you can have your opinion
& i dont mean to be argumentative
but in fact de facto always trumps de jure everywhere

& normally a new de jure will emerge from a new de facto

rarely does a former de jure resume after a subsequent de facto

this is because the rule of law is only an extension or
appurtenance of brute force
created by those in power for their own convenience

indeed de jure is just a subtler means of force than brute force

another way to think of it is that de jure is a subset & refinement
of de facto
just as de facto is a subset & refinement of an active military front

& with claves especially
given their inconvenience & dysfunction etc
it it unlikely that defunct ones would ever be deliberately
reconstituted if they could be avoided

rather the general drift is almost entirely in the opposite direction

--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Smaardijk"
<smaardijk@y...> wrote:

> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"

<aletheiak@y...>

> wrote:
> > confirmation of the demise of karki
> > paragraph number 4 in
> > http://bisnis.doc.gov/bisnis/country/981203az.htm
> >
> Yes, that happened on January 13, 1990, according to the

website of

> the embassy of Azerbaijan in China (
> http://www.azerbembassy.org.cn/rus/back_chron.html ).

Needless to say

> that they call this occupation illegal. Armenian sites all

question

> the Soviet maps that show the enclave, of course (calling it a

dirty

> trick played upon them by Moscow).
>
> So de facto the enclave is no more, but de jure, in my opinion, it
> will continue to be there until some agreement is reached on

its

> status - Azeri or Armenian.
>
> Peter