Nazarov P.V.

Master of scientific and pedagogical magistracy
On a specialty "Jurisprudence"
 University "Turan"

Problem solving contradictions in the content of the principles of self-determination of peoples and territorial integrity of States

Abstract. In this article the author analyzes the problem of the presence of contradictions between the two principles, plays an important part in the geopolitical balance of power in the world: the principles of self-determination of peoples and territorial integrity of states. These principles are the cornerstone of the solution of which will be an effective mechanism to resolve various internal conflicts, the cause of which is the desire of certain people to obtain independence in all its manifestations.

Keywords: right, people, self-determination, a principle, the United Nations, the contradiction, the territory integrity.

The international community at this stage to solve many complex issues, and one of the most painful - the national-ethnic. Ethnic conflicts, accompanied by armed struggle and violence, are constantly taking place in different parts of the world, and they occur not only in developing countries, such as countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, but in the civilized Europe, North America, and generally we call - in the former socialist states. Often the result of ethnic conflicts is the creation of new states. Some of them are recognized by the international community, such as Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia in 1993. Status of others - Kosovo, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Palestine, Samalilenda, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus - have not yet been defined, which is naturally a source of inter-ethnic or religious conflicts.

If we look at the ethnographic map of the Earth, we can see that modern humanity is a complex ethnic system, which includes thousands of ethnic groups of various kinds, i.e., nations, peoples, tribes, ethnic groups, etc.

Ethnic ties have a strong influence on the world order and the stability of relations within the state. As a rule, a conflict arises when the social and political rights of citizens are suppressed or restricted, especially for national and ethnic lines, as a result of which the national identity in opposition to the government and to other communities, where owing to the inability to find expression in the forms recognized by the State, the controversy moves into open armed conflict.

This raises the important question of the right of peoples to self-determination and how this right is related to other international principle of the unity and territorial integrity of the state.

The widely held view that there is a contradiction between these two principles.

Indeed, contemporary international law, on the one hand, claims the freedom of self-determination as a fundamental principle of the other - insists on the territorial integrity of states, moreover, their political, national unity, both at the strategic principle of international relations and domestic policies.

For example, the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples", demanding "respect the principle of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples" at the same time states: "Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the objectives of and principles of the Charter of the United Nations "(p.6) that all States must respect" the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity " [1].

M. Pomerance said that "... the concept of the United Nations, giving the interpretation of the right of peoples to self-contradictory and dangerous, initially involving the use of the policy of" double standards ", which naturally does not allow to find a constructive and peaceful approach to conflict resolution" [2].

At the same time, it is possible to note some precision and not at the specified point of view, because the problem is not the ambiguity of the text of the UN Declaration, and the ability to interpret the exact same situation in that context, which is beneficial to the world community.

Moreover, the purpose of the Declaration adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1960 was the decision of the issue of colonial dependence and the question of the territorial self-determination, which were discussed in the framework of determining the status of the dependent states. The questions of self-determination in an existing state, it is not affected. Next, when decolonization in the world is almost completed and the world is left of classical columns, the principles of the Declaration cause heated discussions about their modern interpretation.

Thus, some authors argue that "... at the moment there are no specific, until the end of registration of the international law of clear criteria on which the new state can be recognized or not recognized by the international community, and the current system de facto can not guarantee nor national integrity States or the right of nations to self-determination " [3].

As a result, depending on the priority of political interests in favor the principle of territorial integrity, the right of nations to self-determination.
And, in fact, today we are witnessing the selectivity with which the international community is coming to the recognition of this right for some and denial of others, it is obvious different approach to the situation in Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Crimea.

M. Koskenniemi thinks that "the requirements of the territorial integrity or national political forms of ethnic communities are" a time bomb "that could blow up the domestic well-being and lead to conflict between the rival communities" [4]. In this case, it is difficult to determine which communities worthy of ethnic self-determination, and what - no.

So, really to face ambiguity and uncertainty of the situation, but is it really? After all, if we say so, then we question the very existence of international law as a whole system of legal regulation. The Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the UN Charter, adopted by the UN General Assembly on October 24, 1970 states: "In the interpretation and application of the principles outlined above (We are interested in the following: Article 2 of resolution 1514 ( XV) «all peoples have the right to self-determination, by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development", Article 6 "Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations ") are interrelated and each principle should be construed in the context of all the other principles." From this point of view, we have considered the principles should not only contradict each other, but also to be in a certain harmony.

The principle of territorial integrity is a matter of bilateral relations and is designed to protect the territorial integrity and national unity of States from attacks from the outside, from a foreign country, while the principle of self-determination is an inalienable right to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development .

Barsegov Y.G. He notes that "... the supreme legal title territorial delimitation is the right of nations to self-determination. They are determined not only the content but also the limits of territorial rights. Only with the free consent of the people can be established the territorial status of the state, and the only way the established status quo can guarantee peace and friendly relations among peoples" [5].

To avoid separatism and interethnic conflicts in our above mentioned Declaration on Principles of International Law states the following position "Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs shall be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember and partial or complete disruption of the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States, observing in the actions a principle of equality and self-determination of peoples, peoples as described above and thus possessed of a government representing without distinction of race, creed or color the whole people belonging to the territory".

The principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, as one of the fundamental principles of international law, establishes the inalienable right of all peoples to self-determination. Because of this - for all peoples and nations have the right to self-determination, which is realized by the free will of the people and entering it on certain conditions in another country, that is a free choice of political status.

We come to the conclusion that the implementation of the right to self-determination of peoples is not considered as a violation of the territorial unity and integrity. International law only protects the territorial integrity of the states, whose borders are based on the self-determination of peoples. This relationship between the two principles enshrined in the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as in the Vienna Declaration and Program of Action adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights on 25 June 1993. As of the Vienna Declaration: "All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

The World Conference on Human Rights considers the denial of the right to self-determination as a violation of human rights and underlines the need for effective implementation of this right.

Modern law does not reduce the principle of the right of self-determination only to secession - the possibility of secession and creation of independent states, it allows us to consider it much wider. Many countries, including at the legislative level, offer a variety of possibilities considering the peculiarities of ethnic groups with their own culture, daily life and religion. Some states use the policy of multiculturalism, such as Australia, Canada, others are building federal relations through the establishment of consensual special administrative form - autonomous, subjects of the Federation, etc. - Belgium, Austria, and others.

Thus, summarizing the above, we note that the right to have the necessary tools to overcome the territorial and ethnic disputes. Important in their use - revealing the true will of the people through the establishment of the Rules of Procedure, the good will of the parties and the interests of the state, as well as other states and nations, and most important - rule and respect for human rights.

We should not forget about the wide use of some States in addressing the issue of the principle of self-determination and the principle of the integrity of the borders of the state of "double standards", so in our opinion this issue should be resolved only source of power - the people.

List of references:

1. The United Nations Charter, signed on 26 June 1945 // The official website of the United Nations / http://www.un.org/ru/documents/charter/index.shtml

2. International law and Self-determination: the Interplay of the Politics of Territorial Possession with formulations of Postcolonial «National», Joshua Castellino. - The Hague: Wighoff, 2000.

3. Habrieva T.Y. Modern problems of self-determination of ethnic groups: comparative legal research. - M .: Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, 2010. - 288 p.

4. Koskenniemi M. The Politics of International law 20 years later // European Journal of International Law. - Oxford, 2009. - vol. 20, N 1. - p. 7-19.

5. Barsegov Y.G. Binding force of the right of peoples to self-determination and the means to ensure. - M .: International Humanitarian Fund of Armenian Studies, "Armbuk - Mashtots", 1993.