Analysis of Russia’s Military Aggression against the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic from the International Legal Perspective

Background: The article analyses the aggression of Soviet Russia against the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR) from two perspectives – from the point of view of both Soviet Russia and international law. The problem of whether or not to continue the subject of international law and recognition during the restoration of independence of the states subjected to aggression has created the need for an unambiguous legal response. Even though the rules of the Montevideo Convention (1933) were fully valid in the establishment of the ADR and the republic became a subject of international law, it was recognised by the Versailles legal system, and it was provided with all the attributes of a state in political, economic, social, and other regards, but it was subject to the aggression of Soviet Russia. The conclusion that it is impossible to assess the aggression of Russia against independent states in the framework of the legal system at the beginning of the 20th century is also controversial. The conclusion that Russia’s military aggression against independent states ‘cannot be evaluated within the framework of the legal system of the period’ is wrong, at least in terms of the IV Hague Convention on the Law and Customs of War on Land Territory of 1907(Regulations (Addendum)) Art. 42, the principle of ‘no transfer of sovereignty to the occupying state during occupation’. Methods: The occupation of the Republic of Azerbaijan after the restoration of state independence is comparatively analysed using historical and legal methods, taking into account the practice of other states that were attacked by Soviet Russia. A case study approach was used in this article. Since the case study is explanatory and descriptive in design, the description of the conventions on Russian military aggression (1899-1907 Hague Conventions, 1949 Geneva Convention) and practical explanation are included in the article. Results and Conclusions: The activity of the emigration government, the national liberation struggle, international crimes committed against the population, and the results of the illegal annexation are evaluated according to international law due to the military aggression of Soviet Russia against the ADR. Illegal annexation does not mean the loss of international legal subjectivity of the occupied state. Only in cases of disintegration of the population and disintegration of the society does the loss of state identity occur. Regardless of the existence or effectiveness of the government-in-exile, the long-term struggle of the Azerbaijani people for self-determination during the Soviet era creates an objective basis for the continuity of the ADR.