![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Of course it did -- first off, let's remember that the UN SC has 15 member states, which definitely qualifies for "international community". Secondly, exhaustive quotes were provided to show, for example, that US and EU specifically recognized NK as part of Azerbaijan [1]. However, the UN General Assembly, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) [2] have also all recognized NK as part of Azerbaijan, as did countries on individual level (you can see some of the links at the bottom of this ref [3]). Hence, it is correct to say that UN SC and the international community have recognized NK as part of Azerbaijan -- although we could, of course, spell out, and reference, who this international community are. -- AdilBaguirov 07:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
All the lands represented in United Nations. The people of the lands all over the world. Shared values and principles among the primary actors within an international system.
Usage of the expression It has been claimed that the superpower nations (now mainly the United States, although China and Russia are both capable of intercontinental force projection) use the term to describe organizations in which they play a predominant role, regardless of the opinion of other nations. For example, the Kosovo War was described as an action of the "international community" even though it was undertaken by NATO, which represented under ten percent of the world's population during the Kosovo War, this including Italy and Greece who were in opposition to the involvements.
Notes Similarly, "international community" is being used by some Western leaders when criticizing Iran for its nuclear ambitions by saying that "Iran is defying the will of the international community by continuing uranium enrichment". The league of non-aligned nations (122 countries out of 193 recognised governments by both the USA and the UK, well over 50%) has in fact backed Iran's right to uranium enrichment. In this case, those countries do not form a part of the "international community"."
There is also a definition from Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "f : a body of persons or nations having a common history or common social, economic, and political interests <the international community>" [6]
Thus, just like you admit with N.Korea example of mine, "international community" does not have to include 100% of nations around the world -- indeed, not even 50% of nations.
Meanwhile, define "care" about any specific country. I would argue that the nations in Africa and South Pacific do not care about N.Korea much. Moreover, N.Korea is far from having enough nuclear bombs and ICBMs to be a real and present danger to the (entire) international community. In addition, your perception is magnified by the we are contemporaries of these events, whilst the war over NK temporarily stopped 13 years ago, which is a while. But at that time, the international community certainly did "care" more -- exemplified not only by UN SC resolutions and OSCE/CSCE mediation, but many articles and even covers of Western and other media.
Anyhow, the fact remains that aside from UN SC, other important international actors, all part of, and speaking for, the international community, have also adopted decisions on NK war, recognizing NK as part of Republic of Azerbaijan, and recognizing Armenia's military occupation of NK and other regions. This verifiable fact should certainly be reflected in the article. -- AdilBaguirov 00:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Golbez, it's not belligerent to list out important facts, and considering this whole discussion, it is important to list those authoritative organizations and nations to alleviate any doubts. --
AdilBaguirov
20:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I added some information on the population of Armenians on the article any thoughts. Artaxiad 03:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Nothing about the circumstances behind its founding, nothing about its settlements or its internal administrative divisions, nothing about its industry or economy during the Soviet period, nothing about official Soviet policies towards it and its inhabitants, nothing about its population makeup and changes over the Soviet period, etc., etc.
Meowy
16:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Two years later, nothing has changed. Unless there is some content to justify its inclusion the "Azerbaijan SSR" flag in the infobox should go because the article contains no content about the oblast's establishment. Because of its location, I cannot fact tag it. Meowy 23:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
The article only cites sources which are in favor of the Azerbaijani version of how the region was made in favor of the Armenians and to exclude the Azerbaijanis. It is also ignoring how Stalin redrew the area to include Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan around 1921 as stated by Service, Robert. Stalin: A Biography. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006 p. 204 ISBN 0-674-02258-0 Ninetoyadome ( talk) 21:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm over 5 years late to the discussion, but I believe the leadership of Soviet Azerbaijan was in charge of drawing the boundaries after the NKAO was decided to exist. The documents about the decisions that were taken are classified to this day, but there's a conspiracy theory that it was draw purposely to not have a border with Armenian SSR, and the Red Kurdistan AO was to be established to create a Muslim buffer zone between Armenia and the NKAO. Obviously I'm not advocating for including the conspiracy theory, but I think the statement in the article is attempting to push the perception that the borders were drawn in Armenians' favor (and I've seen many Azerbaijanis argue this), which is kind of unfair, no?
“The borders of the new autonomy were carved by the Soviet leadership of Azerbaijan with no participation of Armenian representatives. [...] Those straps of sparsely inhabited Highland land with the small towns of Abdalar (Lachin) and Kelbajar as well as a few villages squeezed between the new-established AONK and Armenian Zanghezur, became parts of the Kurd autonomy established on the same day as [NKAO], on July 07, 1923. [...] The history of the autonomous “Kurdistani County” (also known as “Red Kurdistan”) is short and unclear most of the documents referring to its existence are either destroyed or “classified” both in Azerbaijan and Russia. Unclear are also the reasons of its creation. In any case, the frameworks of this article do not allow us to go into the details of the history of the “Red Kurdistan’, but it is quite evident that one of its function was to create a Muslim buffer between autonomous “Armenian Karabakh” and the rest of Armenia.”
These resolutions are used as examples of resolutions affirming the oblast as part of Azerbaijan. Yet in their texts they rather refer to surrounding territory. Is there an interpretation or detail I am missing? Maidyouneed ( talk) 04:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)