Tweet
ARMENIAN 'SMEAR CAMPAIGNS' TARGET AZERBAIJAN
news.az
Aug 4 2010
Azerbaijan
Yuri Bocharov News.Az interviews political scientists Yuri Bocharov,
a member of the Azerbaijan-Israel international association.
As a PR specialist, what can you say about the information war
unleashed on Azerbaijan by Armenia? Has Azerbaijan finally managed
to start its own offensive, the need for which has been highlighted
by President Ilham Aliyev?
The president is right, it is better to attack than to defend in the
information war. However, in the information war, as in the formation
of a state image, it is primarily necessary to define the main groups
of influence on world public opinion which makes the rulers take the
relevant decisions. I can see four such groups in the confrontation
with Armenia: first, the US Congress, second the Council of Europe
and all European structures influencing the policy of European
countries, third, the Kremlin and fourth different economic and
political associations of Azerbaijan's Middle Eastern neighbours,
such as the Arab League and others.
Moscow and Washington are certainly the main groups of influence here
and it is they who will probably put a full stop to the conflict.
While there has been some strategic success on the American front,
there have been only individual tactical victories on the Moscow
front. Certainly, Azerbaijan has come a long way in this fight over
the past few years, but there's still a long way to go until victory
and we should not relax. I would like justice to win and am ready to
help in any way I can.
It is no secret that Armenian activists use smear campaigns to
spoil Azerbaijan's image. How susceptible are foreign media to
anti-Azerbaijani propaganda?
I don't usually pay any attention to provocative statements by Armenian
extremists about Azerbaijan. However, the articles "Pearls of so-called
Azerbaijan" and "Some problems of the mentality of Caucasian Azeris"
got my interest from the analytical point of view. When I read negative
articles written to order, as an analyst I usually ask who needs this
and why and who has paid for it.
The reason why such articles are posted on the Voice of Armenia's
website does not even merit discussion. The Voice is designed to
conduct smear campaigns to earn its keep. However, the question is
why these articles were first reprinted by Inosmi.ru and then Newsland.
And what's most interesting is that the article "Some problems" which
has been posted on the Newsland and at least five other websites as a
reprint from Inosmi.ru, has already been removed from the Inosmi site.
The error 404-information message appears when you try to access it.
This article isn't on Voice of Armenia website either! Meanwhile,
Newsland, which has an audience 100 times the size of the Voice's,
continues to promote it. The original of this article was actually
published in Armenian on the Iravunk website, though it has the same
author as the article "The pearl".
I wonder, therefore, why Newsland, which usually provides balanced
and accurate information about current events, should twice print
two odious, clearly anti-Azerbaijani articles. Is this a new trend or
being done to order? The website is reported to have very competent
journalists from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, though according to
rumour they are backed by the Ukrainian security department. Then who
are they targeting? Azerbaijan, or Russia and Turkey? Who does not
benefit from the gradual calming of the Caucasian conflicts? Is Russia
preparing to clear out Caucasians, so needs to warm the people up?
These people are the main targets of criticism on the Newsland website!
In fact, both articles reflect Yerevan's position, which is trying
to substantiate its occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh before the world
community. For this purpose it needs either to prove that these lands
never belonged to Azerbaijan or it would be even better to prove
that Azerbaijan never existed as a state! If there were no republic
or state, the tale of a Greater Armenia from sea to sea would become
the truth and the occupation of Azerbaijani lands would no longer be
an occupation but the restoration of territorial integrity.
What's most "interesting" here is that these articles are a very
successful piece of PR for someone against many targets. First,
there was a hint that Turkey is interested in destabilizing the
situation in the Caucasus which automatically sets it against
Russia and Azerbaijan. Second, the "Lezgins" seem to link their
hopes for an independent state not with Russia, but with whom? Again
with Turkey or America and probably with Iran, whatever you wish,
but everyone is involved. I have put the word Lezgins in inverted
commas because the author cannot define them himself noting that
"...we use this generalized formula for brevity, since in fact all
Lezgin ethnicities include Udins, Tsakhurs, Lezgins, Rutuls, Agils,
Tabassars, Kriz and Buguds". For which members of the group does he
want to create a state? All of them strongly defend their identity
and are not willing to assimilate. Meanwhile, the author also sets
up the Lezgin people, stirring up the Russian people against him,
since he writes that "the leaders of the Lezgin people, who have
been struggling against Azerbaijani rule for 20 years now and having
numerous losses in this fight know well how to attain this goal with
or without Russia's support". It means that the new state will "be
formed" not within Russia, so Russia "loses" part of its land. Here
is the way real provocateurs hit three targets at once.
But most of all I "liked" the map given in the article "The pearl".
This is posted only on the Voice of Armenia site, while other websites
do not show it, which is a pity since they have lied so much in an
attempt to prove that Azerbaijan has never existed. The map shows
Armenia, Georgia (which is interesting in terms of its current
borders) and even the Nakhchivan Automonous Region in their place,
while Azerbaijan is divided into five almost equal sections within its
current territory. Azerbaijan itself is in the area of the Absheron
Peninsula, Lezgistan along the border with Russia, Talishstan in the
south on the border with Iran and Gardmang and Artsakh in the west.
What's most important is the way the borders were drawn - one dates to
the 9th century, another to the 16th century and a third to the 19th
century. This is how the map of Greater Armenia is built on a mosaic
of borders! If they hint at the so-called Artsakh province, they could
at least draw their 9th century maps with quite a different Armenian
border, at least the Wikipedia website has a different version. Then
why fiddle around with some Karabakh and Artsakh if the whole of
Azerbaijan isn't there?
One more statement by the Armenian "scientist" who said, "Modern
Azerbaijanis do not only have different tribal roots but also
consists of numerous (dozens) of tribes, ethnic groups and quite
independent ethnicities today. The population of the Kur-Araz plain
which makes the basis of the Azerbaijani ethnicity consists of 30-40
tribes of Turkmen, Khazar-Turkic, Khazar-Jewish, Iranian, Kurdish and
Dagestani origin." Thank God, they did not eliminate the concept of
"Azerbaijani ethnicity" though they could have deprived us even of
this. To take the Armenian theory further, Russia also cannot exist
within its contemporary borders. The most it can claim is part of
Moscow province within the princedom of Ivan Grozny while the rest is
"occupied and colonized"!
It is paradoxical that Armenia, which is known for its monoethnic
composition, should speak about "discrimination" against different
nations in Azerbaijan.
I do not want to speak of genocide but I know only two countries in
the world where the aboriginal population is 98%. These are Armenia
and Cambodia, though the [former] leader of the latter, Pol Pot,
attained this through a more radical way, though also set "humanistic"
goals of saving his people from famine through their total reduction.
I do not have any idea of the purposes of the Armenian leadership
today, but we remember that even in the remote past in the period
of the "fraternal love" of all peoples in the USSR, Armenia always
differed in terms of the "purity" of its population and a special form
of tolerance of other peoples. Probably, therefore, the number of the
Armenian diaspora abroad is higher than the population of the country.
Meanwhile, the main cities where Armenians live today are Paris,
New York and Moscow, rather than Yerevan.
I would like to urge people be cautious and not to yield to provocation
if justice is to win.
From: A. Papazian
news.az
Aug 4 2010
Azerbaijan
Yuri Bocharov News.Az interviews political scientists Yuri Bocharov,
a member of the Azerbaijan-Israel international association.
As a PR specialist, what can you say about the information war
unleashed on Azerbaijan by Armenia? Has Azerbaijan finally managed
to start its own offensive, the need for which has been highlighted
by President Ilham Aliyev?
The president is right, it is better to attack than to defend in the
information war. However, in the information war, as in the formation
of a state image, it is primarily necessary to define the main groups
of influence on world public opinion which makes the rulers take the
relevant decisions. I can see four such groups in the confrontation
with Armenia: first, the US Congress, second the Council of Europe
and all European structures influencing the policy of European
countries, third, the Kremlin and fourth different economic and
political associations of Azerbaijan's Middle Eastern neighbours,
such as the Arab League and others.
Moscow and Washington are certainly the main groups of influence here
and it is they who will probably put a full stop to the conflict.
While there has been some strategic success on the American front,
there have been only individual tactical victories on the Moscow
front. Certainly, Azerbaijan has come a long way in this fight over
the past few years, but there's still a long way to go until victory
and we should not relax. I would like justice to win and am ready to
help in any way I can.
It is no secret that Armenian activists use smear campaigns to
spoil Azerbaijan's image. How susceptible are foreign media to
anti-Azerbaijani propaganda?
I don't usually pay any attention to provocative statements by Armenian
extremists about Azerbaijan. However, the articles "Pearls of so-called
Azerbaijan" and "Some problems of the mentality of Caucasian Azeris"
got my interest from the analytical point of view. When I read negative
articles written to order, as an analyst I usually ask who needs this
and why and who has paid for it.
The reason why such articles are posted on the Voice of Armenia's
website does not even merit discussion. The Voice is designed to
conduct smear campaigns to earn its keep. However, the question is
why these articles were first reprinted by Inosmi.ru and then Newsland.
And what's most interesting is that the article "Some problems" which
has been posted on the Newsland and at least five other websites as a
reprint from Inosmi.ru, has already been removed from the Inosmi site.
The error 404-information message appears when you try to access it.
This article isn't on Voice of Armenia website either! Meanwhile,
Newsland, which has an audience 100 times the size of the Voice's,
continues to promote it. The original of this article was actually
published in Armenian on the Iravunk website, though it has the same
author as the article "The pearl".
I wonder, therefore, why Newsland, which usually provides balanced
and accurate information about current events, should twice print
two odious, clearly anti-Azerbaijani articles. Is this a new trend or
being done to order? The website is reported to have very competent
journalists from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, though according to
rumour they are backed by the Ukrainian security department. Then who
are they targeting? Azerbaijan, or Russia and Turkey? Who does not
benefit from the gradual calming of the Caucasian conflicts? Is Russia
preparing to clear out Caucasians, so needs to warm the people up?
These people are the main targets of criticism on the Newsland website!
In fact, both articles reflect Yerevan's position, which is trying
to substantiate its occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh before the world
community. For this purpose it needs either to prove that these lands
never belonged to Azerbaijan or it would be even better to prove
that Azerbaijan never existed as a state! If there were no republic
or state, the tale of a Greater Armenia from sea to sea would become
the truth and the occupation of Azerbaijani lands would no longer be
an occupation but the restoration of territorial integrity.
What's most "interesting" here is that these articles are a very
successful piece of PR for someone against many targets. First,
there was a hint that Turkey is interested in destabilizing the
situation in the Caucasus which automatically sets it against
Russia and Azerbaijan. Second, the "Lezgins" seem to link their
hopes for an independent state not with Russia, but with whom? Again
with Turkey or America and probably with Iran, whatever you wish,
but everyone is involved. I have put the word Lezgins in inverted
commas because the author cannot define them himself noting that
"...we use this generalized formula for brevity, since in fact all
Lezgin ethnicities include Udins, Tsakhurs, Lezgins, Rutuls, Agils,
Tabassars, Kriz and Buguds". For which members of the group does he
want to create a state? All of them strongly defend their identity
and are not willing to assimilate. Meanwhile, the author also sets
up the Lezgin people, stirring up the Russian people against him,
since he writes that "the leaders of the Lezgin people, who have
been struggling against Azerbaijani rule for 20 years now and having
numerous losses in this fight know well how to attain this goal with
or without Russia's support". It means that the new state will "be
formed" not within Russia, so Russia "loses" part of its land. Here
is the way real provocateurs hit three targets at once.
But most of all I "liked" the map given in the article "The pearl".
This is posted only on the Voice of Armenia site, while other websites
do not show it, which is a pity since they have lied so much in an
attempt to prove that Azerbaijan has never existed. The map shows
Armenia, Georgia (which is interesting in terms of its current
borders) and even the Nakhchivan Automonous Region in their place,
while Azerbaijan is divided into five almost equal sections within its
current territory. Azerbaijan itself is in the area of the Absheron
Peninsula, Lezgistan along the border with Russia, Talishstan in the
south on the border with Iran and Gardmang and Artsakh in the west.
What's most important is the way the borders were drawn - one dates to
the 9th century, another to the 16th century and a third to the 19th
century. This is how the map of Greater Armenia is built on a mosaic
of borders! If they hint at the so-called Artsakh province, they could
at least draw their 9th century maps with quite a different Armenian
border, at least the Wikipedia website has a different version. Then
why fiddle around with some Karabakh and Artsakh if the whole of
Azerbaijan isn't there?
One more statement by the Armenian "scientist" who said, "Modern
Azerbaijanis do not only have different tribal roots but also
consists of numerous (dozens) of tribes, ethnic groups and quite
independent ethnicities today. The population of the Kur-Araz plain
which makes the basis of the Azerbaijani ethnicity consists of 30-40
tribes of Turkmen, Khazar-Turkic, Khazar-Jewish, Iranian, Kurdish and
Dagestani origin." Thank God, they did not eliminate the concept of
"Azerbaijani ethnicity" though they could have deprived us even of
this. To take the Armenian theory further, Russia also cannot exist
within its contemporary borders. The most it can claim is part of
Moscow province within the princedom of Ivan Grozny while the rest is
"occupied and colonized"!
It is paradoxical that Armenia, which is known for its monoethnic
composition, should speak about "discrimination" against different
nations in Azerbaijan.
I do not want to speak of genocide but I know only two countries in
the world where the aboriginal population is 98%. These are Armenia
and Cambodia, though the [former] leader of the latter, Pol Pot,
attained this through a more radical way, though also set "humanistic"
goals of saving his people from famine through their total reduction.
I do not have any idea of the purposes of the Armenian leadership
today, but we remember that even in the remote past in the period
of the "fraternal love" of all peoples in the USSR, Armenia always
differed in terms of the "purity" of its population and a special form
of tolerance of other peoples. Probably, therefore, the number of the
Armenian diaspora abroad is higher than the population of the country.
Meanwhile, the main cities where Armenians live today are Paris,
New York and Moscow, rather than Yerevan.
I would like to urge people be cautious and not to yield to provocation
if justice is to win.
From: A. Papazian