Tweet
Times.am, Armenia
Feb 9 2010
Azerbaijan needs `material for genocide'
By Times.am at 9 February, 2010, 5:48 pm
The interview of political scientist Levon MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN
to the observer of Voskanapat.info portal Goar KARAPETYAN
G. K. Levon Grantovich, in your interview to the `Hayots Ashkhar' you
said that one of the brain trust of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)
is located in Azerbaijan Republic. Why Azerbaijan needs it?
L. M. ` Sh. Any state always tries to create/to get some influence
leverage over the other, most often, over neighboring state. Even if
between them were established very friendly relations. The presence of
such leverage doesn't indicate its indispensable application. This
necessary determent factor insures country from possible undesirable
moves of ally in its foreign policy predilections. That leverage also
could impact on foreign and internal policy of the `controlled' state.
That is why some called superpowers for their influence on policies of
the majority countries of the world. Azerbaijan today indeed has (not
big) opportunities to influence the policy of Turkey and Georgia, and
constantly attempts to build them up.
In this case Azerbaijan's policy towards the current Turkey's
government, despite Baku politicians' words is really hostile. Kurds
are not the only problem, although one of the main. The problem has
also religious denominational reason. The unbridled anti-clerical
policy of Azerbaijan, when almost every month demolished and closed
mosques, led to serious contradiction with the ruling in Turkey
ideology of the islamist Justice and Development party. This is one
more additional incentive for convergence between Azerbaijan and
Republican People's Party the main opposition in Turkey, which
continues the traditions of Mustafa Ataturk, an ardent opponent of
Islam. At the same time, let's pay attention to the fact that
Azerbaijan closely operates with Turkey's religious movement jaafari
and among them there is a lot of ethic Azeri Turks.
Toward the Kurds Baku exploits the ethnicity of Azerbaijani majority
leaders, the Kurds nationality. Azerbaijani Kurds feed the ethnicity
with money infusions so it would look more convincing.
G. K. What about Turkey? How does it relate to this kind of behavior
similar of the part `Bir millyat' (one nation)?
L.M. ` Sh. The ethnic experience of Turks became accustomed to this
kind of behavior even half brothers, without mentioning the
dissenters, who fell away from the main mass of Turkish nomads? Azeri
and Anatolian Turks not once fought with each other. Azeri Turks, are
mostly Shias by centuries resisted Anatolian Turks confessing Sunni.
`Bir millyat' appeared only at the end of XIXth and beginning XXth
centuries, it was the wave of new Pan-Turkism ideology. Until that
time delicate and sleek Istanbul beys (Bey is a Turkish title for
`chieftain) disdained Caucasian Turks. However, today this ratio
didn't change a lot. Anatolian Turks have same attitude toward
Central-Asian Turks, Turks of Volga region, Siberian Turks and so on.
All of the mentioned Turks never entrusted each other. They didn't
trust even themselves. Let me remind you well-known fact: as soon as
Ottoman Turkey's Crown Prince would become Sultan, first thing he
would do destroy his brothers. They couldn't let survive anyone who
could tomorrow relying on the `right of blood' claim to the throne.
Now, between Turkey and Azerbaijan, in fact, is the same process: we
observe mutual attempts on political will destruction of opponent.
Baku and Ankara are brothers, attempting to achieve superiority over
each other. All Turks relate to each other the same way: Uzbeks in
constant dispute with Kyrgyz, Turkmens are in tense relations with
Azerbaijan¦
G. K. Does Turkey undertake any actions against Azerbaijan?
L.M. ` Sh. It would be wrong to say that Ankara is only defending
itself. This is not so. Small plots, like the incident with trashcans
filled with Azerbaijani national flags before the football match with
Armenia, in the Turkish Bursa is only the visible tip of iceberg. The
direct abuse of women members of Milli-Mejlis of Azerbaijan, when the
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, in fact, called them prostitutes, also
one of the obvious but unimportant, aspects of confrontation. The way
more serious are troops of Turkish radical Islamic movements in
Azerbaijan. Typically, they all consist of the radical Sunni
movements' followers. In fact Turkey not only radicalizes Azerbaijani
society, but also splits it to Sunnism ` Shia Islam We see how serous
and contradictory these two Islamic movements are on the Iraq's
example, where for many years the followers of these movements
senseless and cruel kill each other.
The most destructive in this regard are nursists, or nurchi, as they
called in Azerbaijan. It's interesting that in Turkey they officially
banned, but in Azerbaijan they function quite openly. The same as
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). Azerbaijan doesn't recognize this
movement as terrorist. Despite the fact that PKK recognized as
terrorist organization in Turkey, USA, and many Europe countries. The
fact that Azerbaijan is free for nursists preaches and for function of
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) cells indicates the deep contradictions
between Baku and Ankara. But if Kurdistan Workers' Party PKK is badly
disguised weapon of Azerbaijan against Turkey, then nursists represent
if not the threat, but concern for Azerbaijan itself.
G. K. Then, why Baku is not trying to get rid of them?
L. M. ` Sh. At first glance it would be logical. However, not
everything is so clear and simple. First, Baku sure that will be able
to keep under control representatives of this movement. Second,
Azerbaijan hopes that, if there would be need, it will be able `to
return' the ideological bomb of nursizm back. Furthermore, it's
actually difficult to extend nursists influence in Shiite Azerbaijan:
the only region, where they find `understanding', is the northern part
of Azerbaijan, predominantly populated by Sunnis. On the other hand,
Baku obtains rights to `justify' repressions among Dagestan aboriginal
people of Azerbaijan by the presence among them of radical Islamists.
G. K. Dirty trick, I should say.
L. M. ` Sh. I agree with you. But, tell me when in its short history,
Azerbaijan tried to solve national problems in civilized ways?
G. K. In Azerbaijan, there should be intelligentsia. Indeed
intelligentsia represents moral standard of any society. In Azerbaijan
should be academicians, poets, artists, creative workers¦
L. M. ` Sh. You repeat common mistake. Intellectual person not always
belong to the intelligentsia. The theme is interesting, and I would
like to develop it.
My deep conviction that intellectual ` a man living in harmony with
its spiritual, moral, material values of his nation. I want to
emphasize: his nation. An intellectual can't be cosmopolitan. Since,
what is accepted in one nation, not necessarily greeted by another
one. This applies both for the apparent trifles, in private life and
for serious circumstances. For example, guests in Armenian family
won't take off shoes; this is disrespect to the hostess. At the same
time guests in Central Asia or, for example, Japan, should take their
shoes off, and if they won't it would cause a deep insult. This is
understandable. In Central Asia they used to eat on Dastarkh?n `
special carpet used on the floor. Walk into the house shoes on akin to
climb the table in Europe.
One could be very intellectual, to know living and dead languages as,
for example, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, but at the same time do not belong
to the intelligentsia. On the other hand, for example, living in the
village Armenian wine-grower, who didn't read a dozen books is often
the true standard of intelligentsia. Every nation for centuries and
millennia of its existence developed its own code of conduct, moral
and intellectual values. They are different in different people,
sometimes its something little, sometimes it comes to the mutual
exclusion, and they often present the value only in their own nation
and environment. But they are there in each and every nation and it
should be considered.
Nation, in general, can't commit crimes. At least, in the moral
dimensions of this exact nation. We are different, and it should be
considered. We all remember how Azerbaijan massively cheered their
officer who cut down sleeping Gurgen Markaryan. We all were outraged:
how could the scum, vile murder be admired? In fact Ramil Safarov
didn't violated Turks moral code, on the contrary, he acted in full
accordance with their unwritten code. That is why he still enjoys the
glory of the hero. Murder, even the most vile, doesn't conflict with
the mentality of Caucasian Turk. It's impossible for us. Of cause even
among the Armenians could be found man capable on killing of sleeping
person. I even think that there could be found few dozen people who
would try to justify this murder. But among majority of Armenians such
murder would be condemned.
I would like to be understood correctly: I am not saying what is good
or bad. I am just saying that this way thinking worked out by nations
for centuries. I understand that some Transcaucasian Turks could get
indignant by reading these words. But I understand that only marginal
part, or those who have some not-Turkish blood would get indignant.
True Turks will only smirk. You can't do anything with it. If Turks
would be different, then they probably won't survive in the history.
And conversely if we would be different, then probably we won't exist.
It means that ideological codes worked out by nation to a large extent
dictated by history and necessity.
G. K. Do you want to say that Turks are not worse or better us?
L. M. ` Sh. It's exactly what I want to say. We are different. It's
just impossible to compare incomparable things. What is better, a cave
or a tree? Turks and Armenians are civilizational antipodes. We have
different outlook, different cultures, mutually exclusive lifestyles,
different civilizations. We live in a different value dimensions. We
should accept each other the way we are.
G. K. Do we act different way?
L. M. ` Sh. Yes, unfortunately. We always believed that Turk could be
the way we are; it's a mistake, almost crime. Note: we had three wars
with Transcaucasian Turks only in XXth century. Each time, immediately
after the end of another war there were some Armenians, who claimed
that Turks are not `the same'. Phrase `Turks, could be bad, but I have
a Turk friend¦', probably heard every Armenian. The result of this
thinking was the fact that after each war Armenian survivors after
massacres remained to live behind Turk lines, turning in a voluntary
hostage, or, I'll say tougher, `material for the future massacres'.
It would be wrong and even unfair to blame people, but we can't turn a
`blind eye'. People, extrapolated on Turks their own outlook became
unwitting perpetrators of their children martyrdom. We don't talk here
about Armenians, who lived in Artsakh and Utik: they lived on the
territory of their historical Homeland. We talk about those, who lived
on the left bank of Kura River, in Kakh or Shamakhna regions, in
Sumgait or Baku. Nukha Armenians, for example, during each of three
mentioned above wars were massacred. Altogether in Nukha-Aresh region
Turks killed more than 75 thousand Armenians. More than 65 thousands
of them were killed during summer-fall of 1918. Indeed it was possible
to avoid, if not this ill-starred `Turk is not the same'.
Turk is always `same'. We are always the same. He is always ready to
cut, we are always ready `to understand it' and even `notice'
imaginary changes. Even today some people in Armenia believe that
`Turk is not the same'. They don't understand, or they don't want to
understand, that it's impossible. In case if they understand and still
repeat it, then I can't call them other way than traitors.
G. K. Do Turks extrapolate their outlook on us, Armenians?
L. M. ` Sh. Naturally. Otherwise they won't believe in delirium that
Azeri government propaganda stuffs them with. Why the average
Transcaucasian Turk believes that Armenians killed Khojaly people,
tortured and shut prisoners and so on? Because he is able to do that.
He can't imagine different way of things. Azerbaijani propaganda daily
invent new stories of Armenian `atrocities', they all designed for the
formed by centuries outlook of Transcaucasian Turk. Seeds fall on the
well-manured soil, therefore there are such lush fruits.
G. K. Does it mean that genocide and massacres ` unavoidable
phenomenon, and we are doomed to survive it in the future?
L. M. ` Sh. Fortunately, this is not so. But not because we,
Armenians, suddenly saw the light or Turks changed. As I've said,
among Armenians there are people, who believe that `the Turks are not
the same'. Turks are still willing to cut peaceful and defenseless
people. However, since 1988 situation radically changed. It's one of
the main results of national liberation fight for Artsakh. Turk lost
his advantage. It didn't happen intentionally, in some extent it
happened occasionally, better to say because of the political
short-sightedness of our enemies, who deported Armenians from the left
bank of Kura River. But it happened.
Artsakh war has changed a lot in our life. As war, it, doesn't stand
out from thousands other collisions with the neighboring tribes, and
its glorification is the consequence of its close aberrations and even
incompleteness of war itself. The Artsakh war has the unique
consequence: it geographically divided us with Turks. You see, it's
very important: the resettlement areas of Armenians and Transcaucasian
Turks are no longer intersecting. From now on Turks denied the
opportunity to cut the civilian population. We lost the feeling of
concern for the remaining hostage relatives. For the first time in
many centuries! Even if you deny the historical truth, it would be
enough do not let Turks in our rear.
I am convinced that Turks attempt reoccupy Artsakh (mountains and low
parts) not because they consider it as their homeland. Turk perfectly
well know that this is not so. Azerbaijan seeks (at least partially)
to restore the conditions, that would allow (if necessary) to begin
new massacres. Azerbaijan needs hostages. Roughly speaking Azerbaijan
needs `material for genocide'. And we should understand it. Nomads
never had a feeling of the native land. Moreover, it never belonged to
them. Pasture with the juice grass in Karavachar Mountains that's all
what they've lost. They need the return `of refugees', I repeat, they
need to separate part of Armenians from the main mass, to get back to
cutting, thus blackmailing the remaining part of the Armenian people.
G. K. Thank you Levon Grantovich. Hopefully, we'll have another
possibility to talk.
L. M. ` Sh. Sure. And we'll talk about our Army, the only and eternal
guarantee of Armenian people's security
G. K. Certainly.
http://times.am/2010/02/09/azerbaijan- needs-%e2%80%9cmaterial-for-genocide%e2%80%9d/
Feb 9 2010
Azerbaijan needs `material for genocide'
By Times.am at 9 February, 2010, 5:48 pm
The interview of political scientist Levon MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN
to the observer of Voskanapat.info portal Goar KARAPETYAN
G. K. Levon Grantovich, in your interview to the `Hayots Ashkhar' you
said that one of the brain trust of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)
is located in Azerbaijan Republic. Why Azerbaijan needs it?
L. M. ` Sh. Any state always tries to create/to get some influence
leverage over the other, most often, over neighboring state. Even if
between them were established very friendly relations. The presence of
such leverage doesn't indicate its indispensable application. This
necessary determent factor insures country from possible undesirable
moves of ally in its foreign policy predilections. That leverage also
could impact on foreign and internal policy of the `controlled' state.
That is why some called superpowers for their influence on policies of
the majority countries of the world. Azerbaijan today indeed has (not
big) opportunities to influence the policy of Turkey and Georgia, and
constantly attempts to build them up.
In this case Azerbaijan's policy towards the current Turkey's
government, despite Baku politicians' words is really hostile. Kurds
are not the only problem, although one of the main. The problem has
also religious denominational reason. The unbridled anti-clerical
policy of Azerbaijan, when almost every month demolished and closed
mosques, led to serious contradiction with the ruling in Turkey
ideology of the islamist Justice and Development party. This is one
more additional incentive for convergence between Azerbaijan and
Republican People's Party the main opposition in Turkey, which
continues the traditions of Mustafa Ataturk, an ardent opponent of
Islam. At the same time, let's pay attention to the fact that
Azerbaijan closely operates with Turkey's religious movement jaafari
and among them there is a lot of ethic Azeri Turks.
Toward the Kurds Baku exploits the ethnicity of Azerbaijani majority
leaders, the Kurds nationality. Azerbaijani Kurds feed the ethnicity
with money infusions so it would look more convincing.
G. K. What about Turkey? How does it relate to this kind of behavior
similar of the part `Bir millyat' (one nation)?
L.M. ` Sh. The ethnic experience of Turks became accustomed to this
kind of behavior even half brothers, without mentioning the
dissenters, who fell away from the main mass of Turkish nomads? Azeri
and Anatolian Turks not once fought with each other. Azeri Turks, are
mostly Shias by centuries resisted Anatolian Turks confessing Sunni.
`Bir millyat' appeared only at the end of XIXth and beginning XXth
centuries, it was the wave of new Pan-Turkism ideology. Until that
time delicate and sleek Istanbul beys (Bey is a Turkish title for
`chieftain) disdained Caucasian Turks. However, today this ratio
didn't change a lot. Anatolian Turks have same attitude toward
Central-Asian Turks, Turks of Volga region, Siberian Turks and so on.
All of the mentioned Turks never entrusted each other. They didn't
trust even themselves. Let me remind you well-known fact: as soon as
Ottoman Turkey's Crown Prince would become Sultan, first thing he
would do destroy his brothers. They couldn't let survive anyone who
could tomorrow relying on the `right of blood' claim to the throne.
Now, between Turkey and Azerbaijan, in fact, is the same process: we
observe mutual attempts on political will destruction of opponent.
Baku and Ankara are brothers, attempting to achieve superiority over
each other. All Turks relate to each other the same way: Uzbeks in
constant dispute with Kyrgyz, Turkmens are in tense relations with
Azerbaijan¦
G. K. Does Turkey undertake any actions against Azerbaijan?
L.M. ` Sh. It would be wrong to say that Ankara is only defending
itself. This is not so. Small plots, like the incident with trashcans
filled with Azerbaijani national flags before the football match with
Armenia, in the Turkish Bursa is only the visible tip of iceberg. The
direct abuse of women members of Milli-Mejlis of Azerbaijan, when the
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, in fact, called them prostitutes, also
one of the obvious but unimportant, aspects of confrontation. The way
more serious are troops of Turkish radical Islamic movements in
Azerbaijan. Typically, they all consist of the radical Sunni
movements' followers. In fact Turkey not only radicalizes Azerbaijani
society, but also splits it to Sunnism ` Shia Islam We see how serous
and contradictory these two Islamic movements are on the Iraq's
example, where for many years the followers of these movements
senseless and cruel kill each other.
The most destructive in this regard are nursists, or nurchi, as they
called in Azerbaijan. It's interesting that in Turkey they officially
banned, but in Azerbaijan they function quite openly. The same as
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). Azerbaijan doesn't recognize this
movement as terrorist. Despite the fact that PKK recognized as
terrorist organization in Turkey, USA, and many Europe countries. The
fact that Azerbaijan is free for nursists preaches and for function of
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) cells indicates the deep contradictions
between Baku and Ankara. But if Kurdistan Workers' Party PKK is badly
disguised weapon of Azerbaijan against Turkey, then nursists represent
if not the threat, but concern for Azerbaijan itself.
G. K. Then, why Baku is not trying to get rid of them?
L. M. ` Sh. At first glance it would be logical. However, not
everything is so clear and simple. First, Baku sure that will be able
to keep under control representatives of this movement. Second,
Azerbaijan hopes that, if there would be need, it will be able `to
return' the ideological bomb of nursizm back. Furthermore, it's
actually difficult to extend nursists influence in Shiite Azerbaijan:
the only region, where they find `understanding', is the northern part
of Azerbaijan, predominantly populated by Sunnis. On the other hand,
Baku obtains rights to `justify' repressions among Dagestan aboriginal
people of Azerbaijan by the presence among them of radical Islamists.
G. K. Dirty trick, I should say.
L. M. ` Sh. I agree with you. But, tell me when in its short history,
Azerbaijan tried to solve national problems in civilized ways?
G. K. In Azerbaijan, there should be intelligentsia. Indeed
intelligentsia represents moral standard of any society. In Azerbaijan
should be academicians, poets, artists, creative workers¦
L. M. ` Sh. You repeat common mistake. Intellectual person not always
belong to the intelligentsia. The theme is interesting, and I would
like to develop it.
My deep conviction that intellectual ` a man living in harmony with
its spiritual, moral, material values of his nation. I want to
emphasize: his nation. An intellectual can't be cosmopolitan. Since,
what is accepted in one nation, not necessarily greeted by another
one. This applies both for the apparent trifles, in private life and
for serious circumstances. For example, guests in Armenian family
won't take off shoes; this is disrespect to the hostess. At the same
time guests in Central Asia or, for example, Japan, should take their
shoes off, and if they won't it would cause a deep insult. This is
understandable. In Central Asia they used to eat on Dastarkh?n `
special carpet used on the floor. Walk into the house shoes on akin to
climb the table in Europe.
One could be very intellectual, to know living and dead languages as,
for example, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, but at the same time do not belong
to the intelligentsia. On the other hand, for example, living in the
village Armenian wine-grower, who didn't read a dozen books is often
the true standard of intelligentsia. Every nation for centuries and
millennia of its existence developed its own code of conduct, moral
and intellectual values. They are different in different people,
sometimes its something little, sometimes it comes to the mutual
exclusion, and they often present the value only in their own nation
and environment. But they are there in each and every nation and it
should be considered.
Nation, in general, can't commit crimes. At least, in the moral
dimensions of this exact nation. We are different, and it should be
considered. We all remember how Azerbaijan massively cheered their
officer who cut down sleeping Gurgen Markaryan. We all were outraged:
how could the scum, vile murder be admired? In fact Ramil Safarov
didn't violated Turks moral code, on the contrary, he acted in full
accordance with their unwritten code. That is why he still enjoys the
glory of the hero. Murder, even the most vile, doesn't conflict with
the mentality of Caucasian Turk. It's impossible for us. Of cause even
among the Armenians could be found man capable on killing of sleeping
person. I even think that there could be found few dozen people who
would try to justify this murder. But among majority of Armenians such
murder would be condemned.
I would like to be understood correctly: I am not saying what is good
or bad. I am just saying that this way thinking worked out by nations
for centuries. I understand that some Transcaucasian Turks could get
indignant by reading these words. But I understand that only marginal
part, or those who have some not-Turkish blood would get indignant.
True Turks will only smirk. You can't do anything with it. If Turks
would be different, then they probably won't survive in the history.
And conversely if we would be different, then probably we won't exist.
It means that ideological codes worked out by nation to a large extent
dictated by history and necessity.
G. K. Do you want to say that Turks are not worse or better us?
L. M. ` Sh. It's exactly what I want to say. We are different. It's
just impossible to compare incomparable things. What is better, a cave
or a tree? Turks and Armenians are civilizational antipodes. We have
different outlook, different cultures, mutually exclusive lifestyles,
different civilizations. We live in a different value dimensions. We
should accept each other the way we are.
G. K. Do we act different way?
L. M. ` Sh. Yes, unfortunately. We always believed that Turk could be
the way we are; it's a mistake, almost crime. Note: we had three wars
with Transcaucasian Turks only in XXth century. Each time, immediately
after the end of another war there were some Armenians, who claimed
that Turks are not `the same'. Phrase `Turks, could be bad, but I have
a Turk friend¦', probably heard every Armenian. The result of this
thinking was the fact that after each war Armenian survivors after
massacres remained to live behind Turk lines, turning in a voluntary
hostage, or, I'll say tougher, `material for the future massacres'.
It would be wrong and even unfair to blame people, but we can't turn a
`blind eye'. People, extrapolated on Turks their own outlook became
unwitting perpetrators of their children martyrdom. We don't talk here
about Armenians, who lived in Artsakh and Utik: they lived on the
territory of their historical Homeland. We talk about those, who lived
on the left bank of Kura River, in Kakh or Shamakhna regions, in
Sumgait or Baku. Nukha Armenians, for example, during each of three
mentioned above wars were massacred. Altogether in Nukha-Aresh region
Turks killed more than 75 thousand Armenians. More than 65 thousands
of them were killed during summer-fall of 1918. Indeed it was possible
to avoid, if not this ill-starred `Turk is not the same'.
Turk is always `same'. We are always the same. He is always ready to
cut, we are always ready `to understand it' and even `notice'
imaginary changes. Even today some people in Armenia believe that
`Turk is not the same'. They don't understand, or they don't want to
understand, that it's impossible. In case if they understand and still
repeat it, then I can't call them other way than traitors.
G. K. Do Turks extrapolate their outlook on us, Armenians?
L. M. ` Sh. Naturally. Otherwise they won't believe in delirium that
Azeri government propaganda stuffs them with. Why the average
Transcaucasian Turk believes that Armenians killed Khojaly people,
tortured and shut prisoners and so on? Because he is able to do that.
He can't imagine different way of things. Azerbaijani propaganda daily
invent new stories of Armenian `atrocities', they all designed for the
formed by centuries outlook of Transcaucasian Turk. Seeds fall on the
well-manured soil, therefore there are such lush fruits.
G. K. Does it mean that genocide and massacres ` unavoidable
phenomenon, and we are doomed to survive it in the future?
L. M. ` Sh. Fortunately, this is not so. But not because we,
Armenians, suddenly saw the light or Turks changed. As I've said,
among Armenians there are people, who believe that `the Turks are not
the same'. Turks are still willing to cut peaceful and defenseless
people. However, since 1988 situation radically changed. It's one of
the main results of national liberation fight for Artsakh. Turk lost
his advantage. It didn't happen intentionally, in some extent it
happened occasionally, better to say because of the political
short-sightedness of our enemies, who deported Armenians from the left
bank of Kura River. But it happened.
Artsakh war has changed a lot in our life. As war, it, doesn't stand
out from thousands other collisions with the neighboring tribes, and
its glorification is the consequence of its close aberrations and even
incompleteness of war itself. The Artsakh war has the unique
consequence: it geographically divided us with Turks. You see, it's
very important: the resettlement areas of Armenians and Transcaucasian
Turks are no longer intersecting. From now on Turks denied the
opportunity to cut the civilian population. We lost the feeling of
concern for the remaining hostage relatives. For the first time in
many centuries! Even if you deny the historical truth, it would be
enough do not let Turks in our rear.
I am convinced that Turks attempt reoccupy Artsakh (mountains and low
parts) not because they consider it as their homeland. Turk perfectly
well know that this is not so. Azerbaijan seeks (at least partially)
to restore the conditions, that would allow (if necessary) to begin
new massacres. Azerbaijan needs hostages. Roughly speaking Azerbaijan
needs `material for genocide'. And we should understand it. Nomads
never had a feeling of the native land. Moreover, it never belonged to
them. Pasture with the juice grass in Karavachar Mountains that's all
what they've lost. They need the return `of refugees', I repeat, they
need to separate part of Armenians from the main mass, to get back to
cutting, thus blackmailing the remaining part of the Armenian people.
G. K. Thank you Levon Grantovich. Hopefully, we'll have another
possibility to talk.
L. M. ` Sh. Sure. And we'll talk about our Army, the only and eternal
guarantee of Armenian people's security
G. K. Certainly.
http://times.am/2010/02/09/azerbaijan- needs-%e2%80%9cmaterial-for-genocide%e2%80%9d/