Documents menu

Independent Chechnya: Treaty of peace with Russia of 12 May 1997

By Francis Boyle, 17 September 1997

This Treaty constitutes a de facto (though not yet de jure) recognition of the Chechen Republic Ichkeria (CRI) by the Russian Federation under international law and practice. Therefore, the Government of CRI should be able to use this Treaty in order to obtain recognition as an independent nation state by other states, whether on a de facto or a de jure basis. Since Russia has already recognized CRI as a de facto independent nation state, then other states should be willing to do the same, if not more. My reasons for this conclusion are as follows.

Title

The most important element of the Treaty is its title: "Treaty on Peace and the Principles of Interrelations Between the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic Ichkeria." Under basic principles of international law, a "treaty" is concluded between two independent nation states. In other words, the CRI is being treated by the Russian Federation as if it were an independent nation state under international law and practice. By comparison, the words "compact" or "accord" are used for an agreement concluded between a federal state such as the Russian Federation and one of its component units. Quite obviously, the use of the word "treaty" instead of "compact" indicates that Russia is treating the CRI as an independent nation state instead of a component unit of the Russian Federation.

Likewise, normally there is no such thing as a "treaty on peace" between a federal state such as the Russian Federation and one of its component units. Therefore, once again, my conclusion is that Russia is treating the CRI as if it were a de facto independent nation state instead of a component unit of the Russian Federation.

Likewise, the use of the language "Treaty on...the principles of interrelations" indicates that Russia is treating the CRI as an independent nation state instead of a component unit of the Russian Federation. Normally, "the principles of interrelations" between a federal state such as the Russian Federation and a component unit are determined by the Constitution of the federal state. This document says nothing at all about the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Therefore, my conclusion once again is that the Russian Federation is treating the CRI as if it were a de facto independent nation state. Certainly the most important element of the title to the Treaty is the use of the term "Chechen Republic Ichkeria." That is the precise name which the Chechen People and the Chechen Government have determined to give to their independent nation state. In other words, once again, the Russian Federation has provided the Chechens with de facto (though not yet de jure) recognition as an independent nation state on their own terms.

Furthermore, this "treaty" is concluded between "the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic Ichkeria." It is already well recognized that the Russian Federation is an independent nation state under international law and practice. Russia can only conclude a "treaty" with another independent nation state under international law and practice. Conversely, an independent nation state such as the Russian Federation would not conclude a "treaty" with a component unit of that federal state. Therefore, once again, my conclusion is that by means of this Treaty the Russian Federation has accorded the CRI recognition as a de facto (though not yet de jure) independent nation state under international law and practice.

Article 1

Article 1 of the Treaty basically parallels the requirement of Article 2, paragraph 4 of the United Nations Charter that member states "shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force...." Likewise, U.N. Charter Article 2, paragraph 3, requires member states to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means...." So by means of this Treaty the Russian Federation has formally recognized its obligation to treat the CRI in accordance with these two most basic requirements of the United Nations Charter. Once again, this is normally a commitment given by one independent nation state to another independent nation state, not a commitment given by a federal government to one of its supposed component units.

Article 2

The second Article of the Agreement is extremely important: "To build our relations corresponding to the generally accepted principles and norms of international law..." Yeltsin has publicly proclaimed that one of these principles of international law is maintaining the territorial integrity of states, presumably the Russian Federation.

But my guess is that he made this statement in order to deflect public criticism of this Treaty for the time being. In my professional opinion, the only way that Article 2 of this Treaty can be properly read in light of everything that was said beforehand in its text is that the Russian Federation is treating the CRI as if it were a de facto (though not yet de jure) independent nation state under international law and practice, with an international legal personality of its own. Only independent nation states are subject to "the generally accepted principles and norms of international law." Once again, treaties are concluded between independent nation states, not between a federal state and one of its supposed component units.

Article 3

Article 3 of the Treaty says that this "treaty is the basis for the conclusion of further treaties and accords over an entire complex of interrelations." In other words, this Treaty contemplates the conclusion of additional treaties in the future. But notice the express use of the word "treaties" to characterize the nature of the agreements in the future. Once again, treaties are concluded between independent nation states, not between a federal state and one of its component units. Hence, my conclusion is that by means of this Treaty the Russian Federation is treating CRI as if it were a de facto independent nation state under international law and practice.

Articles 4 and 5

Articles 4 and 5 of the Treaty follow the normal procedures for the conclusion of a treaty between two independent nation states, as opposed to a compact or an accord between a federal state and one of its component units.

Signatures

This Treaty is signed and brought into force immediately by the two presidents acting in their capacities as heads of state. The presidents only act in the names of their respective states. This Treaty binds the two states, including their respective presidents.

Conclusion

For all of the reasons indicated above, it is my conclusion that by means of entering into this Treaty, the Russian Federation has granted de facto recognition to the Chechen Republic Ichkeria as an independent nation state under international law and practice. Therefore, it is my recommendation that the Chechen Government use this Treaty for the purpose of obtaining international recognition of the Chechen Republic Ichkeria as an independent nation state, whether on a de facto basis or a de jure basis, by other states around the world and by international organizations. Since the Russian Federation has treated the Chechen Republic Ichkeria as a de facto independent state under international law and practice, then there is no good reason why other states and international organizations should not do the same thing, if not more.

Francis A. Boyle Professor of International Law University of Illinois College of Law