses the continuing efforts by the Minsk Group of the CSCE to achieve a peaceful solution to the conflict, including efforts to implement resolution 822 (1993), and expresses its grave concern at the disruptive effect that the escalation of armed hostilities has had on these efforts;

7. Welcomes the preparations for a CSCE monitor mission with a timetable for its deployment, as well as consideration within the CSCE of the proposal for a CSCE presence in the region;

8. Urges the parties concerned to refrain from any action that will obstruct a peaceful solution to the conflict, and to pursue negotiations within the Minsk Group of the CSCE, as well as through direct contacts between them, towards a final settlement;

9. Urges the Government of the Republic of Armenia to continue to exert its influence to achieve compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorny-Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic with its resolution 822 (1993) and the present resolution, and the acceptance by this party of the proposals of the Minsk Group of the CSCE;

10. Urges States to refrain from the supply of any weapons and munitions which might lead to an intensification of the conflict or the continued occupation of territory;

11. Calls once again for unimpeded access for international humanitarian relief efforts in the region, in particular in all areas affected by the conflict, in order to alleviate the increased suffering of the civilian population and reaffirms that all parties are bound to comply with the principles and rules of international humanitarian law;

12. Requests the Secretary-General and relevant international agencies to provide urgent humanitarian assistance to the affected civilian population and to assist displaced persons to return to their homes;

13. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Chairman-in-Office of the CSCE as well as the Chairman of the Minsk Group, to continue to report to the Council on the situation;

14. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

SC Resolution #884 (1993) 

---

UNITED NATIONS
Security Council Distr.

GENERAL

RESOLUTION 884 (1993)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 3313th meeting, on 12 November 1993

The Security Council,

Reaffirming its resolutions 822 (1993) of 30 April 1993, 853 (1993) of 29 July 1993 and 874 (1993) of 14 October 1993,

Reaffirming its full support for the peace process being pursued within the framework of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), and for the tireless efforts of the CSCE Minsk Group,

Taking note of the letter dated 9 November 1993 from the Chairman-in-Office of the Minsk Conference on Nagorny Karabakh addressed to the President of the Security Council and its enclosures (S/26718, annex),

Expressing its serious concern that a continuation of the conflict in and around the Nagorny Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic, and of the tensions between the Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijani Republic, would endanger peace and security in the region,

Noting with alarm the escalation in armed hostilities as consequence of the violations of the cease-fire and excesses in the use of force in response to those violations, in particular the occupation of the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz in the Azerbaijani Republic,

Reaffirming the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Azerbaijani Republic and of all other States in the region,

Reaffirming also the inviolability of international borders and the inadmissibility of the use of force for the acquisition of territory,

Expressing grave concern at the latest displacement of a large number of civilians and the humanitarian emergency in the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz and on Azerbaijan's southern frontier,

1. Condemns the recent violations of the cease-fire established between the parties, which resulted in a resumption of hostilities, and particularly condemns the occupation of the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz, attacks on civilians and bombardments of the territory of the Azerbaijani Republic;

2. Calls upon the Government of Armenia to use its influence to achieve compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorny Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic with resolutions 822 (1993) , 853 (1993) and 874 (1993) , and to ensure that the forces involved are not provided with the means to extend their military campaign further;

3. Welcomes the Declaration of 4 November 1993 of the nine members of the CSCE Minsk Group (S/26718) and commends the proposals contained therein for unilateral cease-fire declarations;

4. Demands from the parties concerned the immediate cessation of armed hostilities and hostile acts, the unilateral withdrawal of occupying forces from the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz, and the withdrawal of occupying forces from other recently occupied areas of the Azerbaijani Republic in accordance with the Adjusted timetable of urgent steps to implement Security Council resolutions 822 (1993) and 853 (1993) (S/26522, appendix), as amended by the CSCE Minsk Group meeting in Vienna of 2 to 8 November 1993;

5. Strongly urges the parties concerned to resume promptly and to make effective and permanent the cease-fire established as a result of the direct contacts undertaken with the assistance of the Government of the Russian Federation in support of the CSCE Minsk Group, and to continue to seek a negotiated settlement of the conflict within the context of the CSCE Minsk process and the Adjusted timetable, as amended by the CSCE Minsk Group meeting in Vienna of 2 to 8 November 1993;

6. Urges again all States in the region to refrain from any hostile acts and from any interference or intervention, which would lead to the widening of the conflict and undermine peace and security in the region;

7. Requests the Secretary-General and relevant international agencies to provide urgent humanitarian assistance to the affected civilian population, including that in the Zangelan district and the city of Goradiz and on Azerbaijan's southern frontier, and to assist refugees and displaced persons to return to their homes in security and dignity;

8. Reiterates its request that the Secretary-General, the Chairman-in-Office of the CSCE and the Chairman of the CSCE Minsk Conference continue to report to the Council on the progress of the Minsk process and on all aspects of the situation on the ground, in particular on the implementation of its relevant resolutions, and on present and future cooperation between the CSCE and the United Nations in this regard;

9. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

ANNEX 1 STATEMENT OF THE OSCE CHAIRMAN-IN-OFFICE

---

You all know that no progress has been achieved in the last two years to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the issue of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan. I regret that the efforts of the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Conference to reconcile the views of the parties on the principles for a settlement have been unsuccessful.

Three principles which should form part of the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict were recommended by the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Group. These principles are supported by all member States of the Minsk Group. They are:

-territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia and the Azerbaijan Republic;

-legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh defined in an agreement based on self-determination which confers on Nagorno-Karabakh the highest degree of self-rule within Azerbaijan;

-guaranteed security for Nagorno-Karabakh and its whole population, including mutual obligations to ensure compliance by all the Parties with the provisions of the settlement.

I regret that one participating State could not accept this. These principles have the support of all other participating States.

This statement will be included in the Lisbon Summit documents.

http://www.osce.org/docs/english/1990-1999/summits/lisbo96e. htm

Resolution no. 21/28-p On The aggression of the republic of Armenia Against the republic of Azerbaijan

---

The Twenty-eighth Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers (Session of Peace and Development - Intifada Al-Aqsa), held in Bamako, Republic of Mali, from 4 to 6 Rabi-ul-Thani, 1422H (25-27 June, 2001),

Proceeding from the principles and objectives of the Charter of the Organization of the Islamic Conference;

Gravely concerned over the aggression by the Republic of Armenia against the Republic of Azerbaijan which has resulted in the occupation of more than 20% of Azeri territory;

Deeply distressed over the plight of more than one million Azeri displaced persons and refugees resulting from Armenian aggression and magnitude and severity of humanitarian problems;

Reaffirming all previous relevant resolutions and, in particular, the resolution No.21/9-P(IS), adopted by the Ninth Session of the Islamic Summit Conference;

Urging strict adherence to the Charter of the UN and full implementation of Security Council resolutions;

Welcoming all diplomatic and other efforts for the settlement of the conflict;

Reaffirming all Member States respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the Republic of Azerbaijan;

Noting also the destructive influence of the policy of aggression of the Republic of Armenia on the peace process in the OSCE framework;

Taking note of the Report of the Secretary General (Document No. ICFM/28-2001/PIL/D.12).

1. Strongly condemns the aggression of the Republic of Armenia against the Republic of Azerbaijan.

2. Considers the actions perpetrated against civilian Azeri population in occupied Azeri territory as crimes against humanity.

3. Strongly condemns looting and destruction of the archeological cultural and religious monuments on the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

4. Strongly demands the strict implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions 822, 853, 874 and 884, and the immediate unconditional and complete withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied Azeri territories inter alia Lachin and Shusha regions and strongly urges Armenia to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

5. Expresses its concern that Armenia has not yet implemented demands contained in the UN Security Council resolutions.

6. Calls on the UN Security Council to recognize the existence of aggression against the Republic of Azerbaijan; take the necessary steps under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations to ensure compliance with its resolutions; condemn and reverse aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan and decides to take coordinated action to this end at the United Nations.

7. Urges all States to refrain from providing any supplies of military arms and equipment to Armenia, which can encourage the aggressor to escalate the conflict and to continue the occupation of the Azerbaijani territories. The territory of Member States should not be used for transit of such supplies.

8. Calls upon Member States, as well as other members of the international community, to use such effective political and economic measures as required in order to put an end to Armenian aggression and to occupation of the Azerbaijani territories.

9. Calls for a just and peaceful settlement of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan on the basis of respect for the principles of territorial integrity of states and inviolability of internationally recognized frontiers.

10. Urges both Armenia and Azerbaijan and all Member States of the Minsk Group to engage constructively in the ongoing OSCE peace process on the basis of the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council and relevant OSCE decisions and documents, including those of the First Additional Meeting of the OSCE Council of 24 March 1992, OSCE Summit of 5-6 December 1994, OSCE Summit of 2-3 December 1996, OSCE Council of Ministers Meeting of 18-19 December 1997 and refrain from any action that will make it more difficult to reach a peaceful solution.

11. Expresses its full support for the three principles of the settlement of the armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan contained in the statement of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office at the 1996 Lisbon OSCE Summit, namely the territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan, highest degree of self-rule of the Nagorno-Karabakh region within Azerbaijan and guaranteed security for Nagorno-Karabakh and its whole population.

12. Considers the proposal made by the OSCE Minsk Conference Co-chairmen aimed at the staged settlement of the Armenia-Azerbaijan armed conflict as the basis for the negotiations within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group and expresses its understanding that this approach is to ensure immediate elimination of the most serious consequences of the aggression against the Republic of Azerbaijan.

13. Requests the Secretary General to communicate the OIC�s principled and firm position vis-a-vis the Armenian aggression against the Republic of Azerbaijan, to the current Chairman of the European Organization for Security and Cooperation.

14. Reaffirms its total solidarity and support for the efforts being made by the Government and people of Azerbaijan to defend their country.

15. Calls for enabling the displaced persons and refugees to return to their homes in safety, honour and dignity.

16. Expresses its appreciation to all Member States which have made humanitarian assistance to the refugees and displaced persons and urges all the others to extend their contributions to these people.

17. Expresses its concern over the severity of humanitarian problems concerning the existence of more than one million displaced persons and refugees in the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan and requests the OIC Member States, the Islamic Development Bank and the other Islamic Institutions to render urgent financial and humanitarian assistance to the Republic of Azerbaijan.

18. Considers, that Azerbaijan has the right for appropriate compensation with regard to damages it suffered, and puts the responsibility for the adequate compensation of these damages on Armenia.

19. Requests the Secretary General to follow up the implementation of this resolution and to report thereon to the Twenty-ninth Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers.

http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/28/28-ICFM-PIL2-en.htm#21/ 28-p

university of Dundee

Forensic medicine

---

On the instruction of the State Commission on War Prisoners, Hostages and Missing People of the Azerbaijan Republic, I, Derrick John Pounder, performed post-mortem examinations of the bodies of ten persons at the forensic Medicine and Anatomical Pathology Institute of the Scientific Practical and Training Board of the Ministry of Public Health of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the city of Baku. The autopsy examinations began at 11.50 hours on Thursday 7^th April 1994 and finished at 16.10 on Friday 8^th april 1994.

The bodies were identified to me by dr. Zabit Mamedov as those deceased war prisoners whose bodies were released by the Republic of Armenia and transferred by representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Baku, Azerbaijan, march 3^rd and 24^th 1994. The bodies were individually identified to me prior to each autopsy examination by dr. Zabit Mamedov. During the conduct of ten autopsy examinations Dr. Zabit Mamedov , Dr. Mansur Buniatov, Dr. Vugar Mamedov and Mr. Igor Kravets (mortuary technician) were present throughout.

As a result of my examinations I prepared ten individual autopsy reports relating to each of the deceased. I concluded that the causes of death were as follows:

 

Case 1.	Agayev, Roustam (Ramazan ogly).	Cause of death: single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 2.	Djafarov, Anvar (Asker ogly).	Cause of death: Incised wound to the throat.
Case 3.	Guiasov, Bakhram (Akif ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot to the chest.
Case 4.	Gouseinov, Fikret (Gassan ogly).	Cause of death: undetermined.
Case 5.	Ahmedov, Elshan (Goussein ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 6.	Ahmedov, Elman (mamed ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 7.	Mamedov, Kourchat (Kiyaz ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 8.	Mamedov, Eldar (Shahbaba ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 9.	Guliev, Faig (Gabil ogly).	Cause of death: Single gunshot wound to the head.
Case 10.	Nasirov Ilkhan (Sadulla ogly).	Cause of death: undetermined.

As a result of my examinations I concluded that in all ten cases autopsy examinations had been performed in Armenia and I confirmed that autopsies had again been performed on each of the ten individuals following receipt of the bodies in Azerbaijan. Consequently the autopsies which I performed were the third autopsies each of these bodies was subjected to. One body (case 4, Gouseinov Fikret) was skeletonised, one body (case 10, Nasirov Ilkham) was severely putrefied and the other eight bodies showed moderate to advanced putrefaction. Tissues had been removed from the bodies at the time of the first autopsies in Armenia; these tissues and the reports of the first autopsies were not available to me. Tissues had also been removed from the bodies during the second autopsies in Azerbaijan; those removed tissues that i requested access to were made available to me and the results of the autopsies performed in Azerbaijan were made available to me verbally. All questions related to the conduct of the autopsies in Azerbaijan were answered to me by Dr. Zabit Mamedov and Mr. Igor Kravets. The condition of the bodies arising from the state of putrefaction and decomposition and the conduct of the two previous autopsies with the removal of some tissues, although limiting the information which could be obtained by further autopsy, did not preclude useful and productive examinations.

The essential findings in each case were as follows:

 

Case 1. Agaev, Roustam (Ramazan ogly)

There was a single gunshot wound to the head which entered the right temple and exited on the left side toward the back of the head. The presence of shot deposits on the surface of the skull surrounding the entry wound indicates that the end of the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired. At the autopsy performed in Armenia the skin of the right temple which included the gunshot wound of entry was excluded together with the adjacent right ear. Also presumed to have been retained at the first autopsy were several internal organs including part of heart, the spleen, and the liver together with the large bowel. These organs had been removed after death as part of the normal conduct of an autopsy and there is no evidence to substantiate the allegation that organs may have been removed for the purposes of medical transplantation. The evidence clearly that the right ear was excised after death and not during life and that it was excised as a part of autopsy procedure.

Case 2. Djafarov, Anvar (Asker ogly).

There was a large incised wound to the right side of the neck. This wound had been produced by multiple parallel cuts to the skin and repeated parallels in the depth of the wound. The pattern of inquiry was typical of suicide and there were no other injuries to the body to suggest that the depth was other than a suicide. There was post mortem damage of both feet and the left knee consistent with rodent activity. 

 

Case 3. Guiasov, Bakhram (Akif ogly).

There was a single gunshot to the chest which entered on the left side just below the nipple. The bullet passed through the left lung and exited the back on the left side splintering the ninth rib. There was evidence of emergency medical treatment in the form of a surgical incision to the left side of the chest and what appeared to be an injection mark to the front of the right elbow. There was no evidence of surgical treatment of the wound to the lung suggesting that he died before the emergency surgery could be completed. 

 

Case 4. Gouseinov, Fikret (Gassan ogly).

The body was skeletonised with virtually no residual soft tissues. There were a minimum of eight healing rib fractures which must have been present many weeks or months prior to death. There was no other bony injures. In the absence of soft tissues it was impossible a cause of death. It is possible that the death was a complication of the rib fractures, such as pneumonia.

 

Case 5. Ahmedov, Elshan (Goussein ogly).

There was a single gunshot wound to the head which entered at the right temple and exited at the left temple. The skin if the right temple which included the gunshot wound of entry had been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia. On the outer surface of the skull surrounding the gunshot entry wound there were soot deposits indicating that the end of the muzzle of the gun had been in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired. There were two fresh bruises to the body which had occurred during life. There was a 5 cm bruise to the left shin and a 6 cm bruise to the muscles of the front of the left shoulder, without bruising of the overlying skin in the latter injury. 

 

Case 6. Ahmedov, Elman (mamed ogly).

There was a single gunshot wound to the head which entered at the left temple and exited at the right temple. The skin if the left temple which included the gunshot wound of entry had been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia. The outer surface of the skull of the left temple surrounding the gunshot wound of entry showed abundant soot deposits indicating that the end of the muzzle of the gun had been in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired. The left ear had been excised in continuity with the skin of the left temple, which included the gunshot wound, at the first autopsy in Armenia. The right ear had also been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia.

 

Case 7. Mamedov, Kourchat (Kiyaz ogly).

There was a single gunshot wound to the head which entered behind the right ear and exited above the left ear. The skin surrounding the gunshot wound of entry had been excised in at the first autopsy in Armenia; there were identifiable soot deposits in the depth of the entry wound. Consequently it is not possible to determine the range at which this shot was fired from.

It is not possible to confirm or to deny that this may have been a contact wound (with the end of the muzzle of the gun in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired). There was an 8 cm bruise to the right side of the forehead which was unrelated to the gunshot wound. This bruise was fresh and had occurred during life. A portion of skin at the centre of this bruise and been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia. There was post mortem loss of some tissue from the toss of the left foot consistent with rodent activity.

 

Case 8. Mamedov, Eldar (Shahbaba ogly).

There was a single gunshot wound to the head entering at the right temple and exiting at the left temple. The skin of the right temple, including the gunshot wound, of entry, together with the right ear in continuity had been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia. There was no identifiable soot in the depth of the entry wound. Consequently it is not possible to determine the range of fire of the gunshot wound. It is not possible to confirm or to deny that it may have been a contact wound (with the end of the muzzle of the gun in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired). There was post mortem loss of skin on the wall of the abdomen in continuity with the autopsy incision and suggesting rodent activity.

 

Case 9. Guliev, Faig (Gabil ogly).

There was a single gunshot wound to the right temple entering at the right temple and passing markedly backwards to exit towards the back of the head on the left side. The skin of the right temple including the gunshot wound of entry had been excised at the first autopsy in Armenia; there was no identifiable soot within the depth of the entry wound. Consequently it is not possible to determine the range of fire of the gunshot wound. It is not possible to confirm of deny that the gunshot wound may have been a contact wound (with the end of the muzzle of the gun in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired). There was a fresh 5 cm bruise to the right side of the head unrelated to the gunshot wound. The bruise had been produced during life.

 

Case 10. Nasirov Ilkhan (Sadulla ogly).

The body was in advanced state of putrefaction. There was no apparent injury to the body. The condition of the body did not permit a cause of death to be established.

 

None of the bodies showed evidence of torture or systematic beatings (except that this could not be assessed in case 4 because the body reduced to a skeleton). Six of the ten bodies showed a single gunshot wound to the head. In five of the six cases the entry wound was to the right side if the head and the exit wound to the left side if the head; in one of the six cases the entry wound was to the left side of the head and the entry wound to the right side of the head. In three of the six cases there was identifiable soot deposits on the outer surface of the skull surrounding the gunshot wound of entry and indicating that, in each of three cases the muzzle of the gun had been in contact with the head at the tome the shot was fired. In the other three cases, because of loss of physical evidence as a consequence of previous autopsies in Armenia, it is not possible to confirm or deny that the end of the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the head at the time the shot was fired. Of these six cases, three showed fresh bruises to the body, in one case a bruise to the right side of the head; in a second case a bruise to the right side of the forehead; in the third case a bruise to the left shoulder and a further bruise to the left shin. In three cases one or both ears had been excised post mortem and almost certainly at the time of the autopsies in Armenia. In two of these three cases the right ear had been excised and in the third case both ears had been excised.

I am aware that these six dead were alleged to have been shot whilst attempting to escape. The pattern of gunshot wounds is not consistent with such an explanation. The common pattern of gunshot wounds to the head, with three of the six wounds being definite contact wounds, is strongly suggestive of execution-type shootings.

 

Attested on soul and conscience

derrick john pounder

(Signature)

Dear survival!!!

 

Are you happy with my international sources now????

I believe, you will show your respect and trust to the UN, OBSCE, Islamic Conference sites and organisations

In all international documents, Armenia showed as agrresor and Karabagh confirmed as a occupied part of Azerbaijan Republic.

So, you can't provide any international source which will compromise the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and belongnes of karabagh to azerbaijani nation.

 

http://www.osce.org/docs/english/1990-1999/summits/lisbo96e. htm

http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/28/28-ICFM-PIL2-en.htm#21/ 28-p

The question of territorial integrity vs self determination right is the core issue in this problem and you can not in any way state that the former is stronger than the latter.

Karabakh was an "Autonomous republic" within Azerbaijani SSR, with its own Supreme Soviet which had the authority to decide the future of the enclave (that's why it was called "enclave", not a "province" or "region"). The Supreme Soviet of Karabakh did vote democratically for its political belonging and could very well be an exclave to Armenia as Nakhichevan was to Azerbaijan when the Stalin regime handed over the two Armenian regions to Azerbaijan. By the decision of the Supreme Soviet in Karabakh, the region was de facto never a part of the Azerbaijan republic to be, neither politically nor in reality since Armenians were in fact in charge.
 
As the prevailing situation Azerbaijan has not much of choice to either continue the deadlock and create a second Cyprus according to the model conducted by its big brother Turkey, or accept the fact and negiotiate directly with Karabakh. A third option of war is always possible in the theory, but no one thinks that renewed hostilities from Azeri side will improve their already fragile image in Europe and the rest of the world (not to mention what happened the last two times Azerbaijan tried to resolve the conflict by force).

Karabakh Armenians did constitute the majority of the population in Karabakh; they did vote democratically for their future on the basis for self-determination; they did answered the Azeri violence when diplomacy did not work; and they did victor. Going back to be an integral part of Azerbaijan is not an option for the government of Karabakh, specially when the Azeri government clearly does not even recognise them as a negotiating part.