This is a research which is entitled to an introductory international legal study of the genocide case of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and its people.

P R E F A C E
THE ERA OF GENOCIDE

“International events following the signing of the United Nations Charter, indicate that an era of genocide has emerged in order to pave the way again for international domination. Genocide, as an instrument to achieve this goal, finds its roots in the politics of “elimination” on which the USA was established, as compared to those of “assimilation” and “divide to rule” The main targets to be realized are the replacement of people, the partition of countries, the causing of large scale immigration and the problems resulting therefrom as a method of disrupting other societies and weakening their competition capabilities.

Genocide is being directed from outside on basis of pretexts and is also being instigated internally and given a simulacrum of civil wars by the criminal abuse of the applied technology of psychiatry In all cases, genocide-operations depend on ‘propaganda’ through mass-media and other information manipulating devices to create the mental conditions needed to instigate and to justify the commission of genocide. Lies, distortion of facts and ‘confusion’ are the main methods of manipulation.”

This two preceding paragraphs opened my article in the CONGRESS BULLETIN NO.5 of the ICLS (LWO) 6th. International Congress on Legal Science which focused on genocide in the former Yugoslavia.

The era of genocide is being intensified and the genocide incidents of whole nations are being treated as ordinary events. The media are giving accounts of those genocide incidents with the same tune as their accounts of football games and film stars, and even with less intensity.

Mankind is being prepared to face and accept more genocide incidents of more nations, with apathy and confusion.
The world genocide-gang is well organized and supported by a “genocide technology” or “genocide engineering” and a “genocide industry”. The UNO is placed in the center of the “genocide aid” and the “genocide keeping”. The UNO makes use of five main techniques: the manipulation of international law, lies, genocidal intervention, camouflage action, and inaction.

In the course of my research in the era of genocide, I thought that the arche-type examples are the Palestine case, the atom-bomb Japan case, the Vietnamese case, the Croatia case, and the Bosnia case. But a new case has emerged: the Chechnya case. There are so many other cases of genocide in this era of genocide which they dare to call the era of the United Nations for peace and cooperation.

This book is entitled to an introductory international legal study of the genocide case of the Chechen Republic and its people.

DR. MOKHAMMAD A. MAHMOUD
The Hague, 26 June 1995
P.O.Box 91582, 2509 ED The Hague/NETHERLANDS

C O N T E N T S

*ABBREVIATIONS
1. THE REPEATED COMMISSION OF AGGRESSION, GENOCIDE AND OCCUPATION AGAINST THE CHECHEN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPUBLIC
2. THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL BASIS OF THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE CHECHEN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPUBLIC
3. A GENERAL VIEW OF OBLIGATION AND LIABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW (WITH REFERENCE TO THE GENOCIDAL, AGGRESSION AGAINST CHECHNYA
4. THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF THE FEDERAL, GOVERNMENT AND THE STATES MEMBERS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REGARDING THE GENOCIDAL AGGRESSION AGAINST CHECHNYA
5. THE IMMEDIATE OBLIGATIONS OF ALL STATES
6. THE SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF STATES PARTIES TO THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION
7. THE SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF STATES MEMBERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS TREATY AND OF THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
8. THE LEGAL BASIS OF THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF UN MEMBERS FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND INACTION’S WITHIN THE UN
9. THE DEVIANT POSITION OF UN MEMBERS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
10. THE LIABILITIES OF THE STATES MEMBERS OF THE GENOCIDE-GANG AND THE OTHER OBSTRUCTING STATES
11. THE PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE AGAINST THE CHECHEN PEOPLE
12. SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF MUSLIM STATES AND PEOPLES
13. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PEOPLE AND REPUBLIC OF CHECHNYA

ABBREVIATION
ASSR – Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic
RF – Russian Federation.
RSFSR – Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republics
Russia – Originates from the word “Rus”
Russian – member of the Slavic-speaking race
Soviet – body of representatives. Thus a “Soviet Republic” is a republic being governed by a representative body
Union SSR – republic member of the USSR, not of the RSFSR
USSR – Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

1. THE REPEATED COMMISSION OF AGGRESSION, GENOCIDE AND OCCUPATION
AGAINST THE CHECHEN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPUBLIC

Background information

1. The “Chechen Republic of Ichkeria” is situated North of the Caucasus, in the Russian border with Georgia, to the cast of North Ossetia and Ingushetia, to the west of Dagestan.

2. In 1992, the total population was 1.300 000. The Chechens are closely related to the Ingushes They are Sunni Muslims and their language is a Nakh dialect.

3. There is evidence that the Chechen and the Ingush inhabit this area as early as the Paleolithic period. “The remains of the late Bronze and early Iron ages… attest to the high level of social and economic development of the tribes, to advanced metallurgy, first of copper, then of iron, and to contacts with Scythia, Transcaucasia, and Southwest Asia”(1).

4. The names Chechen and Ingush originals from the names of two mountain villages, inhabited by two tribes, respectively the Nakhcho and the Galgai.

5. Chechnya is rich with oil and gas. Forests cover 18.7% of the territory. It has significant machinery manufacture for the oil and chemicals industries. Manufacture of a range of things is also developed furniture, parquet flooring, musical instruments and food processing. Agriculture is mainly in the valleys. Rail transportation is also developed.

Aggression and occupation by Russia under the Czar

6. The Chechens and Ingushes are independent mountain peoples, who were, like other Caucasian peoples, subjected to Russian aggression and colonialism, especially in the 19th century. Under the leadership of their Muslim leader Imam Shamil, they resisted this aggression. In 1858 their leader was captured and in 1864 their countries were occupied by imperial Russia and they were driven into the mountains. Due to their prolonged resistance, the Caucasian war took from 1817 until 1864 and was followed by the application of a gradual russification policy.

7. The Chechen people did not loose their independence by being part of the Russian empire, but their independence was obstructed by occupation, russification and exploitation.

Regaining independence by the fall of the Russian Empire

8. The fall of the Czar as a result of the revolution led to the regaining by the Chechen people of their independence. On 14 (27) March 1917 a Chechen National Cabinet was elected by the Chechen Congress and composed of sheikhs, merchants and officers. An Ingush National Cabinet was also elected. In order to promote their security, the north Caucasians proclaimed on 11 May 1918 their independent Republic of Mountain Nations of North Caucasus They issued a Declaration of Independence and were separated front imperial Russia

Re-occupation by Moscow under the Red Army

9. The proclaimed proletariat revolution planned to export itself by force, not for noble goals, but for pragmatic reasons. Consequently, the regime in Moscow invaded the Czar ex-colony by the Red Army, as the Great Soviet Encyclopedia published in Moscow 1978 admits(2). The Czar empire was revived under a new government called “All-Russian Central Executive Committee” which decreed on 20 January 1920 to annex Chechnya and Ingushetia under the Gorskaya Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic of the RSFSR.

10. On 20 November 1922, Chechen was separated from Gorskaya ASSR and made an Autonomous Region under the RSFSR. On 7 July 1924, the Gorskaya ASSR was abolished and an Ingush Autonomous Region was established. On 15 January 1934 the Chechen and Ingush Autonomous Regions were added together as one autonomous region, which was made an ASSR on December 1936.

11. The pragmatic reasons which we referred to were summed up by Lenin in June 1920 as(3):
11.1. The impossibility of the communist republics to continue to exist, “surrounded as they are by the imperialist powers of the whole world”, “without the closest alliance”.
11.2. The need for “a close economic alliance between the Soviet republics”.
11.3. The class nature of Soviet power, and its international nature, which were impelling the “masses of the working people” toward unity.

12. This laid the basis and paved the way for the revival of the Russian empire, under another name, the RSFSR, despite the recognition of the independence of the north Caucasian nations, including Chechnya, as we will point out later on.

Genocide as part and parcel of Russian imperialism

13. As events disclose, genocide in the RSFSR, the USSR, and the RE are not the product of occasional events, but of deliberate criminally minded policy.

14. In our view genocide means the causing of serious bodily and/or psychic harm to any number of persons due to their national or ethical origin, race, religion, or economic, political or social position.

15. While genocide was committed by the crusaders and the imperialists in many parts of the world, only the Nazi’s of World War 11 were put to trial and punished by the Nuremberg Tribunal which began its work on 20 November 1945 and ended on 1 October 1946. Since then, the prevention, suppression and punishment of the crime of genocide became an undisputed principle of modern international law.

16. It is a matter of course that the United Nations Charter by its abolition of war and of aggression, also prohibits genocide. For this matter, the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization passed in its first session in 1946 a resolution (Gen. Ass. res. 9611/Dec. 11, 1946) affirming that genocide is a crime under international law (see Annex no. I).

17. Instead of establishing a Standing Commission on Genocide, the UNO General Assembly passed its resolution 260A (111) of Dec. 9, 1948 adopting a Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and calling upon all States to sign and ratify it or accede to it (see Annex no. II). The Genocide Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and in March 1988 the total number of States Parties was 96 only, and the signatories were 4.

18. Article II of the Convention defines genocide as follows:

Article II: “genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religious group, as such
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to revent births within the group;
(c) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”.

Struggle against occupation

19. The Chechen and Ingush people did not accept the re-occupation of their country by Moscow under the Red Army. They resisted by all available means in the 1920’s and the 1930’s This took place especially during the collectivization process, as many farmers retained their independence. The two main factors which underlined this resistance and struggle against occupation by the Red Army, are religion, being Islam, and the anti-Communist social system, being that of Muslims living in the north Caucasus natural setting.

Genocide by Moscow under Stalin

20. After the death of Lenin in 1924 Stalin extended the aggression of RSFSR on the nationalities and the religions which are not Russian. Stalin reacted to the resistance and the struggle against Moscow imperialism by committing genocide against the Chechens and the Ingushes.

21. The rich farmers were eliminated in the genocide operation of 1937-1938. The communist party of Chechen-Ingush was itself a target. While the Communist party in 1934 included 11.966 members, 3500 members were considered “undesirable”, 1500 members were declared “moved to another place”, and, in 1938, “822 members” were accused of being “enemy of the people” or of being “Trotskists” and disappeared.

22. Another large scale genocide operation was carried out in February 1944 The decision was taken in fact one year earlier by the Politburo and the General Staff of the Red Army. Stalin, Voroshilov, Kaganovitch, Khrushchev, Kalinin and Beria were of the opinion to postpone the deportation until the German enemy leaves the country. Molotov, Zjdanov, Vosnesenski, and Andrejev were of the opinion that deportation had to take place immediately.

23. The Stalin’s large scale genocide operation started on 23 February 1944 by deporting more than 400.000 Chechens and 90 000 Ingushes to Central Asia and Siberia. Only 2000 persons could escape to the mountains the Chechens living in North Asset were also deported The deportation operation took only three days and was carried out by the so-called “People’s Commissioner for Internal Affairs”, Lavrenti Beria, who was also a member of the Politburo and of the State Defense Committee.

24. The total genocide deportation operation was kept secret. Only two years after its commission, namely on 26 June 1946, lzvestia published a small note. The Presidium of the RSFSR Supreme Soviet issued a decree signed by the Chairman of the Presidium, I.Vlasov, and its secretary, P.Bachumorov, announcing that the Crimean Tatars and the Chechens were deported to another place in the USSR, ignoring mentioning the deported Ingushes, and that the Chechen-Ingush ASSR was officially dissolved on 7 March 1944 The reasons given were that the great majority committed treason and collaborated with the German Army This reason was untruthful, because, as the Great Soviet Encyclopedia itself states’, the Chechens and Ingushes fought and aided the front in the war with Germany (1941-1945), they supplied food to the army, and their oil industry worked hard to supply the front.

25. The genocidal deportation took only three days and was done by a sudden action causing total surprise and psychic paralysis. On 23 February (1944), the Red Army Day, men were taken prisoners. Women and children were collected from their homes and transported with the trucks which were delivered by the USA for the war effort against Germany. Each family was allowed 20 kg luggage. All their possessions, houses, lands and cattle were robbed from them by the RSFSR. The trucks brought them directly and speedily to their exile. During the deportation, 20% of the people died due to weather conditions and hunger The officers of the Ministry of the Interior, B.Koboulov and I.Serov, were in charge of keeping the deportees in settlements their first years in exile caused the death of many of them due to the climate, hard work and epidemics. The demographic loss was estimated at 38% of the Chechen and Ingush peoples. Besides physical genocide through genocidal deportation, cultural genocide was also committed because of the obstruction of their intellectual life and national education. Moreover, the methods of the Police State were applied. In the settlements, a supervisor was assigned to every ten houses. Air obligation to register oneself monthly was imposed, and later on was made. Permission from the police was needed to undertake many things. Traveling was permissible within tile range of 3 km. only. For longer trips, one was obliged to have a document. This intensified the psychic genocide already committed by the deportation. And on 26 November 1948, the USSR decreed that they are permanently deported with no right to return back to their country.

26. The genocidal deportation of the Chechens and Ingushes was not an isolated incident by itself. It represents the deliberate genocidal crime committed by Stalin and his genocide gang against many other nationalities and religions which are not Russian. The Karatchaiyans, Balkarians, Kalmukens were also deported as a measure of usurping the countries of non-Russian nations and destroying their identity.

27. The real reason for the genocidal deportations was strategic to secure the total control of north Caucasus as a buffer-territory in case of aggression from the south, especially that the north Caucasian nations are non-Slav Muslims, thus both anti-Russian and anti-communism. For this strategic reason, demographic genocide was not only committed by the demographic loss caused by the deportation, but also by intensifying the russification of the countries of the deported nations in order to camouflage the russification, some other nationalities were also brought in the count of the deported nation In Chechnya-Ingushetia not only Russians were brought in to settle, but also North-Ossetians, Avarians, Darginians, and Ukranians. This was done in order to destroy the identity of the country and its people and to avoid its persistent struggle to retrieve its independence.

28. All these genocidal crimes explain why the Chechen-Ingush ASSR was abolished by Stalin and his genocide gang on 7 March 1944. This we call political genocide. Moreover, the Prigorodnyi district was severed from it and added to North-Ossetia, as a measure of inciting future local problems capable of frustrating national aspirations and efforts for regaining independence. The territorial aggression we prefer to call territorial genocide because a nation can only enjoy its dignity and exercise its self-determination and sovereignty on its territory and has the right to territorial integrity. All these kinds of genocide have enforced the anti-Russian and anti-communism struggle of the Chechens, and their determination to regain their independence.
28.a. Ironic enough, Stalin – who committed with the help of his genocide-gang all those kinds of genocide – together with Roosevelt and Churchill, and “speaking in the interest of the thirty-two United Nations”, issued on November 1, 1943 a Declaration on genocide and its punishment, which stated:

“Those German officers and men and members of the Nazi party who have been responsible for, or have taken a consenting part in the above atrocities, massacres and executions, will be sent back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were done in order that they may be judged and punished according to the laws of these liberated countries and of the free governments which will be created therein… without prejudice to the case of the major criminals, whose offenses have no particular geographical localization and who will be punished by the joint decision of the Governments of the Allies”.

Repatriation under Khrushchev

29. Ironic enough, after the death of Stalin in 1953, Khrushchev, who was a member of his genocide-gang, adopted a de-Stalinization policy. The oppression of opposition and the genocide committed against non-Russian nations and religions brought the communist party itself and the RSFSR empire in danger of disintegration Khrushchev had to dissociate himself from that period and to gain support for himself. These circumstances opened the way for the repatriation of the Chechen and the Ingush peoples.

30. Firstly, decrees were gradually issued exempting more deportees from 11 registration” In June 1955, education in their own language and culture became permissible. They demanded rehabilitation and their return to their countries and the reinstituting of their autonomous republic. Many, estimated at 30 000, returned to Chechen-Ingush without permission from the authorities.

31. As late as the Twentieth Communist Party Congress in 1956, Khrushchev confessed that the Karatchaiyans, Balkarians and Kalmukians have been oppressed. He then even said that since the war ended in favor of the USSR, the deportations were not necessary. He also declared that the accusations made by Stalin against those nations and their deportation were illegitimate. The Central Committee of the Communist Party decreed on 24 November 1956 to restore the national autonomy of the Chechens and Ingushes. On 9 January 1957 the Supreme Soviet decreed to restore Chechen-Ingush as an ASSR under the RSFSR. The district of Prigorodnyi was not added back to Checheno-Ingushetia, but three other districts: Kargalinski, Naurski, and Shelkovski. The repatriation had to be in four years and M.G. Gairbekov was put in charge of its implementation. The russification which took place in twelve Years, from 1944 up to 1956, caused a number of problems the capital Grozny had already 540.000 inhabitants and 500.000 of the repatriated had to be added to them, thus shortage of housing, tension and conflict arose between the Russian colonial settlers on the one hand, and the Chechens and the Ingushes on the other hand. In 1958 armed conflict took place and caused a number of deaths, the departure of 36.000 Russians, and a demand by the Russian colonial settlers that the Chechens and Ingushes should be deported again. The problems were deliberately caused with the intention to impede the regaining of independence by the Chechens and the lngushians.

32. The repatriation operation was declared as fulfilled by a decree of the RSFSR Supreme Soviet on 26 April 1991, in which the restoration of the rights and the territorial integrity of the deported nations was promised. But such restoration did riot take place until now.

33. Other deported nations demanded also to be repatriated to their countries.

Exploitation by Moscow

34. The communist principle of the abolition of the exploitation of man by man did not apply to the exploitation of a nation by another nation. This principle was violated in the inter-national relations among the nations making up the RSFSR, in order to save and enrich imperial Moscow at all costs. The exploitation of Chechen-Ingush ASSR by the Russian empire under the Red Army is called “selfless aid to the people of the entire Soviet Union” and is intensified in the 1960’s and the 1970’s. For this so-called “selflessness”, the republic was “awarded” the “Order of Lenin” in 1965 and the “Order of the October Revolution” and the “Order of Friendship of Peoples” in 1972(6). The “close economic alliance” which Lenin urged in June 1920 meant the obstruction of the independence of Chechnya and other north Caucasian nations lie actually urged the maintenance of the exploitation of Chechnya by imperial Russia, which exploitation started in 1893 when the first oilwell was drilled and the working class was composed mostly by colonialist Russians.

Conditions enhancing the struggle for independence

35. The Russification of Checheno-Ingushetia and the repatriation of the indigenous people of the country resulted in economic and social problems worsened by high unemployment, housing shortage, corruption, and the fact that tile colonialist Russians had the important jobs.

The struggle to regain independence

36. The above mentioned crisis led to the formation of two political parties:
36.1. The Vainakhskaya Democratic Party (VDP) under leadership of Zelimkhan Yandarbiev, striving to elevate Checheno-Ingushetia to the status of a Union Republic (under the Soviet Union), and
36.2. The National Congress of the Chechen People (NCCP) with an Executive Committee under the Chairmanship of Dzhoxar Dudaev, composed of the radical nationalists striving to independence, and supported by the Green Movement, the Movement of Democratic Reforms, the People’s Front, the Muslim organizations and the independent press.

37. These parties organized demonstrations. The first incident which marks the defiance of Moscow took place begin September 1989. The NCCP decided to dissolve the Supreme Soviet of Checheno-Ingushetia. The National Guard of the NCCP stormed the building of the Supreme Soviet and threw them out. The chairman, Dokku Zavgayev was taken prisoner and was forced to resign his function as President of Checheno-Ingushetia. The Executive Committee of the NCCP look over the functions of the Executive organs.

38. A reactionary step was taken by the chairman of the Russian parliament, Ruslan Khasboulatov, himself a Chechen, who formed a temporary higher council to prepare for parliamentary elections. The behaviour of the chairman of this council, Khoussein Akhmadov, led to his dismissal and the press labeled the council as the enemy of the people. The vice-president of the RSFSR, Alexander Routskoi, reinstated the council, with the chairmanship of Baouddin Bakhmadov.

39. The Presidium of the NCCP continued its armed resistance, mobilized all men and kept the National Guard alert. The people kept demonstrating for democracy and freedom.

40. In October 1990, Checheno-Ingushetia declared its sovereignty. And in July 1991, Ingushetia proclaimed its own republic, and decided by a referendum to remain under the RSFSR. It also claimed Prigorodnyi district which was given after the deportation to North-Ossetia.

41. In August 1991, the military coup took place in Moscow marking the collapse of the USSR and the coming in power of Boris Yeltsin.

42. On 6 September 1991, Dzhoxar Dudaev, the leader of NCCP, took a decisive step by dissolving the parliament and the cabinet. His presidency was legitimated by elections on 27 October 1991, which elections were declared invalid by Boris Yeltsin.

The declaration of independence and the reactions to it

43. On 9 November 1991 Dudaev proclaimed the independence of the Chechen Republic. This proclamation caused unrest among the Russian colonial settlers Boris Yeltsin reacted by declaring the state of emergency on 8 November 1991, and suspending the right to strike and the freedom of expression, calling all the people to deliver their weapons.

44. Dudaev called total mobilization of the peoples of the Caucasus against Russian imperialism, and warned the peoples to prepare themselves for war. The National Guard contained 5.000 military personnel and 60.000 volunteers, and the train and the airport were under Chechen control.

45. The Russian parliament sent to Grozny a delegation to intermediate, under the leadership of Routskoi and Khasboulatov, and the Supreme Soviet of RSFSR decided in an emergency meeting that the conflict must be solved with political means, in order to avoid the chain-reaction which earl be caused by the use of force. Despite this, Yeltsin sent troops. But these could not carry out their task, and ignored the order to arrest Dudaev. Under the pressure of the parliament, Yeltsin was obliged to end the state of emergency and to call back the troops. Yet the Russian parliament agreed that the borders of Chechnya be controlled against incoming or outgoing weapons.

46. In December 1991 a financial and arms blockade was imposed on Chechnya, and the oil was later on included in the blockade. The Russian army was also already occupying the regions of Malgobek and Sunzha, which Chechnya considers belonging to its territory. The parliament of Chechnya demanded that the federal army withdraws from Chechnya.

47. At the end of July 1993 Moscow recognized for Chechnya the status of a special autonomous republic. An agreement was also concluded between Dudaev and the President of Ingushetia, Ruslan Aushev, that the borders between the two countries shall not be demarcated.

48. Dudaev declared that Chechnya shall not take part in the elections of 12 December 1993 for the new parliament and new constitution of the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation reacted by including Chechnya in the new constitution as a member of the federation. Dudaev called this a provocation. And Shakhraj, the Chairman of the Committee of the Affairs of the Federation and Ethnic Relations, declared that Chechnya violated the constitution by refusing to convene the elections.

49. Dudaev agreed to establish confederative relations with the federation. But this was refused and Yeltsin, just before the elections of 12 December 1993, ordered that the borders of Chechnya be defined and controlled Dudaev considered this a declaration of war against Chechnya.

The Yeltsin-Grachev’s genocidal operation

50. One whole year later and specifically on 11 December 1994, Yeltsin and his Defense Minister, Grachev, started a large scale genocidal operation against Chechnya and all its people. Warplanes and heavy weapons were used to ruin Grozny, the capital, and the neighboring villages on their inhabitants.

51. The victims of this genocidal operation were riot only the Chechen people, but also the very young untrained and inexperienced soldiers who were sent simply to die or to be severely wounded. Moreover, the whole of the federation became also a victim of the costs of this genocidal operation.

52. Since the beginning of the genocidal operation on 11 December 1994, the Chechens continued to defend their country most bravely and selflessly.

53. On 9 February 1995, Yeltsin announced that the (genocide) job of the Russian Army in Chechnya ended, while that army was still carrying out its genocide mission. A cease-fire was announced but was not implemented, except for collecting the bodies of the dead by the genocide aggressors and the Chechen forces and people acting in self-defense and the others who were defenseless.

54. Yeltsin and his genocide-gang did not only commit genocide crimes against the Chechen people, but also against the members of their armed gangs who they call the Russian Army. An army in modern international law is for deterrence and self-defense in case of aggression. The Russian Army was reduced to armed gangs, both on the ground and in the air, by commissioning it to carry out the genocide-operation in Chechnya. Those heavily armed gangs were composed for the most of young ill trained and inexperienced people. A great number of them were killed during the genocide-operation. Their mothers formed a protest group but in vain. It is reported that the members of those armed gangs do not know the reasons for this genocide mission. Due to their very low morale they escape in drunkenness, while other young people are forced to join the Russian Army with the risk to be forced to take part in the genocide mission against Chechnya.

55. This is genocide against the young people and the others forced to commit genocide against Chechnya, because they are deliberately and unlawfully subjected to serious bodily and/or psychic harm on basis of their Russian nationals, in order to satisfy the morbid targets of those in Moscow suffering from mania imperialis, a disease which explanation follows.

56. During the genocide-operation a negotiation was entered into with the Chechen armed forces. While an agreement was reached to withdraw all Russian armed personnel from Chechnya before a general election takes place, Yeltsin decreed to have a permanent Russian military presence in Chechnya. His own negotiation team threatened to resign. He declared himself ready to review this decree. A nobel offer front Dudaev to step down in exchange for a recognition by RF of the sovereignty and independence of Chechnya was not accepted.

The imperialis chronic disease

57. From the emergence of the phenomenon “Russian Empire” in the 19th century until now, the imperial body in Moscow, being the capital of that empire, persists to exist at all costs and under any name, without regard to the emergence of modern international law which is based on self-determination of nations and peaceful coexistence. This persistence provides evidence that there is a virus imperialis which exists in the mind of the governing organ of the Russian Empire. The function of this virus is to urge that governing body to keep the parts of the empire under its domination. Any manifestations of the identity of non-Russian nations and non-Orthodox religions in the empire and any independence aspirations of those nations, form an attack against the virus imperialis. When this virus imperialis is attacked it causes febris imperialis, that is “imperial fever” which is, in this case, a mental abnormal condition characterized by nervous high temperature and morbid mental changes affecting behavior This morbid mental condition is the mania imperialis. It blocks sane thinking and sane reactions, thus leading to insane thinking and insane reactions. 11 is imperialist madness.

58. The said phenomena of virus, febris and mania imperialis are revealed by the repetitious nature of the insane aggressive extreme reactions of the governing organ of Moscow every time independence movements of non-Russian nations in the Russian empire become active The symptoms of this madness-process are:
58.1. The passing of the word Russia and Russians on all countries and nations within the empire.
58.2. The using of extreme and mad force to silence the voice of non-Russian and non-Orthodox nations and to destroy the physical identity of their countries. The same pattern of mad behavior occurred in destroying the building of their Imperial Parliament by Yeltsin.
58.3. The commission of genocide of all kinds, physical, cultural and demographic, against the non-Russian nations in order to eliminate the source of independence aspirations.
58.a These symptoms of mania imperialis took place in the case of Chechnya in 1817-1864, by Moscow under the Czar, then in 1920 by Moscow under the Red Army, then in 1944 by Moscow under the genocide gang of Stalin, and since December 1994 until now by the genocide gang of Yeltsin. This repetitious nature indicates a chronic imperial disease.
58.b One other symptom of this chronic imperial disease is that at each incident, the sane opposition of the Russians themselves comes under extreme repressive and oppressive measures.

2. THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL BASIS OF THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE
CHECHEN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPUBLIC

The continuity of States and of their territorial integrity

59. Since the prohibition of war and of the annexation of territories by force, the principle of the continuity of State has been recognized in order to counteract and affirm the illegality of occupation or annexation of foreign countries and territories.

60. The prohibition of war finds its roots in the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of international Disputes, signed at The Hague, on 18 October 1907. Then came the Covenant of the League of Nations which embodied in its preamble that the High Contracting Parties endeavor to promote international cooperation and to achieve international peace and security:

“by the acceptance of the obligation not to resort to war,
by the prescription of open, just arid honorable relations between nations,
by the firm establishment of the understandings of international law as the actual rule of conduct among Governments, and
by the maintenance of justice arid a scrupulous respect for all treaty obligations in the dealings of organized peoples with one another”.

61. The third source is the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy, of 27 August 1928 (came in force on 25 July 1929), known as the “Briand-Kellogg Pact”. The preamble stated:

“Deeply sensible of their solemn duty to promote the welfare of mankind;
Persuaded that the time has come when a frank renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy should be made to the end that peaceful and friendly relations now existing between their peoples may be perpetuated;
Convinced that all changes in their relations with one another should be sought only by peaceful and orderly process, and that any signatory Power which shall hereafter seek to promote its national interests by resort to war should be denied the benefits furnished by this Treaty…”

62. The declarations between 1941 and the signing of the Charter of the United Nations on 26 June 1945, also denunciated war and affirmed the necessity of peace and of uniting to implement the rule of law among nations As a matter of course the Charter of the United Nations reaffirms the same goals It states in its preamble:

“We, the people of the United Nations, determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war…, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, and for these ends
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall riot be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international] machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples, have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims.”

63. These Purposes and Principles are again stated in Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations:

“The purposes of the United Nations are:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end, to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion, and
4. To be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.”

64. Thus, since war is declared in tile preamble as an undesirable evil, Article 1.1 of UN Charter speaks of aggression and of collective measures for the prevention and removal thereof, and even of threats to the peace and breaches of the peace.

65. We must explain here the elements of statehood in international law. The writers follow a concept of statehood which is contrary to the prohibition of war and of the annexation of territories by force. They speak only of three material elements as sufficient components of statehood people, land and government. To these three elements one must add a fourth element, that is, the element of legality. The essence of law is to define what is legal and what is illegal If there is air international law and the state is subject of that law, there must be a condition or an element which distinguishes a legal state from an illegal one, a state which is recognizable as such by international law from that which is not recognizable as such. This element of legality cannot be other than the free exercise of self-determination of the indigenous people, their sovereignty over the whole of their territory and, hence, the territorial integrity of their state.

The continuity of the independence of the Republic of Chechnya

66. As mentioned above, the Republic of Chechnya regained its independence in 1917 by the fall of the Moscow Empire under the Czar. Its occupation by Moscow under the Red Army does not cause its statehood and independence to cease to exit. Occupation is an obstruction of statehood and independence, and not an extinguishment or a nullification thereof.
66.a The sovereignty and independence of the people and the Republic of Chechnya and their occupation by Moscow is revealed by the constitutions of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic and of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. We will deal with these so-called constitutions in what follows and qualify them legally with regard to their legitimacy in relation to the occupied and oppressed people of Chechnya.

The recognition of independence of Chechnya by the first Russian structure after the fall of the Czarist Russian Empire

67. In their message of 3 December 1917 “To all the Working Moslems of Russia and of the East”, V.I. Lenin, the Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars, and J.V. Stalin, People’s Commissar for Nationalities, condemned Western imperialism, recognized the independence of the national institutions of the Chechens, and of other nations which had fallen under the Russian empire, yet maintained the word “Russia” in order to inherit the Russian Empire, as will appear from the USSR constitution of 1923.

68. The said message of 3 December 1917 was concluded by stating:

“Comrades, brothers, we are advancing towards an honest, democratic peace firmly and resolutely.
On our banners we bring liberation to the oppressed peoples of the world
Moslems of Russia!
Moslems of the East!
On this road towards a renewal of the world we await your sympathy and support (emphasis are added).”

69. This bears a clear recognition of the right of Chechnya to restore and maintain its independence front the Russian empire. The recognition of the independence of the Muslims of Chechnya is made here on the same level as that of the Muslims in other countries of the East, such as Turkey, Iran, etc.

70. As mentioned above, the promised honest democratic peace and liberation of the oppressed peoples were ignored, as the Red Army invaded Chechnya in 1921-1922.

(In the period 1918-1922)
The confirmation of the independence under the first constitution of the RSFSR

71. The first constitution of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic (RSFSR) was adopted on 10 July 1918. Since this constitution was in force when Chechnya was occupied by the Red Army in 1921-1922, its provisions are applicable as the basic law of the occupying power.

72. This constitution affirmed under article 2 that: “The Russian Soviet Republic is established on the basis of a free union of free nations, as a federation of national Soviet Republics”. This article defines the RSFSR as a federation of various distinguishable “nations” having the international legal form of “republics” arid governed by representative bodies, “Soviets”.

73. The constitution affirmed the freedom to join the union by stating in Article 8:

“At the same time, striving to bring about the really free and voluntary, and, therefore, the complete and lasting union of’ the working classes of all the various nationalities of Russia, the Third all Russian Congress of Soviets confines itself to formulating the main principles of the Federation of the Soviet Republics of Russia, leaving to the workers and peasants of each nationality the right to decide freely, at their own national Congress of Soviets, whether they desire, and upon what basis they desire, to participate in the federal Government and in other federal Soviet institutions,” (emphasis added).

74. This is an affirmation of the sovereignty and independence of the republics constituting the federation, including Chechnya. It is an arrangement to unite to reach certain goals, rather than “one country” organizing itself in a federal form. The reason of this arrangement is recognized in the constitution the various nationalities uniting together to reach their common goals It is in fact a regional organization or a small regional “United Nations”.

75. Moreover, this affirmation of free will and independence, itself negates freedom by stating that the free decision must be exercised by the national Congress of Soviets, and not by a freely established representative body.

76. The subsequent question is whether the constitution envisaged secession. In fact, in its Article 49e it did deal with the “admittance” to and the “severance” from the union as falling within the competence of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and the All-Russian Central Committee. It stipulates: “The admittance of new members into the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic, and the recognition of the severance of those parts which have left the Russian Federation.” (emphasis added)

77. Firstly, Chechnya did not join freely but was occupied by the Red Army in 1921-1922 after it had regained its independence by the fall of the Russian empire, This means that, legally, it never formed a part of the RSFSR of 1918-1922.

78. Secondly, if Chechnya would have united freely it would have had the status of a sovereign independent nation and a “union republic” uniting with other nations and having the right to leave the RSFSR union.

79. If Chechnya would be considered to have been part the FSRR (Federation of the Soviet Republics of Russia) which emerged in 1918, Chechnya would nave been entitled to free association and free secession.

80. But Chechnya did not join freely and was prevented from secession In fact, the Czar empire was revived under a new form called “All-Russian Central Executive Committee”.

81. Front the outset, a dictatorship emerged calling itself the dictatorship of the proletariat or the working people, while the communist party assuming this kind of dictatorship was and remained a minority.

82. That committee decreed on 20 January 1920 to annex Chechnya and Ingushetia under the Gorskaya Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic of the RSFSR. The Red Army carried out the new imperial decision by annexing Chechnya by force in 1921-1922.

83. On 20 November 1922, Chechnya was separated from Gorskaya ASSR and made an Autonomous Region under the RSFSR.

84. Since Chechnya was forced to be part of the RSFSR, its legal status can only be qualified as an obstructed independent sovereign nation and an obstructed state under international law.

Under the 1922 Treaty of Union of the USSR:

85. A Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was established to include the countries in which the Party in Moscow and the Red Army succeeded to secure the manipulation of the people and power with false hopes for national freedom, equality, and security, not only in the RSFSR but also in Ukraine, White Russia, and the Trans-Caucasus which included Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.

86. The 1922 Treaty of Union of the USSR adopted on 30 December 1922, had the following features.
86.1. It followed the structure of the RSFSR by having union republics coming together on the same model of the RSFSR But, under the heading “The Treaty of Union”, which makes it, like the RSFSR, a true international regional organization, a small United Nations, uniting by means of a treaty. The international character of the Union is stressed in the Declaration of Union which is the preamble of the Treaty of Union. The Declaration of Union stated: “Finally, the very structure of the Soviet power, which is international in its class character, urges the working masses of the Soviet Republics along the path of union into one socialist family”. Yet, the true intention to revive imperial Russia is revealed by the statement of the Declaration of Union which followed: “All these considerations imperatively demand the union of the Soviet Republics into a single state”. This statement continues by mentioning the goals enhancing the creation of the Union as one state, while those goals, considering the differing nations making up the union, are better achieved by keeping the union as an international regional organizations: “…powerful enough to ensure internal economic prosperity, security from foreign attacks, and the free development of her peoples according to their nationality”. On these imperial premises, the Declaration of Union concluded by calling the Union as a “new united State”, not as united States.
86.2. It treated the RSFSR as one union republic The other union republics are the Ukrainian SSR, the White Russian SSR, and the Trans-Caucasian SFSR (Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia).
86.3. It recognized that the USSR union republics which are mentioned have also the right to
secede, this time more clearly stated under Article 26, thus: “Each of the united republics retains its full liberty to leave the Union if it so desires”.
86.4. It furthered the constitutional manipulation by considering the RSFSR as a union Federative republic without any reference to its constituent parts or the status thereof.

87. Neither the Declaration of Union, tier the Treaty of Union denied the right of the constituent nations of the RSFSR to free association in and free withdrawal from the RSFSR Legally speaking, the constituent parts of the RSFSR, retained their right to secede from it, which secession would automatically mean their secession from the USSR.

88. It is therefore legally valid to conclude that if Chechnya would have joined the RSFSR freely, it would have retained its right to secede front the RSFSR, after that the RSFSR became a union Federative republic of the USSR in 1922.

89. Since Chechnya was forced to be part of the RSFSR, it retained its legal status as an obstructed independent sovereign nation and an obstructed state under international law.

Under the USSR constitution of July 6, 1923

90. This constitution was in fact a re-statement of the 1922 USSR Treaty of Union. It consisted of a Declaration of Union as a preamble and a Covenant.

91. In its new version, the Declaration of Union affirmed “the voluntary association of… sovereign nations on a basis of equality, each republic reserving for itself the right of free withdrawal from the Union”.

92. The Declaration of Union and the Covenant carried further the constitutional manipulation by treating the RSFSR as a union republic of the USSR, as if it were representing one single nation, and, consequently, without referring to its constituent sovereign nations.

93. But Article 15 of the Covenant recognizes the right of autonomous territories of the RSFSR to be represented in the Council of Nationalities, which, with the Council of the Union, form the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, which is the supreme authority of the USSR during the intervals of sessions of the Soviet Congress.

94. Recognizing this right, means that Chechnya had assumed air equal status within the structure of the USSR, which status gave it the power to share in the supreme authority of the USSR.

95. Moreover, neither the Declaration of Union nor the Covenant denies the constituent sovereign nations of the RSFSR the right to free association in and free withdrawal from the RSFSR. Therefore, Chechnya retained its right to free association in and free withdrawal from the RSFSR as was affirmed under the RSFSR constitution of 1918-1922.

96. Since Chechnya was forced to be part in the RSFSR, its inclusion in the structure of the
USSR is illegal and does not change its status as an obstructed independent sovereign nation and an obstructed state under international law.

In the period July 6, 1923 – December 6, 1936

97. Already on 7 July 1924, the Gorskaya ASSR was abolished and an Ingush Autonomous Region was established. On 15 January 1934 the Chechen and Ingush Autonomous Regions were added together as one autonomous region.

98. This act of adding the two regions to be one region is a violation of the sovereignty and independence of each nation, whatever historical ties they have. Chechnya retains its status of being an abstracted independent nation and an obstructed state under international law.

Under the USSR constitution of 6 December 1936

99. This constitution is the first in which Chechnya is mentioned. It states under Article 22 that the Checheno-Ingush Republic is an Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, within the RSFSR The inclusion of the Checheno-Ingush Republic under the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was forced on it by that article, as having been a part of the Russian empire under the Czar, which inclusion is a violation of the principle of “really free and voluntary” association of free nations pronounced under Article 8 of the constitution of 1918 of the RSFSR, and also a violation of the right to secession recognized under Article 49e of that constitution. The Republic of Checheno-Ingush has riot joined the RSFSR freely, and the presence of the RSFSR in its territory can only be legally qualified as an occupation The resistance to this occupation amounts at least to secession.

100. Under this constitution, the Chechen-Ingush Republic is equally treated by sharing through elections in the higher organs of state power of the USSR (Articles 34 and 35). Moreover, it enjoys full sovereignty own constitution, own legislature, and own cabinet (Articles 89-93). The only limitation is that its constitution must be in conformity with the RSFSR constitution (Article 92), which by its turn must be in conformity with the USSR constitution (Article 16).

101. After the amendment of 1 February 1944, the Chechen-Ingush Republic was still mentioned under Article 22 as an Autonomous Soviet Republic with the same status as mentioned above.

102. This status under the USSR constitution of 1936 links the Chechen nation as part of the Chechen-Ingush ASSR directly with the USSR, which means that the fall of the USSR leads to the termination of that direct relation and the regaining of full independence and sovereignty.

103. Again, since the initial inclusion of Chechnya under the RSFSR was forced on it, it retains its status as a sovereign nation. whose independence and statehood are obstructed.

The legal qualification of the genocidal deportation of the Chechen people in 1944

104. The aforementioned forms of genocide committed against the Chechens and the Ingushes, present at least a violation of the treaty concluded to form the regional super-structures of the RSFSR and later of the USSR. The kind and the seriousness of the violation committed, amounts to a total repudiation of the treaty by the regime in Moscow, representing the USSR and the RSFSR, not only as far as the Chechen and the Ingush peoples are concerned, but also in regard to all the other nations, whether deported or not.

105. If Checheno-Ingushetia had ever been legally part of the RSFSR or the USSR, the genocidal forms committed against its peoples in 1944 result in its total dissociation from those structures, and its regaining the initial stage of its existence, that is, independence and full sovereignty.
105.a. The genocide of a nation under a common structure by the central authority of that structure is a renunciation of the legal tie and a destruction thereof.

Under the amendment of 25 February 1947 of USSR constitution of 1936

106. In the amendment of February 1, 1944 of the USSR constitution of 1936, the Chechen-Ingush Republic was still mentioned under Article 22 as an ASSR.

107. In the amendment of February 25,1947, the Checheno-Ingush Republic was not mentioned under Article 22 as an ASSR. It was demoted to the rank of just a “region” within the RSFSR. A region has powers of a local government under the authority of a Soviet of Working People’s Deputies which are elected by the working people of the region (Article 95), and elects by its turn the Executive Committee (Article 99). This executive organ is accountable both to the Soviet of Working People’s Deputies and to the superior Soviet of Working People’s Deputies (Article 101).

108. The same demotion was retained in the amendment of 1 June 1949 of the constitution of the USSR of 1936.

109. The system of the USSR or the RSFSR does not embody a demotion possibility of the constituent sovereign nations, but rather a promotion possibility Article 14 which deals with the scope of the jurisdiction of the USSR stipulates (under its paragraph no. vi) that the USSR has the power of “approval of the formation of new Autonomous Republics and Autonomous Regions within Union Republics”. A distinct trend to promote the materialization of the independent sovereign status of the constituent nations can be observed in the status of the ASSR’s. The demotion of the Checheno-Ingush Republic front the status of an ASSR is therefore illegal arid can only be legally qualified as legal anarchy arid high treason against the constitution of the superstructure and the sovereign nations in question.

110. The demotion took place as a means of territorial and political genocide committed by the genocide-gang of Stalin.

111. Analytically speaking, the demotion of Checheno-Ingushetia from the status of an ASSR to that of a region, comprises two legal realities the dismissal front the status of an ASSR and its re-admission as a region. The dismissal from the status of an ASSR means the total departure front the USSR and the RSFSR. The re-admission as a region is illegal and void, because it must be based on the free will of Checheno-Ingushetia, and that republic did not exercise its free will to that effect. The free will of association is the basic law of the treaty bond between the differing sovereign nations making up the USSR and the RSFSR. One must conclude that, since this so-called demotion, Chechnya-Ingushetia seized legally to be part of the USSR and the RSFSR, if the previous relationship could ever be called a legal one After the dismissal and the involuntary re-admission, Chechnya-Ingushetia was simply submitted by force to the structures of the USSR and the RSFSR.

112. The length of the period in which this dismissal and involuntary re-admission took place, adds to the validity of this legal qualification. This dissociation measure covered the period 7.3.1944 until 9.1.1957.

Under the amendment of 1960 of the USSR constitution, of 1936

113. The Checheno-Ingush republic is reinstated as an ASSR, with tile sovereignty and powers which goes with this status.

114. This is equally an involuntary re-admission contrary to the principle of free association which formally underlies the regional super-structures of the RSFSR and the USSR.

115. This involuntary re-admission as an ASSR stands illegal and invalid, and results in the continuation of the subjection of the Republic of Chechnya-Ingushetia by force to the Moscow regime.

Under the USSR constitution of 7 October 1977

116. The important remark to make here is that this constitution reaffirms in its preamble the ideas and principles of’ the first RSFSR constitution of 1918, and of the constitutions of 1924 and 1936 of the USSR This means that it reaffirms the right to secession recognized by the RSFSR constitution of 1918 to the constituent union Republics of the RSFSR.

117. These provisions reaffirm the legal fact that Checheno-Ingushetia was never a legal part of the RSFSR because it never voluntarily joined this regional super-structure. These provisions also admit the right of the Republic of Chechnya-Ingushetia to secede from that regional superstructure.

118. Moreover, this constitution reaffirms the status of’ the Checheno-Ingush Republic as an Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, with the same sovereign powers (Articles 82 and 83), as in the 1936 construction Article 84 adds the affirmation of the territorial integrity. In other words, it extends the involuntary re-admission of tile Checheno-Ingush Republic to the membership of the regional superstructures of the RSFSR or the USSR, and thereby gives a false constitutional cover to the continued forced subjection of that republic to the Moscow superstructures of the RSFSR and the USSR.

Under the RSFSR constitution of 13 April 1978

119. This constitution opens by asserting that “Soviet power has guaranteed equality and free self-determination for all the peoples of Russia”, which cannot hold true in the case of the occupation, genocide and russification of, among others, the Chechen-Ingush Republic and its peoples In other words, this constitution re-affirms the forced subjection of that republic to the Moscow super-structures of the RSFSR and the USSR, against the free will of its people and despite their continuing resistance.

120. Most important is that the constitution also reaffirms the ideas and principles of the RSFSR constitutions of 1918, 1925 and 1937 This means that it reaffirms the right to self-determination, the right to free association with the RSFSR, and the right to secession, on which rights the RSFSR is based

121. This is untrue in the case of Chechen-Ingush Republic which this constitution still refers to under Article 71 as an ASSR. The statement under Article 68 is equally untrue that the RSFSR “has united -as a result of the free self-determination of nations and on a voluntary and equal basis – together with the Soviet Socialist Republics”. Firstly, the RSFSR is not made up of one nation, but is on the contrary made up of a number of differing nations. Secondly, the Chechen and Ingush nations did not enter the RSFSR voluntarily The same applies to many other nations under the RSFSR.

122. In any case, this constitution recognizes the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Republic as a Soviet Socialist State, and independent outside the limits of the rights of the USSR and the RSFSR, its constitution shall conform to these limits (Article 78), and its territory may not be altered without its consent (Article 80) As far as its relations with the federal government and the USSR are concerned, it “participates in the resolution of questions within the jurisdiction of the RSFSR and the USSR through the supreme organs of state power and administration of the RSFSR and the USSR respectively” (Article 79).

123. The legal form of the federation is again characteristic of a regional United Nations, rather than of one unitary federal state, the reason for this, is that the various nations which make up the RSFSR Could trot otherwise remain together tinder one form of organization.

The legal effect of the collapse of the USSR on August 1991

124. It is widely considered that the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics started by the failure of the coup d’etat of August 1991.

125. It is a matter of course and a legal consequence that the obligation to remain affiliated with one form of organization ends when the organization starts to collapse or collapses altogether. The members of the former organization will have duties and rights regarding the assets of the collapsed organization and the liquidation of those assets.

126. In other words, arguendo, and without regard to the right to secession retained by the constituent republics of the RSFSR, if the Republic of Chechnya would have been a voluntary member to the RSFSR, and the RSFSR, representing all its members, including the Republic of Chechnya, became a member in the USSR, the collapse of the USSR will result in the following claim by the Republic of Chechnya. The Republic of Chechnya remained a part of the RSFSR because the RSFSR was also part of the USSR, and by the collapse of the USSR, the structure of the organization ill which Chechnya was a part has drastically changed, so that it uses its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity to establish new inter-national relations with its full consent based on the free exercise of the right of self-determination by its people. This is the inure so because the uniting factor or raison d’etre of the RSFSR and the USSR is abandoned: socialist federalism, and is replaced by a so-called free market economy.

127. All the other republics of the RSFSR are found in the same legal situation and face the same legal consequences.

128. Although this is simple, reasonable and fair, one cannot expect this to be easy to comprehend by Moscow and the beneficiaries of the old structure As mentioned above, the virus imperialis of which Moscow is suffering is likely to cause high fever and extreme feverish action when a republic, facing the collapsed structure and the end of the raison d’etre thereof, exercises its statehood, sovereignty and independence in full.

The legal qualification of the Chechenian Declaration of Independence of 1 November 1991

129. The legal consequences of the collapse of the USSR urged the people of the Republic of Chechnya to exercise their equal sovereignty and to reaffirm their independence as a state by itself not belonging ally more to any superstructure.

130. Moreover, the people of Chechnya had already suffered front occupation, oppression and genocide by the same superstructure which was illegally forced on them.

131. The declaration of independence of the Republic of Chechnya took place on 1 November 199l on basis of the general elections held for this purpose in the presence of international observers.

132. This declaration of independence is legally valid because of the legal consequences of the collapse of the USSR superstructure and because of the fact that the statehood, sovereignty and independence of the republic of Chechnya never ceased to exit, and were at times obstructed arid at other times recognized by the superstructure (USSR and RSFSR). So that the remnants of the collapsed super-structure who attempt at establishing a new superstructure cannot claim any obligation of any of the republics members of the collapsed super-structure to join the new super-structure

133. Furthermore, on all States, within or without a new regional super-structure, falls the legal obligation to respect this declaration of independence and to conduct their relations with the Republic of Chechnya on basis of mutual arid equal recognition, equal rights, and cooperation, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of modern international law.

The legal qualification of the position of Moscow and its declaration of the state of emergency in Chechnya

134. Despite the aforementioned international legal facts, Moscow took the imperialist, illegal and illegitimate position that the Chechen Declaration of Independence would be an act of unpermissible secession, arid on 8 November 1991 unilaterally declared a state of emergency in the republic of Chechnya. This declaration is a violation of Article 30 of the RSFSR 1978 constitution which states that duties of state organs on security matters are defined by USSR legislation. The USSR had already collapsed on the hands of the RSFSR led by Yeltsin, but its formal existence was still recognized.

135. Moscow placed the Chechen Republic under economic and military blockade. It also sent troops into the republic The troops refused to arrest Dudaev and, under the pressure of the Parliament, Yeltsin withdrew the state of emergency and called the troops back. The Parliament agreed on the military blockade of the Chechen Republic.

136. On this basis the Parliament of the RSFSR entered into negotiation with the independent Chechen Republic, in recognition of its equal sovereignty and territorial integrity The subject of the negotiations were secession from the RSFSR and the entering into another kind of relations with it The negotiations between the Parliament of the RSFSR and the independent Chechen Republic qualifies as a recognition of the sovereign free will of that republic and its right to self-determination.

Chechen Republic fulfills the criteria of statehood

137. Besides the fulfillment of the element of legality in statehood by freely exercising its right to self-determination arid declaring its independence, the Chechen Republic, by April J992 had already acquired all the means to run the State and to defend its independence: its own air force with two air bases, an army, a secret service, and its own constitution (12 March 1992).

The Federation Treaty of the Russian Federation of 31 March 1992

138. The above mentioned legal consequences of the collapse of the superstructure of the USSR and the resulting absolute sovereignty and independence rights of the republics under the RSFSR, enhanced the organs of the RSFSR to seek a new form of cooperation with a new regional super-structure.

139. On basis of negotiations a Federation Treaty for a new Russian Federation was adopted and signed on 31 March 1992 by all republics of the overthrown RSFSR, except the Chechen Republic, the Ingush Republic and the Tatarstan Republic. The Chechen Republic had already declared itself independent on 1 November 1991, and the Tatarstan Republic followed in January 1992.

140. As to the Ingush Republic, it was proclaimed in July 1991. After the Federation Treaty was concluded, a referendum in the Ingush Republic resulted in opting to remain part of the RF. It was instated as a Republic of the RF by a decision of the Supreme Soviet of the RF of 4 June 1992. The border lines of 1934 were accepted by the Chechen and the Ingush Republics through the intermediation of the Prime Minister of the RF, Gaydar.

141. The Federation Treaty itself provides for the validity of the position of the Chechen Republic not to have been party of the treaty, and not to have signed it. The Federation Treaty embodies, under its preamble, the principles of “pursuing the goal of the achievement and reinforcement of inter-ethnic agreement, trust, and mutual understanding”, of “the right of national groups to self-determination”, and of “striving for the qualitative renewal of federal relations on the basis of the voluntary distribution of powers”. Accordingly it affirms, under Article VIII, the principle that the Sovereign Republics are free to sign the treaty, have the right to sign it, and are under no obligation whatsoever to sign it. This affirmation provides ample evidence that the older super-structure of the RSFSR was abandoned and implicitly declared terminated and void.

142. Considering the sufferings of the Chechens tinder the RSFSR and the USSR, their republic could not be expected to be party to this Federation Treaty, especially since its preamble includes a statement which those people know well to be insincere, untrue and false, and thus cannot accept it. The statement is: “with manifest respect for the history, traditions, culture, language, and national dignity of the peoples of the Russian federation”.

143. It might be argued that the treaty did not cover the question of membership in the Russian Federation, but, as its sub-title states, the delineation of spheres of jurisdiction and authority between federal government and the governments of the sovereign republics members of the federation. The treaty having carried the top title Federation Treaty, and having explicitly stated tile freedom of the republics to sign it or riot to sign it, is in fact concerning the terms of association or federation, on which basis the republics are entering into the new Russian Federation. Without freely signing it, no republic can be claimed to be a member of the federation. It is inconceivable how a republic be a member of the federation, if it did not “freely” sign that treaty or did not sign it at all. The core of the treaty is that it involves a surrender of a part of the sovereignty and independence of the republics signing it. In the absence of signing it or the absence of freely signing it, the republic or republics in question retain their full sovereignty and independence from the federation.

144. The appearance of the Russian Federation as a signatory to the Federation Treaty is therefore misleading, because tile new Russian Federation could not have existed before signing the treaty. From another angle, signing the treaty by the Russian Federation affirms its awareness and recognition of the exercise of self-determination by the Chechen Republic “not to be part in the treaty”. The same applies to the Ingush Republic and to Tatarstan.

145. Again, for the sake of argument, had the Republic of Chechnya been a party to that treaty, its legal status would have been as follows:
145.1 It would have been recognized as a Sovereign Republic and a State with all powers as a matter of principle, except those delegated with its consent to the Federal bodies according to the treaty (Article III.1).
145.2 It would have had, jointly with the federal bodies, the power to conduct international relations (Article Ill.2).
145.3 It would have had the power to agree or not agree on the definition of the status of the federal natural resources (Article III.3).
145.4 It would have had the power to give or not give its consent to a declaration of a state of emergency within its territory (Article III.4).
145.5 It would have, jointly with federal bodies, jurisdictional sovereignty which cannot be changed unilaterally by one party (Article II.1).

146. The same form of organization as that of the former USSR can be detected. The new Russian Federation is also a regional United Nations, rather than a federation under domestic law. It is of the nature of a inure integrated regional international organization as the one the European Community is trying to establish.

147. Considering the insistence of the Republic of Chechnya on its declaration of independence, the question which would arise is whether a party to that Federation Treaty has the right to secede. The legal principle is that the right to free association gives the right to free dissociation. Compulsion to remain associated will be a negation and a violation of free association. The reason behind this is that the realities might become different or changes might take place so that dissociation becomes a necessity to safeguard, in this case, the national interest of a republic which had freely signed the Federation Treaty.

148. It follows that any action preventing secession will be an act of aggression against the people and the republic who decide to secede.

149. The procedure and the legal consequences of dissociation are other questions, not that dissociation be prevented by force.

150. Since a treaty is an international act which falls under international law, the application of the law of treaties is both inevitable and necessary.

151. The Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties of 1969 affirms in its preamble that “disputes concerning treaties, like other international disputes, should be settled by peaceful mean, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law“. Also in its preamble, it affirms that treaties should be in conformity with “the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, such as the principles of the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, of the sovereign equality and independence of all States, of noninterference in the domestic affairs of States, of the prohibition of the threat or use of force and of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all”.

152. Article 44.3 (c) implies that when the continued performance of a treaty is unjust, there is ground for invalidating, terminating, withdrawing from or suspending the operation of a treaty.

153. Considering these principles of the Treaty of Treaties and the genocidal aggression against a Republic which is not a member of the Federation Treaty of the RF, the manner of implementing that treaty and hence its validity raise serious objections.

The legal consequences of the extinction of the USSR on 8 December 1992

154. The imperial Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ceased to exist formally on 8 December 1992, which fact can only legally result in the freedom of the people and the Republic of Chechnya to re-assume their full sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence, without any obligation whatsoever to remain or to become part of any structure which existed compulsorily under the former imperial Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or under the former imperial RSFSR which was an extension of imperial Czarist Russia.

The Republic of Chechnya and the RF constitution of 12 December 1993

155. Despite the aforementioned legal facts, and despite the fact that the constitution of the Russian Federation of 12 December 1993 is based on “the commonly recognized principles of equality and self-determination of the peoples” (preamble), it imposes upon the Chechen Republic the status of being a subject of the federation (Article 65), which is, in terms of law, untrue and false, and is thereby air aggression against the independent people and Republic of Chechnya. It is air involuntary annexation to the federation and an illegally forced subjection to its superstructure.

156. The inclusion of the Chechen Republic in the 1993 constitution of the RF is also in contradiction with its provision under Article 33 which states: “The referendum and free elections shall be the supreme direct manifestation of the power of the people”.

157. The people of the Chechen Republic had already declared their will through elections to be independent from the collapsed USSR and its RSFSR.

The legal qualification arid the legal effects of resorting to aimed force against the independent Republic of Chechnya

158. It is well founded in fact and in law that the Chechen Republic regained again its independence by the collapse of the USSR and the RSFSR and by its self-determination not to enter into the newly formed Russian Federation.

159. The use of armed force by the Russian Federation against the independent Chechen Republic is an act of aggression which fills under the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.

160. This act of aggression manifests again the mania imperialis of the regime in Moscow, because even if the Republic of Chechnya would be part to the Russian Federation, the Federation Treaty of March 1992 states under Article VI that disputes between the federal government and government bodies of the republics “will be settled with the obligatory use of conciliation procedures in the manner stipulated in the Constitution and laws of the Russian Federation”. The use of armed force against the Chechen Republic is contrary to that provision.

161. The use of armed force reveals that Moscow is aware of the sound legal grounds of the independence of the Chechen republic and that Moscow wants to crush that independence at all costs. An act beyond aggression.

162. The committed aggression does not only present a grave crime against the Chechen Republic and its people, but also against the RF itself and its constituent sovereign States.

163. No law of a civilized political entity permits, in the given circumstances, resorting to armed force against a people who expressed their will to be independent, The aggravating circumstances of the committed genocide crime are the following:
163.1 The opposition expressed continuously against the genocidal armed aggression.
163.2 The insistence of the Parliament on solving the question by peaceful negotiation.
163.3 The resignation of a number of army generals in protest to the ongoing genocide.
163.4 The denial of the RE treaty provision that disputes regarding publishing legal instruments or matters of joint jurisdiction will be settled by the Federal Constitutional Court. Even if the actual dispute which gave rise to the committing of genocide would be included under the jurisdiction of the Federal Constitutional Curt, that Court was suspended by Yeltsin in October 1993.

164. The legal effect vis-а-vis the sovereign States members of the RE is that they are threatened with the use of force against them if they exercise their right to secede from the federation. This threat means that their remaining in the federation is forced upon them, whatever the application of the Federation Treaty may be in reality. This “threat” and “forcing” present a violation of the Federation Treaty capable of considering it gravely violated and invalidated. The more so, because this state of affairs presents a grave violation of a number of peremptory norms of modern international law, such as peaceful coexistence, settlement of disputes by peaceful means, the prohibition of war and of genocide, respect for and observance of human rights, etc… (compare Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties).

165. It follows that the sovereign States parties to the Federation Treaty have the right to repudiate it and to withdraw from it. Besides the legal basis mentioned above, the nature of that treaty gives them that right. And it could not have been intended by the parties to that treaty that they would not have the right to denunciate it and withdraw from it, even after such a grave and genocidal violation takes place (see Article 56 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties).

166. The total genocidal aggression of the federal government against the people and the Republic of Chechnya, is the gravest breach of the Federation Treaty. It could have not been intended by the parties to that treaty that such an aggression would be committed against a sovereign State, whether party to the treaty or otherwise. According to Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the parties to the treaty or the aggrieved party, are entitled to suspend the operation of the treaty or to terminate it in case of a material breach, which is, in this case, “the violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty”. Any party is also entitled to suspend or terminate the treaty in case the breach of the treaty radical] changes the position of every party with respect to the further performance of its obligations under the treaty. The breach committed is the use of armed force and in a genocidal operation against a sovereign State because it used its freedom not to sign the Federation Treaty, which use of genocidal armed force has aggravated the economic crisis, with its effect on all the sovereign States members of the federation Moreover, it was not the purpose of the Federation Treaty that the federal government would abuse its authority to such an extent.

167. The ways in which the federal government is conducted presents a “fundamental change of circumstances” on basis of which the sovereign States consented to sign the Federation Treaty, which change causes a radical transformation in the extent of the obligations still to be performed under the treaty (Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) In the case at hand, the sovereign States are facing new obligations to participate in and to carry out the burden of such aimed genocidal operations against other sovereign States members or non-members of the Federation Treaty.

168. The legal bases for renouncing the Federation Treaty do not mean that the sovereign States members of the federation are not under certain obligations in face of the said genocidal use of armed force by their federal government. We will deal with these obligations later on.

The legal effects of the recommission of genocide against the people and Republic of Chechnya

169. There is unrefutable evidence of the acts which are being committed against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya since 11 December 1994. Those acts present a continuous, intensive and indiscriminate criminal use of the army of Moscow, and constitute an ongoing crime of genocide Boris Yeltsin the head of the political entity in Moscow recognized himself on 18 January 1995 that genocide is being committed against the people of the Republic of Chechnya, and asserted that he himself is in control.

170. Those genocidal acts are continuing despite the resolution of the Parliament in Moscow to resort to peaceful negotiation, the opposition’s declarations and stands, and the resignation of a number of army leaders and of the human rights commissioner of the RF.

171. Moscow under Boris Yeltsin is now encouraged in its genocidal operation against the independent people and the Republic of Chechnya by the approval and the intensification of genocide in other parts of the world in this era of genocide, with the collaboration of the Powers in the name of the United Nations, just as it (Moscow) was encouraged under Joseph Stalin to commit continued genocide against the same people at the beginning of this era of genocide which first witnessed genocide committed by the Nazi’s and by dropping the atom bombs on Japan by the USA.

172. Even in case the Republic of Chechnya would have been a member in the Russian Federation, its declaration of independence, or the declaration of independence of any other member of the federation, could not be met with a total destructive genocidal aggression. When such an aggression takes place, as in the case of Chechnya, it is not only a grave violation of treaty relations, and thereby a de facto and de jure termination of the treaty, but is also a total violation of international law. Such an aggression can only result in the factual and legal dissociation of the sovereign State Party to the Federation Treaty and victim of such an aggression ‘ since a federation formed by consent cannot be maintained by force, let alone by total destructive genocidal aggression.

173. To conclude, in case Chechnya could be considered to have been member of the RF, the genocidal aggression of the RF against Chechnya results inevitably in the dissociation of that republic from the RE, and in regaining its full independence and sovereignty under international law.

174. Since Chechnya is not existing in a vacuum, and there is a modern international law which applies to relations between nations, and even to relations between States and their subjects, we shall deal with the international obligations and liabilities of the RF and of its constituent sovereign States, as well as of all other States. But before doing so, we shall introduce the question of obligation and liability in general, and under international law in particular.

3. A GENERAL VIEW OF OBLIGATION AND LIABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
(WITH REFERENCE TO THE GENOCIDAL AGGRESSION AGAINST CHECHNYA)

The place of obligation and liability in the body of law (7)

A body of law is inconceivable without obligation and liability, civil and criminal “Obligation” is “a generic word derived front ‘obligatio’ . That which a person is bound to do or forbear, any duty imposed…”. “Liability” is the condition of being responsible for not carrying out an obligation, thus damage or crime.

Obligation and liability are indispensable for and dependent on each other. There can be no liability without obligation and no obligation without liability. In the absence of obligation and liability a body of law cannot exist. Obligation and liability together present the element that makes law capable of existing, of living, of implementation and enforcement. Obligation marks to the “must” of doing or forbearing, to what one must do and must not do. Liability is the device of forcing the person to do or not to do. Liability works as preventive due to its deterrent effect, and as reparative when applied in a concrete case. For this reason, obligation and liability form the “nucleus” of law in the sense that when it is lacking, law cannot be perceived of, and when it is inactive, the legal system withers away in part or in whole according to the extent to which the nucleus “obligation and liability” is inactive.

As a result, all legal systems contain obligations and liabilities, in explicite and implicate forms The mere existence of’ a rule implies the obligation to carry it out, that is the obligation to do or not to do what the rule imposes, and implies also the liability in case of’ violating that obligation.

Obligation and liability in international law

It is therefore a matter of course that along with the influence and incorporation of the general principle of law in the body of’ rules governing inter-national relations, the principles of obligation and liability, civil as well as criminal, have been applied War damages and war trials are some of its applications. The treaty and the judicial means have been used to settle claims arising out of war and out of damages caused by other violations of rules of international law.

The principles of liability in international law derive front three sources: the general principles of law, as a higher and major source. custom and treaty Declaratory expressions of obligation and harm have been repeatedly given by the UNO and international organizations.

The work of the International Low Commission on State Responsibility is another and a major declaratory instrument of the principles of civil and criminal liability in International law.

The unified concept approach of “wrongful acts” is used. Wrongful acts are divided into delicts and crimes. Every State is responsible for every internationally wrongful act (Articles 1 and 2). The elements of the internationally wrongful act are two (Articles 3 and 4) an action or omission, and a breach of an international obligation of the State, even if the act is lawful in internal law.

The subject-matter and the origin of the obligation are riot relevant and do not affect liability. The origin can be customary, conventional or other (Articles 17 and 191).

The obligation must be in force for the Stale at the time it breaches it.

The breach continues in respect of the period during which the action or omission continues (Article 183).

If the obligation is to prevent a given event, the breach occurs when the event begins and continues until the event is stopped (Article 26).

A breach of an international obligation is present when the obligation requires a particular course of’ conduct and the State does not follow it (Article 20).

International crimes are defined and enumerated in Article 19.2 and 19.3 which reads:

“2. Air internationally wrongful act which results from the breach by a State of an international obligation so essential for the protection of fundamental interests of the international community that its breach is recognized as a crime by that community as a whole, constitutes an international crime.
3. Subject to paragraph 2, and on the basis of tile rules of international law in force, an international crime may result, inter alia, from: (a) a serious breach of an international obligation of essential importance for the maintenance of international peace and security, such as that prohibiting aggression; (b) a serious breach of an international obligation of essential importance for safeguarding the right of self-determination of peoples, such as that prohibiting the establishment or maintenance by force of colonial domination; (c) a serious breach on a widespread scale of an international obligation of essential importance for safeguarding the human being, such as those prohibiting slavery, genocide and apartheid; (d) a serious breach of air international obligation of essential importance for the safeguarding and preservation of the human environment, Such as those prohibiting massive pollution of the atmosphere or of the seas”. (emphases are added)

Since, Chechnya has been subjected to aggression as well as to genocide at the hands of Moscow, we shall elaborate here on aggression and, add more err genocide later on Aggression is formally prohibited by Western international law only since the 1907 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, then by the 1920 Covenant of the League of Nations (Article 10), the 1928 General Treaty for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy (“Briand-Kellogg Pact”), and fire 1945 Charter of the United Nations.

The definition of aggression presented a problem in the UN and a UN Special Committee on the Question of Defining Aggression was established. On basis of the work of that committee, the UN Gen. Ass adopted its resolution 3314 (XXIX) in 1974 containing the definition of aggression, its forms, and the legal considerations applicable to it (see Annex III).

The definition of aggression is provided in Article 1:

“Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this definition”. This definition applies to the actual ongoing Moscow aggression against Chechnya, because the explanatory note added to Article 1 reads: In this definition the term “State” (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a Member of the United Nations;………”

It is Moscow which started the armed aggression against Chechnya, and its act of aggression falls under the provision of Article 2 which reads:

“The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would riot be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including,, the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.”

The armed aggression committed by Moscow against Chechnya falls under more than one of the forms of armed aggression listed in, Article 3, which reads:

Article 3:

“Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:
(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting front such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the rise of any weapons by a State! against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of’ a State by the armed forces of another State;
(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of tile agreements;
(f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for penetrating an act of aggression against a third State;
(g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein.”

Under Article 4, the resolution gives the Security Council the power to determine what other acts constitute aggression under the provisions of UN Charter.

All the pretenses and lies of Moscow to justify its genocide] aggression are rejected by the resolution under Article 5 which reads:

Article 5:

“1. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression.
2. A war of a aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility.
3. No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting front aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful”.

More specifically applicable to the case of Chechnya is the provision of Article 7 which is intended to protect the oppressed nations. It stipulates: “Nothing in this Definition, and in particular Article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of people forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination, nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration”.

The Chechen case is further enforced by the provision of Article 8 which reads: “In their interpretation and application the above provisions are interrelated and each provision should be construed in the context of the other provisions”.

The gravity of the aggression committed by Moscow against Chechen declaration of independence is very obvious, and it constitutes a serious crime under international law.

After this brief introduction of obligation and liability in general and in modern international law, with reference to the aggression against Chechnya, we will deal with the obligations and liabilities of the RF, its constituent sovereign States, and all other States.

4. THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF THE FEDERAL, GOVERNMENT AND THE STATES MEMBERS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REGARDING THE GENOCIDAL AGGRESSION AGAINST CHECHNYA

A critical view of the constitution of the Russian Federation

174. The constitution of the Russian Federation is a mixture of contradictions and falsities.
174.1 Its preamble asserts that one major motive is “honoring the memory of our ancestors, who have passed on to us love of and respect for our homeland and faith in good and justice” The genocidal crimes committed by Moscow under the Czar, Lenin and Stalin against a good number of differing nations are totally ignored and considered “good and justice”. It is reported that seven million people have been eliminated by the Stalin-gang.
174.2 While its preamble asserts “the principle of equality and self-determination” of the differing nations of which Russia is made up, it asserts at the same time that “reviving the sovereign statehood of Russia ” is the major goal.
174.3 It is modeled after the USSR. It recognizes “State power” of the sovereign States making it up, and asserts that this shall be based on equality and self-determination, which makes the RF a regional organization in which the sovereign States surrender some degree of their spheres of powers to the federal structure This character of a regional organization is asserted by the stipulation of Article III.2 of the Federation Treaty: “The republics belonging to the Russian Federation will he autonomous parties to international and foreign economic relations and agreements with other republics, ‘krays’, ‘oblasts’, autonomous ‘oblasts’, and autonomous ‘okrugs’ of the Russian Federation unless this is contrary to the Constitution and laws of the Russian Federation and this Treaty. The coordination of the international and foreign economic relations of the republics belonging to the Russian Federation will be conducted by federal government bodies of the Russian Federation in conjunction with the republics belonging to the Russian Federation”.

Contrary to this regionalism of sovereign States, the constitution grants the President of the Russian Federation far reaching powers which amount to an executive dictatorship Those powers should have been placed under the full control of the Federation Council, especially the Powers to nominate the Federal prime minister and the ministers and to use the armed force domestically or internationally (with review powers of the Duma), and to dissolve the Duma. The position of the President should have been structured as a figure head of the Federation with ceremonial functions, and on rotation basis among the constituent republics, as befitting such a regional organization Consisting of equal sovereign States of differing nations.

Obligations of the political entity in Moscow

175. The political entity in Moscow is under a number of obligations.
175.1 The obligation to stop immediately its genocidal operation and occupation against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya.
175.2 The obligation not to resist action to put an end thereto.
175.3 The obligation to make public the names of all those responsible for or have taken part in that genocidal operation arid occupation, to apprehend them and to extradite them to the Republic of Chechnya to put them to trial in exercise of its sovereignty.

Obligations of the sovereign States members of the Federation Treaty

176. The sovereign States Parties to the Federation Treaty of the Russian Federation and their peoples are under a number of obligations.
176.1 The obligation not to participate in air way in the genocidal aggression being committed, in the name of the federation, by Moscow against the independent people and Republic of Chechnya, since, even if Chechnya would have been party to the Federation Treaty, the sovereign States Parties to that treaty, in the conduct of their international and foreign relations (recognized by Article III.2 of the Federation Treaty) among each other, are under the obligation not to violate the equal sovereignty of any of them or the rules of international law concerning self-determination, territorial integrity, and the prohibition of war, genocide and the violation of human rights of individuals and nations. The danger of their not carrying out this obligation is that they, by reason of their conduct, will be considered as having acquiesced to the way the Federation Treaty is being applied, including the rise of the federal army against a member State, and in the way it was used in Chechnya (Article 45.b of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties).
176.2 Since the sovereign Republics members of the Federation Treaty have themselves voluntarily surrendered a part of their sovereignty to the federal government and are participating in the decision making of that government (Article I), they are under the obligation to rectify the position of that government by putting immediately an end to the genocidal aggression.
176.3 For the above reasons they are liable to pay reparation for all the losses, damages and injuries caused by the said armed genocidal aggression. Their subjects involved in the said armed genocide aggression are responsible tot their acts or inacts of negligence or other acts falling under the Genocide Convention arid oilier forms of crimes against humanity.
176.4 The obligation to impeach die actual President (Boris Yeltsin) because of his committing the most grave crimes of aggression and genocide against the people and the Republic of Chechnya (Article 93 of the 1993 constitution of the RF). If, arguendo, Chechen Republic would have been a member of the RF, committing aggression and genocide against its people forms also the crime of high treason, because it is an overthrow of the authority of the constitution and of the dignity and self-determination of all the differing nations making up the RF. The oath which Boris Yeltsin took to assume the office of the President reads (Article 82): “I vow, in the performance of my powers as the President of the Russian Federation to respect and protect the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, to observe and protect the Constitution of the Russian Federation, to protect the sovereignty and independence, security and integrity of the state and to serve the people faithfully”.
176.5 In case the sovereign States members of the Federation Treaty do not succeed in putting an immediate end to the ongoing armed genocidal aggression, they are under the obligation to suspend or terminate the Federation Treaty and to assume their full sovereignty and independence in order to dissociate themselves from a federal structure being used for aggression and genocide.
In this regard, they must notify, in writing, the federal government and each other Due to the urgency of tile matter, they are not under the obligation to observe any period of time before suspending or terminating the Federation Treaty (Article 65.2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties). If objections are raised, the means to solve them must be peaceful as provided for under Article VI of the Federation Treaty or under Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations (Articles 65.3 and 65.4 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties).
176.6 They are under the obligation to recognize the independence of the people and Republic of Chechnya and to enter into all kinds of international relations with it, since the federal government bodies misrepresented the interest of their sovereign States in this regard.
176.7 They are tinder the obligation to assist the Chechen Republic and its people in their self-defense.

5. THE IMMEDIATE OBLIGATIONS OF ALL STATES

177. It is a matter of course that any and all States which continue their relations with Moscow, despite the commission by its political entity of the ongoing genocide against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya, are in fact collaborating with this ongoing genocide operation by not dissociating themselves trout that political entity.

178. All States are tinder the following obligations which emanate from modern international law, the legal implications of the criminalization of aggression and genocide, and the general principles of law as the major source of modern international law.
178.1 Any and all States are under the obligation to freeze immediately all kinds of relations, diplomatic, economic and otherwise, with the political entity in Moscow until it ends its aggression, genocide and occupation against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya, and until it makes public the names of all the persons responsible for or have taken part in those crimes, apprehend and extradite them to the independent Republic of Chechnya, in order to exercise its judicial sovereignty, since the crimes had their effect within its territory.
178.2 The bases for formally recognizing the independent Republic of Chechnya are now evident and such formal recognition is impelling as a frame of work for assisting the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya to prevent and suppress the re-commission of genocide against them which is going on since 11 December 1994. All States of the world are under the obligation to formally recognize the independent Republic of Chechnya, now called Chechen Republic of lchkeria.
178.3 All States, and other entities, whether governmental or otherwise, are under the obligation to assist the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya in self-defense to put an end to the ongoing genocide against them, until such an end is achieved by action authorized by tile United Nations Organization.
178.4 All States are tinder the obligation, when acting within international organizations, to observe the above obligations and to pronounce themselves actively and positively through the vote or otherwise. We will explain this later on when dealing with their obligations within the UNO.

6. THE SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF STATES PARTIES TO
THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION

The Parties to the Genocide Convention

179. The Parties to the Genocide Convention are under it number of obligations:

1. According to Article 1 of the Convention, they are under the obligation to prevent genocide This obligation can only be achieved by using force to assist the victim countries and peoples in self-defense to put an end to the genocide acts.
2. They are tinder the obligation according to Article VIII of the Convention to call upon the competent organs of the United Nations Organization to prevent and suppress genocide Article VIII states: “Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III”.

180. The Parties to the Genocide Convention are themselves Parties to the United Nations treaty and Members of the United Nations Organization; and their obligation to prevent and suppress acts of genocide is affirmed by their obligation under Article 43 of the Charter of the United Nations to make available the necessary armed forces, facilities and means.

181. Since the question of suppressing and punishing genocide cannot be left to the Security Council with its small number of members, and the possible use of veto, the States Parties to the Genocide Convention are under the obligation to call upon the General Assembly to take appropriate action under the Charter of the United Nations to prevent and suppress the ongoing genocide against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya.

7. THE SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF STATES MEMBERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS TREATY
AND OF THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION

The Parties to the United Nations Treaty

182. All Parties to the United Nations Treaty and Members of the United Nations Organization are under the obligation to give effect to modern international law, including the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide.

183. In this regard they are under the following specific obligations:
183.1 The obligation to recognize the independent State of the Chechen Republic.
183.2 The obligation to assist the Chechen Republic in its self-defense against the ongoing genocide.
183.3 The obligation to convene die General Assembly to see to it that any and all necessary and sufficient measures are in fact taken to put an immediate end to the ongoing genocide against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya.
183.4 The obligation to provide the UNO with all necessary arms, facilities and means to put an immediate end to the ongoing armed genocide] aggression This obligation is explicitly embodied in Article 43 of UN Charter.

The obligations of UN Member States acting in the United Nations Organization

184. A number of legal considerations have to be pointed out to counteract the prevailing manipulation of international law and the abuse by the genocide-gang of the powers of the UNO.
184.1 The UNO is an implementing machinery of the UN treaty. As such it can have no absolute powers. Its powers are limited by three main sources: (a) The purposes and principles stated in the UN treaty, (b) the tasks assigned by the UN treaty to each of its main organs, and (c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations as the major source of modern international law after UN treaty.
184.2 The UN Members when acting within the UNO have no absolute powers. They are under the obligation to act in conformity with the three main sources mentioned under the preceding paragraph. The vote is not a privilege. It is a right and an obligation. It is a function and must be exercised as a tool of implementing UN treaty. The International Court of Justice have affirmed in its advisory opinion of 1948 in what I call the “vote case” that every UN Member State, in pronouncing itself through the vote, has to conform to the provisions of UN Charter.
184.3 The UNO is thus a machinery through which the Parties to the UN treaty are to carry out their obligations embodied in that treaty. The UN Members as Parties to the UN treaty cannot act within the UNO in a manner which frustrates the implementation of that treaty, otherwise the machinery created to implement the treaty will be a tool to be used by them themselves to avoid and violate their own obligations under that treaty. In other words, the UNO has no existence by its own, and is only existing to be used as a tool to carry out the obligations provided for by the UN treaty, and the UN Members are under the obligation to use the UNO actively and positively to achieve that end.
184.4 The General Assembly is the ultimate authority to decide oil the appropriate action to prevent, suppress and punish genocide, and is under the obligation to act accordingly. The Security Council cannot be entrusted to take such action in a case of genocide, for two reasons: (a) It is inconceivable that the intimate prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide can be subject to the judgment of the Security Council with the very small number of its members and the possible use of the veto by ally of its Permanent Members (b) The Security Council is only empowered in cases which are far less serious than genocide (Article 24 UN Charter). It is therefore consistent and effective to maintain that the UN General Assembly is the competent organ to decide in cases of genocide. The Security Council, according to the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, is under the obligation to take provisional and enforcement measures to put an immediate end to genocide. In case the Members of the Security Council fail to carry out their obligations, the General Assembly is bound to take such appropriate and immediate action to put genocide to an end, not only because genocide falls outside the competence of the Security Council, but also on basis of the Uniting for Peace Resolution no.377 (V), of November 3, 1950 (see Annex IV). Its operative part states:

“1. Resolves that if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately with a view to making appropriate recommendations to Members for collective measures, including in the case of a breach of the peace or act of aggression the use of armed force when necessary, to maintain or restore international peace and security. If not in session at the time, the General Assembly may meet in emergency special session within twenty-four hours of the request therefore. Such emergency special session shall be called if requested by the Security Council on the vote of any seven (now nine) members, or by a majority of the Members of the United Nations…” (text between brackets added)

Under the operative parts 7 and 8 of the Uniting for Peace Resolution, the General Assembly called the Member States to make available to it or to the Security Council the necessary resources, both for action under the General Assembly or the Security Council, as well as action in individual or collective self-defense. The Uniting for Peace Resolution was implemented in the cases of Suez Crisis (1956), Hungary (1956), Lebanon and Jordan (1958), the Congo (1960), and the Pakistan Civil War (1972).

185. It is self-evident that the Secretary-General of the UNO is under the obligation to report immediately cases of genocide to the Security Council, to the General Assembly, and to all Members of the United Nations.

186. The Secretary General of the UNO is thus under the obligation to report immediately this case of ongoing genocide against the people and the independent Republic of Chechnya to the Security Council, to the General Assembly and to all Members of the United Nations Organization. This question of the obligations of UN Members is a basic one, and we feel it necessary to elaborate it.

8. THE LEGAL BASIS OF THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF
UN MEMBERS FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND INACTIONS WITHIN THE UN

The basis of the obligations of UN Members States

The obligations of the Members of the UN ensue from the binding force of treaties. This binding force rests on the rule ‘pacta sunt servanda’.

The Member States have recognized their obligations in the preamble of the Charter which is in fact an oath taken by them not to frustrate their obligations under the Charter by any action or inaction, inside or outside the UN Article 22 of UN Charter affirms those obligations, in application of the rule pacta sunt servanda:

“All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter”.

The other basis of the obligations of Member States are mentioned in the Charter. The preamble affirms the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law. And Article 1.1 requires conformity with the principles of justice and international law.

The sources of international law other than the UN Charter are enumerated in Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ which, according to Article 92 of the Charter, is an integral part of it. Those sources are treaties establishing expressly recognized rules, international custom as evidence of a general practice accepted as law, general principles of law recognized by civilized nations, judicial decisions, and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations.

According to Article 4.1 of the UN Charter, Member States are those which accept the obligations contained in the Charter, and are able and willing to carry out those obligations.

The obligations of UN Members States regarding the working of the UN:

(a) The one basic obligation which the UN Member States have is to see to it that the United Nations Organization, as the implementation device of the UN Charter, does in fact implement the Charter with due conformity with its provisions and the provisions of the other sources of international law. This basic obligation is one of the major conditions of being party to the treaty of the Charter of the United Nations and a Member of the Organization (Article 4 of the Charter).
On this basic obligation three sets of specific legal obligations ensue:
(b) The seeking and management of complete and factual information on the issues relating to the realization of the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the implementation of its specific provisions.
(c) The fulfillment of the principles applicable to the preparation for) the decisions of the UN in concrete cases hearing the parties, investigating all the facts, considering all the facts.
(d) The obligation to initiate UN action in concrete cases through proposals to place items on the agenda, and the submission of draft resolutions.
(e) The obligation to use the vote on decisions not as a privilege, but as a function to be performed to implement the UN Charter.

The States Members of the UN create themselves its resolutions. The voting procedure is intended to have the Member States participate in the decision-making of UN organs. It could riot have been intended to allow the Member States the freedom to abuse the voting procedure and disregard their obligations under the Charter and the other sources of international law including the Genocide Convention. An abuse of a right is the use of a right for a purpose other than that for which that right is granted An abuse is a malicious rise. The right to vote is granted to the Member States to allow tiers participation in the work of the UN for the realization of its purposes and principles. The membership and the right to vote must not be abused. The general principles of law, which is the major source of modern international law (article 39 of the Statute of the Court) consider the “abuse of right” as a legal wrong and as an illegitimate act. The right to abstention must also not be abused It must be limited to the case provided for under Article 27.3, that is, in case the Member State is a party to a concrete individual dispute between it and another or other States. The aim is to avoid having a Member State acts as party and judge in the same case.

The fact that Member States are not obliged to give a reason for their vote does not mean that they are absolutely free to use the vote against the purposes and principles of the organization That the States are masters of their vote and that one should expect them to care for their individual interests, does not mean the surrendering of their obligations to use the vote for the realization of tile purposes and principles of the UN, in accordance with the functions and powers of its organs as defined in UN Charter and with due regard to the sources of international law defined in Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ.

The question of abuse of the right to veto, accorded to the Permanent Members of the SC, has been raised in the UN Many States denounced this abuse. This is an indication that the abuse of the right to vote has been regarded within the UN as an undesirable act, committed, as Algeria pointed out in the Gen. Ass. (A/10033, p.6), for egoistic purposes and unjust privileges contrary to international peace and security.

The practice of abstention of the permanent Members of the SC as not indicating opposition to the taking of’ a certain decision (ICJ ruling in its second Advisory Opinion on Namibia – South West Africa – Case, 1971) raises the question whether abstention must then fall under the legal principle that “silence gives consent”.

If abstention is neither considered a disagreement nor air agreement, it then must be considered boycott and deliberate obstruction of the running of the business of the UN and an obstruction of the realization of its Purposes arid Principles. Abstention, except in the case provided for under Article 27 3, is therefore a violation of the obligations of Member States under the Charter.

The preamble of the UN Charter is in fact an oath taken by the Member States which implies their undertaking to use the voting procedure actively and for the realization of the Purposes and Principles of Charter The undertaking of Member States embodied in Article 4 of the Charter also implies such an obligation.

The right to vote, being in its exercise of a decisive effect on the working of the UN, cannot be excluded front the general principle of law which prohibits the abuse of right. This general principle of law has been reaffirmed by the ICJ on many occasions. The ICJ ruled that the abuse of right “cannot, whatever be the present defects in international organization, find a place in international law” (Corfu Channel Case, Merits, 1949, p. 35).

Member States cannot invoke their private interests as an excuse for their abstention, because they have undertaken to give prevalence to the “common interest” (preamble of the Charter). The vote in international organization is an international act which must fulfill the conditions of its international legality and cannot be left to domestic opportunity. Likewise, Member States cannot invoke their ignorance of the matter as air excuse, because they have to be active Members of the organization, and not just (vote) numbers to be used whenever the interests of some other allied State or States are involved.

Like the measurement of the legality of decisions, actions and inactions, the measurement of the legality of the vote is twofold: the legality of form and the legality of substance. The legality of form is realized when the vote conforms to the Charter provisions related to the right to vote and the quantity of vote necessary to pass a decision. The legality of substance concerns the quality of the vote, that is, its conformity with the Charter and the rest of international law. In order to be legal, the vote must fulfill the two criteria of legality.

We have included this analysis in this work on genocide in Chechnya to educate UN Member States on their obligations related to the working of the UN. And at the same time, to provide legal weapons to the victim countries and peoples to be used in the legal battle as anti-manipulation rockets.

9. THE DEVIANT POSITION OF UN MEMBERS INSIDE AND
OUTSIDE THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION

The so-called Russian internal affairs and the inaction of all States outside die UN

187. Despite all the mentioned circumstances and the madness of the genocide aggression, all states took a watching position as the USA, being the super power, and its European allies announced that the case falls under the internal affairs of the RE Genocide was reduced to a violation of human rights, and Moscow was simply called to change its attitude.

188. In this regard, the USA even expressed its dissatisfaction and frustration that Moscow was unable to crush Chechnya in few days.

189. No one State lodged an official protest despite the continuing total destruction of Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, and the commission of all kinds of genocide acts, including bombing and burning of civilian’s homes, not even after the continuation of the genocidal devastating aggression to towns and villages other than Grozny.

Reasons for the deviant position of all States

190. The reasons for this deviant position are many:

190.1 The prevalence of genocidal crimes in this era of genocide.
190.2 ‘The timidity of the States not members of the world genocide-gang to take any course of action, since the relations of those States with the powers are based on the desire to get reward and/or to avoid punishment.
190.3 The ignorance of agents of States not members of the world genocide-gang of the international legal status of Chechnya.
190.4 The keeping of those States occupied with chronic problems.

The inaction of all States inside the UN

191. The States Members of the UN did not take any enforcement action to stop the Moscow genocidal aggression against Chechnya. The States Members of the Security Council did not take any decision whatsoever despite the fact that they are under the obligation to take enforcement measures under Chapter VII to stop the genocidal aggression, and to demand that the aggressor resort to peaceful means to solve any dispute between it and the victim country.

Reasons for the deviant position of States Members of the UN

192. As mentioned in the Preface of this book, the UN is under the control of the world genocide-gang

193. The other factor which led the States Members of the UN to take this genocidal inaction is that the victim nation is a Muslim nation, and the genocide of Muslim nations is one of the main targets of the global genocide-plan.

194. In short, the deviant behavior of States Members of the UN made it a corrupt organization and are covering-up its corruption by the claim that it should be reformed.

195. The reformation of the UN shall lead to nothing as long as the world genocide-gang is in control of the UN and almost all other UN Member States are kept silent by reward and/or punishment.

The methodology of the genocide-gang in the United Nations Organization

196. Before defining the obligations of UN Member States in rectifying the deviant behavior of the UN, a definition of the methods used by the genocide-gang in tile UN is imperative.

197. The basis of the manipulation of international law is the application of old international law and the introduction of measures capable of promoting genocide.

198. The application of international law is manifested by the application of the law of war, while war and its law are prohibited, and modern international law knows, and must only know, a law of aggression and a law of self-defense Maintaining the law of war is a permission to the powerful to commit aggression and to destroy the army of the weak. The Charter of the UN (Chapter VII) and the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations embody the law of aggression and the law of self-defense.

199. The main measures the genocide-gang take to promote genocide are.
199.1 Ignoring the commission of genocide altogether as is happening in the Chechen, Palestine and other cases. The ignoring of the genocidal aggression against Chechnya is manifested by the fact that the UN sent a UN Observation Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) to be stationed on the boundaries of Abkhazia and ordered that the Georgian forces withdraw beyond those boundaries, while Abkhazia and Chechnya had the same status under the USSR, that is the status of an ASSR: Abkhazia an ASSR in the union SSR of Georgia, and Chechnya an ASSR in the union SSR of RSFSR Moreover, the UN also called for the settlement of the political status of Abkhazia. The extreme abuse of the UN by the genocide-gang is manifested by the fact that the UN ignores the genocidal aggression against Chechnya while it knows that the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States, formerly the USSR) has a peace-keeping force imposing a restricted weapons zone between Abkhazia and Georgia. The UN is also aware that the RF itself is acting as a facilitator to reach a negotiated settlement for the political status of Abkhazia on those bases (see SC resolutions 849, 854, 858, 876, 881, 892, 896, 901, 906, 934, 937, 971, 993). Yet the genocide-gang abuses the UN to the extent of allowing and aiding the continuous genocide aggression against Chechnya.
199.2 The continuous recognition and affirmation of the rights of the victim country, as is happening in the case of Chechnya by talking simply about the respect for human rights, and in the cases of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia by affirming their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. This recognition is used as a cosmetic to covet tip UN genocidal deviance.
199.3 The denial of the genocidal aggression by talking simply of the existence of a “conflict” as is taking place in the cases of Chechnya, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Palestine, etc.
199.4 The imposing of an arms embargo on the victim countries, in the presence of a mighty army of the genocidal aggressors. This is alone by the genocide-gang in the cases of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. This method was carried out in the case of Chechnya by ignoring the independence of Chechnya, and its right in any case to UN intervention to stop the genocide-operation, and by claming that the matter is within the internal affairs of the RF, thus forbidding Chechnya from getting the necessary military assistance in self-defense.
199.5 The rejection of the use of force to end the genocidal aggression and to reverse its outcome, yet sending a UN force with no such mandate and only to carry out of the mission of monitoring, which is nothing else but “spying” on the spot. A deliberate confusion is made between peace-enforcing and peacekeeping, while the UN is obliged under Chapter VII of UN Charter to carry out both: peace-enforcing to restore peace in case of any breach of the peace or any act of aggression, and peace-keeping as a preventive measure to maintain peace in case of any threat to the peace, such as the UN Force in Macedonia (Article 39 UN Charter).
199.6 The insisting on “peaceful negotiations to reach a solution of the conflict” and imposing negotiation, while the case is a case of a genocidal aggression arid riot of a conflict and the genocidal aggression is continuing. This is contrary to the generally accepted principle of international law which imposes the taking of enforcement measures to end any act of aggression, even if negotiation is being conducted or recommended. Article 8 of the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement “Pact of Bogota”, of April 30, 1948 stipulates: “Neither recourse to pacific means for the solution of controversies, nor the recommendation of’ their use, shall, in the case of’ air armed attack, be ground for delaying the exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense, as provided for in the Charter of the United Nations “. Chapter VII of UN Chapter embodies this principle, but the genocide-gang is keen to promote genocide as it did in the cases of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. It did the same in the case of Chechnya by acting outside the UN arid asking tile Moscow regime to negotiate with the victim country.
199.7 Camouflage operations such as the taking of UN personnel hostages by the genocidal aggressors and the stealing of heavy weapons from UN barracks.
199.8 The illegal permissiveness arid the illegal delegation of powers to the SG of the UN in matters which are outside the competence of the SG and/or are empowered to the Security Council by the provisions of UN treaty. In the cases of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia the SG was permitted to advise on action to be taken, and was authorized by the Security Council to coordinate enforcement action, while such matters fall exclusively within the competence of the Security Council and are of such a serious nature that they cannot be further delegated, let alone to one person.
199.9 The introduction of lies by saying, as the SG of the UN did, that the parties to the so-called conflict have no political will to end their conflict What political will must Chechnya, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia or Palestine have to put art end to the continuous genocidal aggression against them? Such political will which is capable of ending the genocidal aggression cannot be other than agreeing to be subjected to the genocidal aggression.
199.10 The introduction of the “school of illegality” in diplomacy, which is manipulatingly called the “realist school”, as a means of accepting actual reality without distinction between illegal and legal facts. The arche-type example of the extreme use of this dangerous school is the case of genocide in Palestine.

Obligations of UN Members States regarding UN deviant Faction

200. In such a case the States Members of the UN treaty become under four anti-corruption obligations.
200.1 The obligation not to follow the school of illegality in diplomacy, and to instruct and control their diplomats to this effect.
200.2 The obligation not to observe the deviant inaction of the UN.
200.3 The obligation to assist the victim country, i.e. the Chechen Republic, in its self-defense against the ongoing genocide operation in its sovereign territory As mentioned above, this an obligation of the Parties to the Genocide Convention, and of UN Members.
200.4 The obligation to do all in their ability within the UN to rectify the deviant action or inaction. In this regard, the States Parties to the Genocide Convention are under the obligation to demand that the General Assembly and the Security Council take all necessary and sufficient measures to suppress, prevent and punish the crime of genocide and all the acts related to it (Articles II and III of the genocide Convention). Moreover, all States Members of the UN treaty are under the obligation to take the same course of action, since genocide is an international crime and is the gravest form of aggression.

10. THE LIABILITIES OF THE STATES MEMBERS OF
THE GENOCIDE-GANG AND THE OTHER OBSTRUCTING STATES

The liabilities of UN Member States regarding the working of the UN

200.a. The UN Member States are liable for their inactions arid actions within the UN in respect of the above mentioned obligations. These liabilities are civil as well as criminal.

200.b. Denying or ignoring the liability of States for their acts within the UN will lead to an unacceptable outcome. The Member States shall be able to get rid of their obligations under international law, including the Genocide Convention, and even to violate those obligations through acting in the UN in a way so as to obtain or to obstruct decisions to that end, as happened in this case.

200.c. Without the liabilities of Member States, including their rulers and officials, for their actions and inactions, the organs of UN shall remain subject to abuse by their Members and shall have absolute unchecked powers. A result which is unacceptable under the Charter and modern international law, including the general principles of law, and a number of global treaties including the Genocide Convention. This will lead to an international breakdown of law and order as it is the case at this moment in a member of parts of our planet.

200.d. The Member States cannot revoke this liability on basis of their individual interests or the risks involved in the fulfillment of their obligations. The Member States have obligated themselves to act in the “common interest” (preamble of the Charter) and must he considered to have accepted the risks involved in carrying out their obligations according to the Charter and the other treaties in force, including the Genocide Convention.

200.e. The Member States, including their rulers and officials are liable for the actions and inactions of the main organs of the UN and for the outcome thereof.

200.f. These obligations and liabilities shall be elaborated here below in dealing with the obligations and liabilities of Members of the Security Council.

The obligations and liabilities of Members of the Security Council

200.g. The SC does not exist and cannot operate without its Members. It is the Members of the SC that give it life and action. They transform it from a print on paper to reality. It is the Members who act as composing together a SC. The Members of the SC are therefore responsible for its actions. They are obliged to see to it that the decisions taken by them as a SC are in conformity with the Charter, the general principles of law, and the applicable treaties or conventions in question. They are liable for the violations thereof. Of course, the Member States, including their rulers and officials, who are liable are those whose actions or inactions within the SC are the cause of the illegal action and/or the illegal inaction of the SC.

200.h. In this request in 1948 for an advisory opinion oil voting for the admission of new Members tinder Article 4.1 of UN Charter, the Gen. Ass. affirmed the obligation of Member States of the Security Council, not of the Security Council as an organ, not to violate the Charter. The request of the advisory opinion came as a reaction to the use of a negative vote by the former USSR regarding the admission of new Members, which led to a negative vote by UK, USA and Australia against the admission of other new Members. The request for the Advisory Opinion and the ICJ used the legal formulation. A Member of the UN is called upon to pronounce itself by its vote. This leaves no door open to confuse the distinction between three components the States Parties to the UN Charter, the UN Charter itself as a treaty and the UN organization as a device to implement the treaty. It also leaves no door open to ignore the obligations and liabilities of States for their actions and inactions inside the UN organization and the fact that the vote is the decisive device whereby the Member States pronounce themselves in implementing the Charter.

200.i. The liability of the members of the SC concords also with the liability of Members of the organs of Governmental or private organizations in domestic law. Such liability is both civil and criminal.

200.j. One cannot but conclude that the States responsible for the illegal inactions of the SC are accomplices to the genocide-operation in the Chechen Republic (Article 3.e of the Genocide Convention). Their complicity is evidenced by the causal relationship between those illegal inactions, on the one hand, and the extensity, intensity and continuation of the genocide-operation in the Chechen Republic, on the other hand.

200.k. In the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and in the SC meeting of 29 June 1993, in which the lifting of the arms embargo was refused, Jordan stated that those Governments have deviated and adopted a standard, “despite the fact that it is clearly incompatible with the basic responsibilities of the United Nations and the Security Council in particular” (S/PV.3247, p.43).

200.l. I call the States which violate their obligations under UN Charter by deviant actions or deviant inactions, outside or inside the UN, “obstructing States”. The legal qualification of the position of the obstructing Member States is twofold:

200.l.1 By violating the Charter, they committed crimes against international law. A crime against international law is defined as:
“an act committed with intent to violate a fundamental interest protected by international law or with knowledge that the act will probably violate such an interest…”(8).

The interest involved is the survival and security of the Chechen Republic and its people

Recognizing the seriousness of crimes against international law and in order to combat those crimes, international criminal law applies the “ex post facto” principle. The Nuremberg Tribunal supported the application of this principle by international law by stating. “This law is not static, but by continual adaptation follows the needs of a changing world”. Our world needs serious compliance with international law ‘fire interests that are at stake are the common interests of mankind. If the violation of international law is not considered a crime, States will sacrifice the common interests of mankind for their own interests, even by the use of genocidal aggression, and mankind will have to start again international criminal conspiracies, armed aggressions, genocide-operation, etc.

200.l.2 By obstructing the suppression and prevention of the genocide-operation against the Chechen Republic and its people, the obstructing States are accomplices in that crime, in differing degrees.

11. THE PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE
AGAINST THE CHECHEN PEOPLE

The genocide era and the punishment of genocide

201. A number of most serious issues have to be born in mind:
201.1 The crimes of genocide committed by Stalin and his genocide-gang, and by Truman and his genocide-gang who dropped the atom bombs on Heroshima and Nagasaki, remain unpunished, while the other genocide and war criminals of the Second World War were punished. Twenty-four Nazi leaders were indicted twelve were sentenced to hang, seven to prison terms from 10 years to life, and three were found not guilty. This was the judgment of the Nuremberg Tribunal Besides, a great number of trials were held in various countries in Europe and the Far East As the United Nations War Crimes Commission reported on November 16, 1946: 2458 were tried, 797 were sentenced to death, 1189 imprisoned, and 472 acquitted.
201.2 Since war is prohibited by modern international law, we consider that aggression constitutes the crime of genocide. This crime was committed after Second World War in various parts of the world, the archetype cases are South Africa, Palestine, Vietnam and Lebanon. The contemporary cases of genocide include Palestine, Cashmere, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Azerbaijan, Rwanda, and Chechnya.
201.3 The UN established criminal tribunals only for the two recent cases of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. All other cases of genocide are ignored, even those cases which are still continuing Palestine, Azerbaijan and Chechnya. The non-application of law destroys its legitimate foundation It makes the trials held for some criminals an act of retaliation between criminals, not the rule of law.
201.4 Mankind still awaits to see if its history will ever take note of the supremacy of the rule of law and the punishment of the genocide criminals in this era of genocide which is at the same time so-called the era of the United Nations.
201.5 Now that we deal in this chapter with the punishment of the genocide crimes committed against the Chechen people, the punishment of those responsible for those crimes should take place if the rule of law, and not of criminals and madness, is to prevail. Trials should be held for the Stalin as well as the Yeltsin genocide-gangs and the genocide-gang of the States obstructing the implementation of international law, inside and outside the UN. In what follows, the scope of the punishable acts and the other provisions related to the punishment of the genocide crime shall be deal with.

The scope of the punishable acts

201.a. Not only genocide as defined in Article II of the Genocide Convention is punishable, but also all other acts leading to it or connected with it as stipulated in Article III of the Convention.

“The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempts to commit genocide;
(c) Complicity in genocide”.

No immunity in punishing genocide

202. Due to the utmost gravity of the crime of genocide, the genocide Convention does not provide any kind of immunity to the persons committing it or responsible for its commission as is indicated by the following provisions of the Convention:

Article IV: “Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article 111 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.”

Article VII: “Genocide and the other acts enumerated in article III shall not be considered as political crimes for the purpose of extradition. The Contracting Parties pledge themselves in such cases to grant extradition in accordance with their laws and treaties in force.”

No discretion or pardon in genocide

203. Again, due to the utmost gravity of the crime of genocide, the Convention does not provide room for not-filing a genocide case or for pardon. Article I of the Convention stipulates:

Article I: “The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish”.

The impressiveness of effective penalties in genocide

204. Article V of the Convention provides: “The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article Ill”.

The persons responsible for genocide in Chechnya and the obligation of all States

205. The obligation of the States Parties of the Genocide Convention and of the States members of the UN to field trials for those persons responsible for the genocide crimes against Chechnya is admitted by those States. They have acted accordingly by setting up the UN criminal tribunals for former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda.

206. It is their obligation to set up an international criminal tribunal for genocide in Chechnya, otherwise Chechnya itself will have to hold such trials.

12. SPECIAL OBLIGATIONS OF
MUSLIM STATES AND PEOPLES

Solidarity

207. It is clear that the intensification of genocide in our days is directed against Muslim nations. The concept of the Middle East was introduced and is being promoted, even by the financial support of leading Muslim States, as air intermediary stage which is planned to precede the open and formal declaration of the “Middle East United States”.

208. For these reasons of survival, the Muslim States should come together and assist any victim Muslim country against the genocidal aggression to which it is subjected.

209. The global genocide operation against Muslim nations provides the ground for the special obligations of Muslim States and Muslim peoples.

Financial, military and humanitarian assistance

210. The financial and military kinds of assistance should be effective. The assistance given in this regard should be capable of counteracting the aggression and its effects.

211. The effective financial and military assistance are the prerequisites of humanitarian assistance, because in their absence, the humanitarian assistance becomes ineffective. The media of the genocide-gang sarcastically said: “They give them sandwiches in the morning to be killed at noun”.

The urgency of the legal battle and the legal relief

212. The legal battle and the legal relief are as important in facing the aggression as the military battle. The genocide-gang itself manipulates international law and corrupts international organization because it knows well the importance of the legal battle. In other words, the genocide-gang commits aggression by two means the abuse of military power and the manipulation of modern international law.

213. For these reasons, entering the legal battle by unmasking the manipulation of modern international law and by demanding its implementation, is providing legal relief, which is as indispensable as military and humanitarian relief.

214. The entering of the legal battle shall at least have four immediate effects.
214.1 It shall make the genocide-gang aware that its identity and crimes are disclosed.
214.2 It shall refute the genocide-gang’s assumption that non-genocide-gang members are fools or timid.
214.3 It shall produce a psychological effect on the genocide-gang, capable of checking its aggression.
214.4 It shall raise the morale of the victim nations and of its armed people acting in self-defense.

On the level of governments of Muslim States

215. The governments of Muslim States are under the following special obligation:
215.1 The obligation to provide effective financial, military and humanitarian assistance to the victim countries.
215.2 The obligation to enter the legal battle in the UNO, by continuously submitting draft re-solutions pronouncing modern international law and demanding all States to assist by all means in putting an end to genocide.
215.3 The obligation to cooperate with the Muslim people’s actions against genocide operations.

On the level of Muslim nations

216. The failure of the Muslim States to take the above urgent measures is due to the fact that they are under the pressure, by reward and/or punishment, of the genocide-gang. They have no free will and the statehood of the Muslim nations has been thereby obstructed, internally as well as internationally.

217. The Muslim nations face therefore a historical urgent task to ensure their survival. This task cart only be achieved if the following obligations are fulfilled.
217.1 The obligation to organize themselves in an assembly in order to ascertain their unity, to observe closely the conspiracies against their security, and to decide on the measures to be taken to safeguard their survival.
217.2 The obligation to form a Standing Committee of Arab and Muslim Unity. The task of this Committee shall be: (a) to urge the Governments of Arab and Muslim States to materialize their unity, (b) to follow-up their reactions in this regard, and (c) to issue Declarations on those reactions.
217.3 The obligation to set up and coordinate special institutions for financial, military, humanitarian, and legal relief for all victim arid would be victim Muslim nations.
217.4 The obligation to form an international network of all Arab and Muslim activists, and to establish tile necessary machinery for the coordination of their activities. In this regard, the virus of under estimation should be eliminated, and replaced by the vitamin of encouraging, appreciation and cooperation

The necessary speed

218. The speed of action is a factor of success or failure The genocide-gang is working at a very high speed. If the Muslim States and the Muslim nations are to defend themselves against the global genocide plan, they have to work at a greater speed.

219. The speed of self-defense measures should be institutionalized by creating standing bodies and procedures to guarantee action, follow-up and assessment on certain defined time-limits for the general call for unity and for the treatment of individual cases of Muslim nations.

220. The absence of the necessary speed, the institutionalization of its procedures and the carrying out thereof functionally, shall render all efforts uneffective and rather helpful to the genocide-gang.

13. OBLIGATIONS OF THE
PEOPLE AND REPUBLIC OF CHECHNYA

221. The victim is not free front obligation. The victim is obliged to do all it can to defend itself against aggression, not only physical aggression, but also aggression by manipulating the law. The people and the Republic of Chechnya are thus under the following main obligations.
221.1 The people and the independent Republic of Chechnya have the right and are under the obligation to defend themselves.
221.2 They are also under the obligation to seek highly specialized, honest and courageous legal professional assistance to present and defend their rights before all States, international organizations, international non-governmental organizations and the media.
221.3 They have to notify all States of their obligations and liabilities It is hopes that this book shall be helpful in this regard
221.4 They have to urge UN Members to comply with their obligations within the UNO.
221.5 They have to request UNO to immediately take any and all necessary and sufficient measures to put an end to the ongoing-genocide.
221.6 They have to seek one or more State Member of the UN and Party to the Genocide Convention to institute proceedings before the International Court of Justice against States Members of the UN and Parties to the Convention for their failure to suppress and prevent the ongoing genocidal aggression. The jurisdiction of the ICJ is established by the provision of Article IX of the Genocide Convention, arid by the fact that a number of UN Members have declared their acceptance of the Court’s jurisdiction in accordance with Article 36.2 of the Statute of the ICJ.
221.7 They have to convene trials, even in absentia, for all the genocide criminals, starting from Stalin and his genocide-gang. Article VI of the Genocide Convention states:

“Persons charged with genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article III shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction”.(emphases are added)

-The end-