This paper explores the ambiguous nature of the two principles of international law - self-determination and territorial integrity, illustrating the controversial nuances of international law on a political board whereby the Crimean crisis has been described. In other words, it aims to elucidate the situation of Crimea from the existing international law prism by examination of these two principles. Multiple paradigms will be applied for interpreting juristic status of mentioned principles. After investigating the historical position and theoretical framework of the principle of self-determination and territorial integrity, research has been aimed to process the massive data collected over the Crimean crisis between Russia and the West. The foundation of this research will be based on the collision between Russia and the West collision over the legal interpretation of these two principles over the entire history and particularly in the case of Crimea. From the very beginning, the legal interpretation of the situation of Crimea was that Russia’s legal rhetoric was groundless and that her legal justification on the secession of Crimea was simply not plausible and therefore could not be linked by either law or moral theories.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/khazar_shirmammadov/1/