Based on the comparative analysis of the causes and prerequisites of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire and the Yazidi Genocide in Sinjar, it can be concluded that the two identical crimes have much in common. Both the Armenian Genocide and the Yazidi Genocide were based on racist ideologies. If the Armenian Genocide was based on the ideology of pan-Turkism, then in the case of the Yazidi Genocide it was based on the ideology of Arabism and radical Islam. In both cases, the organizers of the genocides pursued the goal of depriving the indigenous peoples of the right to live in their homeland and taking over their territories, which became one of the main motives for committing these crimes. Along with common features, there are also certain differences. The Armenian Genocide and the Yazidi Genocide were committed in different eras and in different regions, which undoubtedly influenced the causes and preconditions of these identical crimes. The main difference in the causes and prerequisites of the two crimes is that while the Armenian Genocide was planned and prepared by the legitimate authorities of the Ottoman Empire on the eve of the First World War, the beginning of which became the signal for the implementation of this crime, the genocide of the Yazidis in Sinjar was prepared and carried out by the terrorist group ISIS, which took control of certain territories of Iraq, with the complicity of the authorities of the Kurdish autonomy, under the conditions of criminal inaction of the legitimate authorities.

Keywordsthe Armenian Genocide Ottoman Empire Pan-Turkism Yazidi Genocide Sinjar Province of Iraq (Shingal) ideology of Arabism radical Islam

Studying the consequences of various examples of genocide is important not only in terms of identifying the degree of their severity for the victim groups, but also in terms of clarifying the attitude of the international community towards these crimes at the time they were committed. It is important to understand what the position of the great powers was towards these crimes, whether it was expressed through simple condemnation, or certain measures were taken to stop the mass extermination of representatives of ethnic, racial, religious and national groups. From this point of view, in the context of comparing the consequences of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire and the Yezidi Genocide in the region Sinjar of Iraq, the object of the given study is the reaction and degree of intervention of the international community, and influential actors in world politics, with the aim of stopping the further extermination of representatives of the victim groups of these crimes. To achieve the stated goals and objectives, the study combines historicalcomparative and analytical methods, uses a wide range of primary and secondary sources, as well as interdisciplinary research by specialists.

KeywordsArmenian Genocide Ottoman Empire Yezidi Genocide region Sinjar of Iraq international intervention consequences of crimes conviction rates

The Moscow and Kars Treaties, which proved fateful for Armenia and resulted in the seizure of strategically important territories from the Armenian people, have been widely discussed in recent decades, with particular emphasis on the injustice and illegality of these documents from the perspective of international law. Under these treaties, Nakhichevan was illegally placed under the protection of Azerbaijan, and Baku is currently taking unilateral steps to change the status of this autonomous republic, in violation of the Moscow and Kars Treaties still in force. The article examines Turkey’s diplomatic efforts to transfer Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan, which were based on the pan-Turkic goals of the Turkish authorities, as well as the consistent policy of the Azerbaijani authorities aimed at the de-Armenization of the autonomous republic. The domestic and foreign policy motives of the Azerbaijani authorities for changing the status of the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic are also analyzed. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the illegality of the actions of the Azerbaijani authorities in unilaterally changing the status of the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic from the standpoint of international treaty law, as well as to indicate the possible political and legal consequences of violating the provisions of the Moscow and Kars Treaties regarding the status of Nakhichevan.

KeywordsNakhichevan status of autonomous republic Moscow and Kars Treaties Armenia Azerbaijan Turkey Pan-Turanian project