Trump’s Decision on Golan Heights As Argument in Relationships With US, Taron Simonyan (EXCLUSIVE)

• 03.27.2019, 11:00
•  America,  Region,  Near East,  World,  Armenia,  Interview

facebook

Donald Trump, the US president officially recognized the Golan Heights as Israeli territory.

”Armedia” IAA talked to Taron Simonyan, international law specialist, Bright Armenia faction MP.

- Mr Simonyan, what is your opinion of Trump’s decision, as a precedent of international law?

- Any act, particularly made by such an influential state can’t go unreacted. Modern international law is sensitive to such cases. Firstly we need to understand the factual bases of the US recognition. The bare fact that Golan was under Israeli control for 52 years can’t be the key reason. I think the US substantiates it like this։ this decision is the security measure without which the physical existence of Israeli state or population is jeopardized.  It should be concluded that when the same state faces other similar factual circumstances a similar decision should be expected. It is in this light that a state’s action gains precedent significance in international relations. In the international law a specific act does not become a universal precedent or universal norm of international law, but it is shaped through periodical repetition and legal conviction. It is due to these factors that a specific behavior becomes a norm of international law.

It should be noted, however, that Trump’s decision can be viewed as a peculiar act that is going to affect further development of international law, be it regressive or progressive.

- To what extend can Trump’s precedent be further applied?

- If factual circumstances have to do with the physical existence of a state or its population and territory control recognition is grounded on this reason, then it could be somehow projected into other cases with similar factual circumstances. However, the case being not judicial and the precedent, as such, being considered  a source of judicial process not just a source of international law in effect in the international relations, it will be difficult to apply one act to a situation with different factual circumstances.

However this act can be used as an argument in the relationships with the US that the latter should demonstrate the same behavior in situations with similar factual circumstances and interpret them the same way.