Tweet
AzerTag, Azerbaijan State Info Agency
May 20 2004
TO IDENTIFY AGGRESSOR AND VICTIM OF AGGRESSION IMPOSSIBLE
EXECUTIVE EDITOR OLEXIY SOLOHUBENKO STATES THAT BBC IS TRUE
IMPARTIALITY
[May 20, 2004, 23:30:13]
The materials distributed recently on the BBC radio in connection
with the 10th anniversary of the announcement of cease-fire in the
aggressive war which Armenia conducts against Azerbaijan, have caused
sharp protest in the public of our Republic. The executive editor
of the program of the world service of radio Oleksiy Solohubenko has
sent to the embassy of Azerbaijan in the Great Britain a letter with
the answer to the criticism addressed in this connection to the BBC.
In the said reciprocal letter, which was received by AzerTAj from
the embassy, deep concern is expressed in connection with accusation
of the BBC that it takes the pro-Armenian position in the reporting
concerning the Nagorny Karabakh question. O. Solohubenko states:
"Sounding in the numerous letters of students and readers from Baku
accusations for BBC that it takes the pro-Armenian and anti-Azerbaijan
position, puts under doubt the principle of "fidelity to impartiality"
of our radio that has caused in us serious concern".
The executive editor writes: "We understand painful perception by
Azerbaijan undergone occupation where one million people live in
the position of refugees and IDPs, and by the Azerbaijanis, both
the press and radio-television materials concerning Nagorny Karabakh
conflict, therefore, in the reporting on the conflict we, too, try to
be sensitive. We have closely listened and have analyzed the reporting
caused serious protest at our Azerbaijan auditory. Sounded in lips
of the author of the reporting the statement - "We are in the main
city of the so-called "republic", which has not been recognized by
any country of the world, even Armenia" serves as the weighty proof
of our position. As if to arrival of our correspondent in Khankendi
on the Yerevan route, here, there was no political ground, it is only
technical question and as it seems to me while it is unique way of
travel to the occupied region.
Further, in the letter it is stated: "In the Azerbaijan language,
we alongside with other questions have included the protest action
carried out in Moscow in the reporting in connection with occupation
of Shusha, articles from textbooks of history and the statement
of teachers about events in Baku and Yerevan, have carried out
conversations with various politicians, including representatives
of the Karabakh Liberation Organization, have interviewed also such
known Azerbaijan writers, as Anar, Samadoglu and Aylisly, and the
representative of the Council of Europe.
In the reporting in English, we have received the information directed
on attraction of attention of our correspondent in Baku to inflow of
refugees to Azerbaijan. In the first sentence of the said material it
is stated: "As a result of the conflict, 30 thousand people were lost
and about 1 million - have been ousted from their homelands. Karabakh
and the seven adjacent regions once included in the Soviet Azerbaijan,
now are under the control of Armenia, therefore, Azerbaijan appeared
on the first place in the world with the largest refugee population
per capita of any country in the world.
It is necessary to note also, that unlike Baku, in Yerevan there is
no English-speaking correspondent of the BBC, therefore, we have
not received from Yerevan any material in English. We recognize,
that some Azerbaijanis whom we have interviewed in our reporting,
could be more frank and are wider represented in our program. We
shall hold this question in sight.
It is the BBC's job to provide coverage of events on the Southern
Caucasus, as well as in other regions of the world, impartially,
accurate, fairly and balanced, openly to reflect the position of all
layers of society. We are trusted just for this reason. And we during
the present, extremely important time do not want to lose this trust".
The executive editor ends the letter with the following ideas:
"The BBC thinks much of its presence in Azerbaijan and numerous
listeners in this country. We also think much of the atmosphere of
tolerance and openness concerning mass media created in Azerbaijan
as against other countries, hoping, that adherence to this tradition
will be kept even in case of explosion of emotions. The BBC remains
your reliable partner".
Ð.S. Not calling any doubt in sincerity of statements in the letter
of the executive editor of the BBC, we want to remind one more
moment: to observe balance when the question is about still unsolved
problem between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as a matter of fact results
in injustice as despite of the sensation lifted by the Armenians,
the validity consists that the Azerbaijan lands were occupied, as
a result of military aggression in the country appeared one million
refugees and IDPs. Armenia is a state-aggressor.
Therefore, in the said question, first of all it is necessary to be
objective from the historical-political point of view, and also from
the point of view of only human attitude, and to put an equal sign
between the aggressor and its victim is unfair.
May 20 2004
TO IDENTIFY AGGRESSOR AND VICTIM OF AGGRESSION IMPOSSIBLE
EXECUTIVE EDITOR OLEXIY SOLOHUBENKO STATES THAT BBC IS TRUE
IMPARTIALITY
[May 20, 2004, 23:30:13]
The materials distributed recently on the BBC radio in connection
with the 10th anniversary of the announcement of cease-fire in the
aggressive war which Armenia conducts against Azerbaijan, have caused
sharp protest in the public of our Republic. The executive editor
of the program of the world service of radio Oleksiy Solohubenko has
sent to the embassy of Azerbaijan in the Great Britain a letter with
the answer to the criticism addressed in this connection to the BBC.
In the said reciprocal letter, which was received by AzerTAj from
the embassy, deep concern is expressed in connection with accusation
of the BBC that it takes the pro-Armenian position in the reporting
concerning the Nagorny Karabakh question. O. Solohubenko states:
"Sounding in the numerous letters of students and readers from Baku
accusations for BBC that it takes the pro-Armenian and anti-Azerbaijan
position, puts under doubt the principle of "fidelity to impartiality"
of our radio that has caused in us serious concern".
The executive editor writes: "We understand painful perception by
Azerbaijan undergone occupation where one million people live in
the position of refugees and IDPs, and by the Azerbaijanis, both
the press and radio-television materials concerning Nagorny Karabakh
conflict, therefore, in the reporting on the conflict we, too, try to
be sensitive. We have closely listened and have analyzed the reporting
caused serious protest at our Azerbaijan auditory. Sounded in lips
of the author of the reporting the statement - "We are in the main
city of the so-called "republic", which has not been recognized by
any country of the world, even Armenia" serves as the weighty proof
of our position. As if to arrival of our correspondent in Khankendi
on the Yerevan route, here, there was no political ground, it is only
technical question and as it seems to me while it is unique way of
travel to the occupied region.
Further, in the letter it is stated: "In the Azerbaijan language,
we alongside with other questions have included the protest action
carried out in Moscow in the reporting in connection with occupation
of Shusha, articles from textbooks of history and the statement
of teachers about events in Baku and Yerevan, have carried out
conversations with various politicians, including representatives
of the Karabakh Liberation Organization, have interviewed also such
known Azerbaijan writers, as Anar, Samadoglu and Aylisly, and the
representative of the Council of Europe.
In the reporting in English, we have received the information directed
on attraction of attention of our correspondent in Baku to inflow of
refugees to Azerbaijan. In the first sentence of the said material it
is stated: "As a result of the conflict, 30 thousand people were lost
and about 1 million - have been ousted from their homelands. Karabakh
and the seven adjacent regions once included in the Soviet Azerbaijan,
now are under the control of Armenia, therefore, Azerbaijan appeared
on the first place in the world with the largest refugee population
per capita of any country in the world.
It is necessary to note also, that unlike Baku, in Yerevan there is
no English-speaking correspondent of the BBC, therefore, we have
not received from Yerevan any material in English. We recognize,
that some Azerbaijanis whom we have interviewed in our reporting,
could be more frank and are wider represented in our program. We
shall hold this question in sight.
It is the BBC's job to provide coverage of events on the Southern
Caucasus, as well as in other regions of the world, impartially,
accurate, fairly and balanced, openly to reflect the position of all
layers of society. We are trusted just for this reason. And we during
the present, extremely important time do not want to lose this trust".
The executive editor ends the letter with the following ideas:
"The BBC thinks much of its presence in Azerbaijan and numerous
listeners in this country. We also think much of the atmosphere of
tolerance and openness concerning mass media created in Azerbaijan
as against other countries, hoping, that adherence to this tradition
will be kept even in case of explosion of emotions. The BBC remains
your reliable partner".
Ð.S. Not calling any doubt in sincerity of statements in the letter
of the executive editor of the BBC, we want to remind one more
moment: to observe balance when the question is about still unsolved
problem between Armenia and Azerbaijan, as a matter of fact results
in injustice as despite of the sensation lifted by the Armenians,
the validity consists that the Azerbaijan lands were occupied, as
a result of military aggression in the country appeared one million
refugees and IDPs. Armenia is a state-aggressor.
Therefore, in the said question, first of all it is necessary to be
objective from the historical-political point of view, and also from
the point of view of only human attitude, and to put an equal sign
between the aggressor and its victim is unfair.