Our claim for compensation against Armenia

We will not carry out reconstruction work in the liberated Karabakh. We must create a zone to be built from scratch. We have to start all over again, from its infrastructure to its economy. At this starting line, nothing will be built on the old and dilapidated economy. We must build a new economy where there is nothing. We must have a conceptual approach to the question of where to start.

The first step we must take is to return to the talks on the economy that has been destroyed in Karabakh for 27 years. We need to think about turning the economic scale of this damage and years of destruction that lasted for years back. We must file a claim for economic compensation as a result of this aggression by the Armenian state. And we should not get bogged down in the question of where to start.

Before starting work in Karabakh, we must group the damage caused to the country's economy over the years and take it to international courts. After making it the subject of a lawsuit, we must start construction work here. My opinion as an economist is that we need to coordinate the two activities here. Rather, we need to determine for ourselves the answer to a two-pronged question:

• Determine the requirements of international law in this area and the forms of appeal to it;
• Determine the methodology for calculating the damage to the moral and psychological condition of people, starting with the economy.

Forms of compensation under international law

The international community has its own language and style. International law, on the other hand, has provisions and legal keys to which it can refer. International law also clearly stipulates compensation for damages. Article 31 of Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts states that the responsible State is under an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act. Then, Article 34 of this act defines the forms of reparation. Again, referring to international law, it will be clear that full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act shall take the form of restitution, compensation, and satisfaction.

Restitution – The State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to make restitution, that is, to re-establish the situation which existed before the wrongful act was committed, provided and to the extent that restitution is not materially impossible or does not involve a burden out of all proportion to the benefit deriving from restitution instead of compensation.

Compensation – The State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to compensate for the damage caused thereby, insofar as such damage is not made good by restitution. The compensation shall cover any financially assessable damage including loss of profits insofar as it is established.

Satisfaction – The State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to give satisfaction for the injury caused by that act insofar as it cannot be made good by restitution or compensation. Satisfaction may consist of acknowledgement of the breach, an expression of regret, a formal apology, or another appropriate modality. Satisfaction shall not be out of proportion to the injury and may not take a form humiliating to the responsible State.

These forms of reparation (compensation and restitution) can be applied either singly or in combination. This article is mentioned in the UN Resolution on Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law adopted on December 16, 2005.

Damage to Azerbaijan regarding Nagorno-Karabakh

The classification of damages is multi-vector: (i) damage to the lives and psychology of our citizens, who are our most valuable resource, (ii) damage to the industry, agriculture, and production in general, (iii) severe environmental damages and assessment of their impacts, (iv) billions in damage to destroyed infrastructure, etc.

We must file a claim for compensation against occupying Armenia. According to a UN report released in 2000, Azerbaijan suffered $ 53.5 billion in damage during this period. We are talking about the damage done to our country only for 7 years. The scale of these losses will be even greater if we calculate the damage done to our country until 2020, when our lands are liberated from occupation.

In world practice, there are various ways to calculate the economic damage caused by both interstate and civil wars. The synthetic control method is among the methods proposed by my dear colleague Gubad bey. According to the requirements of this method, we compare an occupied district with a district within Azerbaijan corresponding to the population, GDP, and other parameters and determine the annual income of this district. And in the end, multiplying that number by 27, we can calculate the economic damage done to the district.

If this calculation shows that Armenia really has to pay 10 billions in compensation to Azerbaijan, then how can a state with foreign debt exceeding 60% of GDP and foreign exchange reserves of $ 2.6 billion be able to pay it? This is the most difficult and topical question.

One of these ways is the way of contribution. When calculating the amount of damage caused after a peace agreement in certain periods, the other party who is unable to pay it may offer its territories as a material equivalent in exchange. The United States bought Louisiana from Napoleon Bonaparte in 1803 for less than 7 cents per hectare. Azerbaijan may also demand land in exchange for the damage done to it. Then we can choose Zangazur. The return of Zangazur can be both a form of compensation and a celebration of historical injustice.

Mohammed Talibli