Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BAKU: Kauzlarich, Called Azerbaijan's 'Friend' Exposes His True Face

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAKU: Kauzlarich, Called Azerbaijan's 'Friend' Exposes His True Face

    KAUZLARICH, CALLED AZERBAIJAN'S 'FRIEND' EXPOSES HIS TRUE FACE

    Yeni Azarbaycan, Azerbaijan
    Aug 31 2013

    by Hulya Mammadli

    True to their tradition, those who cannot abide Azerbaijan's
    development and true sovereignty wish to capitalize on the increased
    international attention to the country on the eve of the elections and
    expand their smear campaign. The former US ambassador to Azerbaijan,
    Richard Kauzlarich, has recently been observed to be at the fore of
    this campaign. Some time ago in an interview full of accusations
    against Azerbaijan Kauzlarich described himself as Azerbaijan's
    "friend". Recently, he co-authored a report published in The New
    York Times, where his anti-Azerbaijani and pro-Armenian position is
    more pronounced.

    Kauzlarich exposes pro-Armenian bias

    Although the report was shaped as an evaluation of the geostrategic
    significance of the South Caucasus countries, one look at the gist of
    it shows that this is yet another report written in order to carry on
    the campaign of pressure on Azerbaijan and smearing its image in the
    run-up to the election. The part of the report concerning Azerbaijan
    is far from being objectively analytical and reads like an accusation.

    What is more, the distortion of realities concerning Azerbaijan
    and the biased attitude to the country make it clear what are the
    true goals and objectives of the report that openly expresses a
    pro-Armenian position.

    First of all, in contrast to other South Caucasus republics,
    discrimination against Azerbaijan is obvious in the report. The report
    explicitly says that Abkhazia and South Ossetia are Georgia's occupied
    regions. However, there is a biased approach to the realities in
    Azerbaijan. As you know, Armenia has invaded Azerbaijan's Nagornyy
    Karabakh and seven adjacent districts, hundreds of thousands of
    Azerbaijanis were displaced from their native land, material and
    cultural traces of Azerbaijanis in the region are being destroyed
    with the hands of the puppet Armenian regime, natural resources
    are plundered.

    The report turns a blind eye to all these factors and downplays the
    Armenian-Azerbaijan, Nagornyy Karabakh conflict as mere "military
    stand-off": "A two-decade military stand-off persists around
    Nagorno-Karabakh, populated by ethnic Armenians but lying within
    Azerbaijan". You can see that the report does not mention the fact
    of occupation. "Forgetting" the local Azerbaijani population reduced
    to displaced persons from Nagornyy Karabakh is done to deny the fact
    that the region belongs to the Azerbaijani people.

    Another aspect that shows the pro-Armenian position of the report is
    that the closed state of the Turkish-Armenian border is portrayed as
    detrimental to the security climate. Quite the opposite, the main
    factor that worsens the security climate in the South Caucasus is
    that instead of applying necessary international pressure on Armenia
    some countries lend it political, economic and military support. As
    if this was not enough, the co-authors attempt to put the blame for
    the failure to achieve peace on the Azerbaijani leadership. Let us
    reiterate, the reason why the conflict remains unresolved for 20 years,
    UN Security Council resolutions remain unfulfilled and the threat of
    war remains high in the region is the lack of necessary international
    pressure on Armenia.

    Kauzlarich, as one of the co-authors of the report, has thus exposed
    his pro-Armenian bias. On what grounds can this person be considered
    "Azerbaijan's friend" if he doubts the fact that Nagornyy Karabakh
    belongs to the Azerbaijani people and has been occupied?

    Reason for former ambassador's officiousness is known: elections
    draw near

    The report talks about the developments that preceded the 2013
    presidential election in Armenia and the attempt on the life of
    one of the candidates is mentioned as an ordinary fact. If such an
    event had taken place in Azerbaijan, we would likely see a completely
    different treatment. While the objective of the report is to criticize
    Azerbaijan, the author suffers from the shortage of arguments and
    uses false claims from the radical opposition press about violations
    of political and human rights in Azerbaijan.

    The report also alleges that the national leadership is preventing the
    arrival of [joint candidate of the opposition's National Council]
    Rustam Ibrahimbayov to the country. But everybody knows that
    Ibrahimbayov himself impedes his return and despite numerous promises
    about returning on different dates, he does not do so without providing
    any serious grounds. It is obvious that Ibrahimbayov himself and those
    in the "National Council" are well aware that he cannot compete in
    the election. Therefore, they are purposely impeding his participation
    in the election, while blaming it on the government.

    [Passage omitted: Opposition press distorts report]

    Kauzlarich as "friend" who wishes ill

    On the other hand, the possibility of a "political overthrow" discussed
    in the report speaks more about the exposed wishes of the author,
    rather than the reality. Anybody who knows Azerbaijan is aware that
    even compared with a number of developed countries the social and
    political situation in the country is more stable. When somebody who
    says they are knowledgeable about Azerbaijan assesses the situation
    in the country in a non-objective way, this stems from bad intentions.

    As you can see, this report co-authored by Kauzlarich is slander dreamt
    up abroad and designed to deal a blow to Azerbaijan's image and confuse
    the public opinion in the run-up to the election. With this report he
    showed that despite his claims he is not a friend of Azerbaijan. On
    the contrary, he showed his expressly pro-Armenian and biased
    position. The good will and sincerity of such a person's "advice"
    and "recommendations" concerning the country are rather dubious.

    Many such campaigns have been waged against Azerbaijan and each of
    them failed. Despite sabotage our country's international standing
    is on the rise. Attempts to deceive the public opinion in Azerbaijan
    are also doomed to fail.

    [Translated from Azeri]


    From: Baghdasarian
Working...
X