Voice of Karabakh # 98(1)

ACTUAL QUOTE

 

Richard MORNINGSTAR,

US Ambassador to Azerbaijan:

 

“As ambassador of the US to Azerbaijan I want to say that I know how painful Khojaly tragedy is for the Azerbaijanis. Killing of civilians is a terrible tragedy. This once more underlines the necessity of making necessary efforts to solve Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Nagorno Karabakh conflict has caused suffering for all Azerbaijanis”.

 

From the statement to mass-media, Baku, February 27, 2013

 

Sabine FREIZER,

Director of the International Crisis Group’s Europe Programme:

 

“Minsk Group is too weak, it can not influence the conflicting parties, and therefore, Azerbaijan and Armenia have not achieved progress on main principles. Armenian president used opening of Khojaly airport issue in his pre-election campaign and I think that it will be further used for propaganda in Azerbaijan. The situation around the airport has been politicized. I think this project can be realized after Azerbaijan’s occupied territories are released”.

 

From the interview to “1in.am”, Yerevan, February 26, 2013

 

Axel FISCHER,

German Bundestag member:

 

“The United Nations has condemned the ongoing occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent territories by Armenian forces in several Security Council resolutions. The occupation was declared to be in violation of international law and thus the resolutions called for an immediate withdrawal of Armenian troops. The UN Security Council resolutions have our full support. Armenia should have ended the occupation a long time ago. The fate of the refugees depends on the reinstatement of Azerbaijan‘s territorial integrity. The first step will have to be taken by the Armenian side, i.e. the withdrawal of their forces from the occupied regions… However, Armenian plans to re-open Khojaly Airport for international aviation raise serious concerns”.

 

From the response to the question of European Azerbaijan Society, Berlin, February 1, 2013

 

Fahd bin Ali Al-DOSARI,

Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Azerbaijan:

 

“Saudi Arabia has always supported the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. The international organizations support the liberation of the occupied Azerbaijani territories. I consider that most Arab and Islamic countries share the same position.”

 

From the statement to mass-media, Baku, February 1, 2013

 

Mark FIELD,

British MP:

 

“Any move to re-open Khojaly Airport would undoubtedly have a negative impact on peace talks being held under the aegis of the OSCE Minsk Group, which have reached a critical phase. Given the symbolism associated with Khojaly, such a move could even derail the peace talks completely”.

 

From the statement to mass-media, Baku, February 11, 2013

 

Natalie GOULET,

Member of French Senator:

 

“An attempt of the Armenian government to open Khojaly airport is a provocation. This step of Armenia, which has occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s territories, will undermine the peace process. Khojaly tragedy is a massacre. I consider myself an honored citizen of Azerbaijan and will do my best to protect and promote Azerbaijan”.

 

From the statement to “Jihan” agency, Paris, February 12, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

Armenian about Armenians

Robert ARAKELOV

KARABAKH DIARY

(beginning in the previous issues)

MANIA OF GRANDIOSE

 

Observing “Karabakh” from abroad during a year and getting ideas about the events analogical with “Karabakh”, I can insist that the real nationalism, I don’t mean the editorialized-simulated, but the real nationalism, is always a sickness similar to drug addiction.

As in every sickness, the nationalism also has its symptoms, its forms, transformation methods and also treatment methods. By the way, from the point of view of causing the organism to get sick, she has also defined dualism, because it harms both the consciousness, and the mood of a person. Besides, we can absolutely say that the underlined sickness isn’t transformed by generations, it is inflectional one and it doesn’t appear on a person in a moment. The period of spreading of the sickness which is considered as one of the reasonable moments after its disappearing, I mean, it can become to reason of the abnormal acts of a person, abnormal perception of reality and the adoptable reaction to this perception, is absolutely personal and it is measured by psychical characters and the internal nature of a person, from another side, the life level, environmental elements, education and intellectual development level of a person.

The nationalism is completely treatable if the period of spreading of the sickness isn’t completed, but after the lapse of the noted period the sickness gets character of irreversible and incurable psychosis, and its carrier becomes dangerous for the surrounding. In this condition the only way of escape from unpredictable acts of the carrier destructive for civil society is his isolation from the society or his settlement in place of strangers unusual for him.

(I want to note in brackets that similar critical level of sickness appeared, for example, in Igor Muradyan and Zori Balayan – two activists of Karabakhian separatism whom I could meet due to their publications and speeches).

As the nationalism isn’t transformed to generations, but is spread, the process of visitation of the sickness to a healthy person isn’t held by mean of his physical contact with carriers of the sickness, but because of leading the necessary information to the second signal system of a person by special methods who hasn’t ever caught of this illness.

So, due to character of spreading of the nationalism sickness can be called stretched during hypnosis and according to symptoms – as a form of collective psychos as every séance of hypnoses catches usually majority of subjects thanks to application of contemporary means of communication. About the psychological disorders of the person sick of nationalism, more stable among them is the mania of nationalist greatness which means giving some characters to own nation that differ their nation from others, exactly putting it in the highest level. And they think that the mentioned uncial specialties are given in wonderful form, genetically transformed by ancient great-grandfathers. Mania of greatness or, as the ancient Rome people called, mania grandiose, appeals to minor standard versions of uniqueness of the national refinement.

(to be continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meshidikhanym NEYMET, candidate of historical science

Epigraphic monuments of Garabagh

(beginning in previous issue)

 

Two-row engraving is carved over the entrance into round mausoleum into village Shykhlar of Jebrail region. The text is as following:

1. “Its owner and possessor (i.e. mausoleum) the late

2. Forgiven Khalil ibn Mirzadjan. May Allah give his mercy… year”. According to paleographic peculiarities of engravings and architectural style of mausoleum this building may be dated back to the start of XIV century.

The following is the engraving in Azerbaijan-Persian over the entrance in mausoleum in village Khubyarly of Jebrail region: “May always these passages be populated by possessors of the world, which seek mercy. Be aware that the one who restored this tomb was that highly ranked inhabitant of paradise, highest Abd al-Ali Ikhvan. Date of construction is the year thousand two hundred and two” (1787-1788).

In Agdam in architectural monuments “Imarat” there were gathered tombstones of necropolis of XVI century. Two coffer-shaped monuments with engraving in Arabic belong to Satlmshy, son of may (lana) Ahmad ad-Din (died in 965 year of Hijra/1557-1558); Mohammad, son of Karam (died in 945 year of Hujra/1538-1539). On other tombstones there were carved images reflecting crafts and everyday life –horseman, rosaces – symbol of sun, jug for water, mace, dagger, bow and arrow, shoes. On one of the tombstones there is bas-relief of the cow without head. Between legs of the animal there are images of bow and arrow, sledge-hummer, zindan for blacksmithing of metal workpieces and scissors for metal.

Scenes of everyday life, reflecting professions of buried people and most widely displayed in memorials of foremountain regions, bring to nowadays the ancient traditions reflected in applied art. Realistic motifs of local art dominate in these images.

In Lachin region, in valley of Shalva to left from the road to temple Agaoglan there are tombstones of XVI century made in shape of horse figure and coffer made of stones. On the left facet of one of tombstones the relief of weaving loom is carved. On the right there is the figure of standing woman. Woman’s arms stretched to opposite directions, in one hand she holds beetle, in the other the scissors. At the head level the ball of wool is carved while under her hand there is multipronged beetle. Two similar monuments can be found in cemetery of Uruds in Zangezur. Indicated tombstones and other monuments in shape of horse and sheep figures made of stone (XIV-XVII centuries) by paleography, engravings in form of poems in Azerbaijani, relief images reflecting everyday life represent a single style of school of art of carving over stone and calligraphy, traditional for masters of foremountain regions of Azerbaijan.

Sheep raising played an important role in farming of fore -mountain regions. That is why sheep turned into totem. Horses were also regarded as sacred animals, which served as a single mean of transport in mountains. This explains making tombstones in form of horse and sheep figures.

In Malybeyli village of Lachin region there are three monuments in form of stony horse. Mane, saddle, stirrup and leash on one of them are distinctly carved. On blade-bone of horse there is the image of bird and on the left side of neck there is the date: “year of 977” (1569-1570). Technique of carving of the second figure is very similar to the first figure. Fore and back legs of both figures are made from a whole stone piece but divided from each other by line. On the left side of horse of the third monument there are images of rosace– symbol of sun and figure of a man, who holds bird in his right hand. It is known that ancient Turks had the cult of idol Umay, which protects children. Traditional image of a man with bird in his hands on monuments was regarded probably as a sign which protects them from destruction and damage. Mane of the horse is accurately combed to the right side. Near the saddle the round rosace is carved. All three monuments are made by one sculptor. They can be attributed to the XVI century. All horse figures have the image of the same tamga. Such tamga we can see on the figure of horse (XIV century) now kept in Mskheti affiliate of lapidary of State museum of Georgia in Armaziskhevi.

(to be continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phelix TSERTVADZE

                                        THE MORGENTHAU TRAGEDY

                                                   (beginning in the previous issues)

                                                                     Chapter 5.

                                              Dictatorship of Germany on Turkey

So:

What did Mr. Henry Morgenthau want concretely underline with writing his book “Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story”? Did he want to write about the tragedy of Armenian nation? No. It didn’t include in his plans. He didn’t plan to touch the Armenian topic. His book is about German expansionist politics and attempts of Germans to creation of world state. As a proof it is just enough to look at preface of the book of 18 October, 1918 and read the contents. And we do it. “Preface. By this time the American people have probably become convinced that the German deliberately planned the conquest of the world… I have therefore laid aside any scruples I had as to the propriety of disclosing to my fellow countrymen the facts which I learned while representing them (American nation – P. C.) in Turkey…” There isn’t any sign of Armenian topic in the preface. The people who brought the chapters 22-27 to Morgenthau’s book forgot to make needed correctives also in the preface which stayed at the original – firstly published form and witnessed of their forgery.

Let’s read the contents of Morgenthau’s book. “A German Superman at Constantinople” (Chapter 1); “The “Boss System” in the Ottoman Empire …useful to Germany” (Chapter 2); “The personal representative of the Kaiser… Wangenheim” (Chapter 3); “Germany mobilizes the Turkish army” (Chapter 4); “Wangenheim smuggles the Goeben and the Breslau through the Dardanelles” (Chapter 5); “Wangenheim tells…” (Chapter 6); “Germany’s plans for new territories…” (Chapter 7); “A classic instance of German propaganda” (Chapter 8); “Germany closes the Dardanelles…” (Chapter 9); “Germany forces Turkey into the war” (Chapter 11); “the Germans insist on persecuting…” (Chapter 12); “A “Holy War” was made in Germany” (Chapter 14); “The first German attempt to get a German peace” (Chapter 15). So, Morgenthau’s book firstly was aimed to story about German politics and its secrets, but not about the Armenian problem. At the same time Mr. Morgenthau noted the arrogance of German dictatorship in Ottoman empery: Germany mobilizes the Turkish army – Germany closes the Dardanelles – Germany forces Turkey into the war – …the Germans insist on persecuting – …a “Holy War” that was made in Germany. As you see, there are many proofs than enough.

But the list of proofs about German dictatorship and its relation with all events of 1914-1915 in Turkey, including deportation of a part of Armenian population, was enough enlarged and you saw it. “Now, – I continued, – appears a strange situation: in one side, so called barbaric country as Turkey tries to hold war in a civilized manner and manner with its enemies – Christians decently, from the other side, the cultural Christian country as Germany tries to ensure Turks in returning to Barbarism”. Freely or unwittingly Mr. Morgenthau refused and exposed speculations of Armenian sides about Turks’ plan of killing Armenians for their Christian belief. It never happened.  

 

                                                                  (to be continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Samuel A.Weems

“Armenia: secrets of terrorist “Christian” state”

The great series of Armenian frauds. Vol. I

(beginning in previous flimsies)

Chapter nine:

Bloodthirsty Armenian Bandits

A Despotic Armenian Regime

 

Had it not been for Admiral Bristol’s vision to reconstruct what would become modern Turkey, much, if not all, of Turkey would have become part of Communist Russia during the Cold War Era. Turkey would not have become a U.S. friend and NATO partner. Who knows how the history might have unfolded, as the Soviets would finally have had the “warm ports” in the Aegean and Mediterranean, along with the crucial straits of Bosphorus and Dardanelles that Russians desperately wanted for more than three centuries.

Modern-day Turkey has been a true and good friend of the United States since the modern republic was formed in 1923. Turks fought shoulder-to-shoulder with Americans in the last fifty years in Korea, the Gulf, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, and in the current war against terrorism. Admiral Bristol was important in founding this relationship over the objections of the Armenians and their self-serving friends. Today America is the better because Admiral Bristol stood tall in 1918 and 1920.

Hovannissian calls Admiral Bristol “a master of manipulation” (P 91) because he does not approve of the U.S. government’s appointment of Bristol as high commissioner in Istanbul on August 12, 1919, “a post that gave him control over both naval and diplomatic offices” (P 92).

As the British prepared to leave, the Armenian leaders became frantic. In the Armenian Parliament, the sole party controlled by the dictators, Avetik Sahakian “spoke of the iron chain closing in on Yerevan and summoned the nation to bring forward its every last resource. In mid-August the parliament declared a state of national emergency, sent emissaries to encourage the men at the front, and appeal for help to the legislators of the Great Britain, France, Italy, the United States, Greece, Romania, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Persia, China and Japan” (P 93).

To read this statement, one would think Armenia was surrounded by enemies who wanted to destroy it. The truth of the matter is, the Armenian leadership first provoked a civil war with the Ottoman Empire and their people suffered terribly because of the greed and misjudgment of the Armenian leaders. They started a war of aggression with neighboring Georgia and lost. The Armenians started a war with Azerbaijan and lost. The Armenian people paid the price in horrible human suffering.

Think about this great lie the Armenian leadership sent around the world: “Thus, even after the Allied triumph, there remains for the Armenian people no other means of safeguarding its physical existence than to take up the worst possible condition of unequal combat against the secular enemy of the Armenians and of civilization”. Unfair, harsh, and unjustified words from Hovannissian! Hovannissian continues to explain the “big lie” as put forward by the Armenian leaders: “Although the call to arms would heighten suffering, increase famine and epidemic, create new orphans, lead to more exoduses, and further deplete the nation, it was the only alternative to perishing at the hands of the Turks”. Hovannissian doesn’t stop there. He continues: “If it is reserved for the Armenian people to be exterminated at the moment when thousands of Allied soldiers are located at Constantinople, Trebizond, Batum, Tiflis, Baku, at a moment when they can easily stay at the hand of the butchers of the Armenian people, then it remains only to forward to the conscience of humanity its agonizing cries and to go to its fate with a firm resolution to fall with honor” (P 93-94).

This is an outrageous statement!

They started the war they were now losing. They had started the war with Azerbaijan, yet they blamed the Turks – “the butchers of the Armenian people”. The Armenian leaders made the claim they would “fall with honor”.

Fall with honor? By being disloyal to the Ottoman Empire? By being hostile to its neighbors in Georgia? By being hateful and aggressive to its neighbors in Azerbaijan? What manner of honor is this in a civilized world? The answer rings out through the centuries – this isn’t honor, its treason.

Such conduct cannot be called Christian! It is not honor to operate with unprovoked attacks behind the Ottoman battle lines by night and pretend to be the trusted Ottoman friends by day with whom they had lived in peace for more than five hundred years!

(to be continued)

 

 


 

 

 

National Heroes of Azerbaijan

Teacher, fighter, hero

He was not born in Khojaly, but all residents of this city considered him as the real Khojaly inhabitant. And probably not by accident that he gave his life for Khojaly…

Alasgar Khanlar oglu Novruzov was born August 1, 1949 in the Kyurdhadzhy village of Lachin district of Azerbaijan. He graduated from a rural high school with excellent grades in 1966, and in 1968-70’s was on active military service in the ranks of former Soviet Army, which served in Leninakan of the Armenian Republic, where, by the way, and learned about some of the specific features of the Armenian nation.

After demobilization from the army Alasgar decided to continue his study – in 1971, he entered at the Shusha Pedagogical College and at the end of this educational institution in 1973, received his degree as a teacher of physical education and sport. In the same year he began working in his native village school. But fate disposed that Alasgar moved in 1979 in Khojaly and began working in his specialty in high school number one. Everything was normal, people worked, built the city, had a rest, children learned – in short, everything was as it necessary. But suddenly someone does not like it, some people have scratched hands of the Armenians, someone symptoms of the Armenian disease to capture historical territories of neighboring countries and the expansion of the borders of Armenia began to be shown. So off it went…

Armenians began to seize, destroy, and expel residents of Azerbaijanis from their homes, both in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. This was when it became necessary to create self-defense detachments from among the residents of Azerbaijani towns and villages, one of which was the Khojaly unit, created in 1988. Among the first five members of the Council of Defense of Khojaly there was also A.Novruzov. Against the background of all the inflaming undeclared war of Armenia against Azerbaijan and became incessant cases extermination of civilians, burning their houses, combat activity vigilante groups also increased. Alasgar teacher has always been one of the different in a positive way and brave members of Khojaly squad. Squad led by him, containing from 35-40 people, not for a moment leave their posts and bravely attempts to reflect all Armenian invaders break into small town.

But then came that fateful night – the night from the 25th to 26th February 1992. Night, bloody hand was written into the history of the Azerbaijani people. Alasgar, as always, was with his squad in the post. Despite the continuous attack, his squad didn’t take their positions. Incredible strength and bravery was shown by A.Novruzov before the onslaught of the Armenian-Russian forces, far exceeding his squad number and equipment. Because he well knew for what fights. All night lasted this unequal battle. Incomparable superiority in strength and armed aggressor and small size, as well as depletion of ammunition from the defender told his negative word. The enemy managed to take Alesker prisoner, albeit with great difficulty. And later, he was subjected in Stepanakert to incredible tortures and brutally murdered.

He was family, at a family grew up three children…

On February 25, 1997, Alesker Khanlar oglu Novruzov was posthumously conferred the honorary title of the National Hero of Azerbaijan by the decree of the President of Azerbaijan.

The hero was buried in his native village Kyurdhadzhy.

Gadir NASIROV,

“Voice of Karabakh”

 

 

 

 

 

Jamil HASANLI, doctor of historical sciences, professor

 

Nagorno-Karabakh: old misconceptions in new interpretation

(beginning in the previous issues)

After April changes in 1920 G. Orjonikidze supported Azerbaijan in Azerbaijani-Georgian and Azerbaijani-Armenian relations for some times that was considered as “first child of Soviet Russia in East” and it strongly made angry somebody in Moscow, especially in National commissariat of foreign affairs (NCFA) of Russia. Leader of the underlined group G. Chicherin blackmailed Orjonikidze for his position calling him as “secret orientalist-Muslim lover”. At the answer for these attacks G. Orjonikidze told G. Chicherin that he hadn’t any relation with Muslim nationalism and he hadn’t any Tatar in his group (Telegram of G. Orjonikidze to G. Chicherin. 1920).

G. Orjonikidze perfectly knew that he was muddying water in the Center, that’s why he asked N. Alliluyev to inform Stalin that Chicherin together with Garakhan again put him “in desperate situation there”. (Letter to Alliluyev. 07.07.1920). G. Chicherin demonstrated completely different position who wrote the following in his telegram to Orjonikidze on 8 July: “We perfectly know that there will appear a moment for sovietization also of Armenia, but now it is early for this. The only important moment that we can reach is declaration of Karabakh and Zangazur as disputable lands, but the agreement of the Azerbaijani government is necessary for this. It is necessary for us, we absolutely should make an agreement with Armenia. It is required by the world’s position, but we have to state Karabakh and Zangazur as disputable lands for this aim” (Telegram of G. Chicherin to G. Orjonikidze. 08.07.1920).

G. Chicherin and L. Garakhan directed the politics of National commissariat of foreign affairs to organization of relationship with Armenia with Azerbaijan. Not being able to prevent this politics, G. Orjonikidze sent a telegraph on 16 July to V. I. Lenin, I. Stalin and G. Chicherin asking them not to make peace with Armenia until arrival of Azerbaijani delegation. He wrote: “Peace with Armenia without participation of Azerbaijan would strongly make angry the people here” (Telegram of G. Orjonikidze to V. I. Lenin, I. V. Stalin and G. Chicherin. 16.07.1920). This position was also supported by the member of CC ACP A. Mikoyan. He wrote to Orjonikidze on 29 June: “We’re outraged of the attitude of the Center to Karabakh and Zangazur. You also defend our point of view before the Center. We aren’t against peace with Armenia, but absolutely not against Karabakh and Zangazur” (Telegram of A. Mikoyan to G. Orjonikidze. 29.06.1920). As we observe, it was very strange that the Soviet Russia and dashnak Armenia held secret negotiations related with Azerbaijan without its participation and agreement. The same thing about Georgia happened also with Armenia. At that time there were many interesting moments in the encrypted parts of the telegram which Orjonikidze and Kirov sent to Lenin and Stalin. They considered that achievement of agreement with Georgia without considering the position of Azerbaijan would lead the soviet politics to failure. Orjonikidze and Kirov wrote: “Why making an agreement with Georgia, we refuse agreeing also with Azerbaijan? If the Azerbaijani problem would be solved in any other manner, please, let us know”. Then they warn the Center with special code: “You mustn’t introduce Garakhan as the leader of the east politics in any case. People here accept the Zagatala scandal (we mean the promise about giving Zagatala region to Georgia according to Moscow agreement on 7 May, 1920 – J. Hasanli) as the trick of Armenians” (Encrypted telegram of G. Orjonikidze and S. Kirov to V. Lenin and I. Stalin. 12.06.1920). No doubt that L. Garakhan played an important role in construction and realization of anti-Azerbaijani politics of NCFA of Soviet Russia. The encrypted or open texts of the documents of those times show his intrigues with Karabakh problem. For example, G. Orjonikidze openly wrote: “Karabakh is the second Zagatala of our National commissariat of foreign affairs. The special colossal provocation is held here about that all these are done by Armenians in Moscow” (Telegram of G. Orjonikidze to G. Chicherin. 1920).

But on the contradiction with strong pressure of the Center against Azerbaijan, it was impossible to reconcile its position with Armenia. Negotiations of S. Kirov with M. D. Huseynov – national commissar and Armenian representatives in Tiflis hadn’t any special result. He wrote to Chicherin on 6 August that as the result it was possible to reach only the following by Azerbaijanis: they were ready to compromise Sharur-Daralayaz region to Armenia, but the rest lands – Nakhchivan, Ordubad, Julfa, Zangazur, Karabakh they considered as their own territories. Also the Armenian representatives decisively pretended for the highlighted lands. The main proof of Azerbaijan was that these regions had belonged to Azerbaijan during Musavat leadership and concession of these lands would damage soviet regime in eyes of Azerbaijanis, Iran and Turkey (Letter of S. Kirov to G. Chicherin. 06.08.1920).

(to be continued)