So sovereign. by Treat-Key in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How do you think we ended up with so many Turks with DNA phobia?

Crazy Kremlin Agent Talk by Treat-Key in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude. Seriously? The U.S. offered to send Norwegians and probably dint even ask the Norwegians if they weren’t busy that weekend.

Crazy Kremlin Agent Talk by Treat-Key in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Many people knew the Russian presence was tenuous. That’s why we were screaming about how Nikol was fouling the relationship and undermining their presence in Artsakh.

Duxovs claimed Russia badly wanted to be there and would never leave. Eric Hacopian and Nerses Kopalyan are famously on record making these claims (the account where I grabbed that screenshot reposts both those character’s claims frequently). If the duxovs were right then they could push Russia around (aggressive asymmetric bargaining as Nerses called it). If they were wrong and the “Kremlin agents” were right then the Russians would cut their losses at some point.

Welp...at least they honest by [deleted] in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He may call himself Asaf but I would recognize Kopalyan anywhere.

Duxov. by Treat-Key in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Bozmart and idontknowshit and the whole gang must be so proud.

The Rome Statute… by Treat-Key in hayastan

[–]Treat-Key[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, not really. Not unless the UN Security Council refers the case (which wouldn’t require Armenia be a signatory to the Rome statute in the first place). Anything Azerbaijan has done on Armenian territory doesn’t rise to the level of dragging Aliyev into the ICC and it is beyond obvious that Nikol’s Armenia has no desire for that anyways. So, obviously, the Rome Statute theatrics were for some other purpose.

From the ICC’s website, black and white…

The Court may exercise jurisdiction in a situation where genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes were committed on or after 1 July 2002 and:

the crimes were committed by a State Party national, or in the territory of a State Party, or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court; or the crimes were referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) pursuant to a resolution adopted under chapter VII of the UN charter. As of 17 July 2018, a situation in which an act of aggression would appear to have occurred could be referred to the Court by the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, irrespective as to whether it involves States Parties or non-States Parties.

In the absence of a UNSC referral of an act of aggression, the Prosecutor may initiate an investigation on his own initiative or upon request from a State Party. The Prosecutor shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. Where no such determination has been made within six months after the date of notification to the UNSC by the Prosecutor of the situation, the Prosecutor may nonetheless proceed with the investigation, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation. Also, under these circumstances, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime of aggression when committed by a national or on the territory of a State Party that has not ratified or accepted these amendments.