The Occupation in Figures
Nagorno-Karabakh: 1988-1992, territory 4400 km2; Shusha: may 08, 1992, territory 289 km2; Lachin: may 18, 1992, territory 1840 km2; Kalbajar: april 2, 1993, territory 3054 km2; Aghdam: july 23, 1993, territory 1150 km2; Fizuli: august 23, 1993, territory 1390 km2; Jabrayil: august 23, 1993, territory 1050 km2; Gubadli: august 31, 1993, territory 802 km2; Zangilan: october 29, 1993, territory 707 km2.

Historical truth on Azerbaijan scares Armenian gov't and Russian media

Historical truth on Azerbaijan scares Armenian gov't and Russian media



President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev touched upon many actual topics of both internal and external nature, addressing the 6th congress of the New Azerbaijan Party on Feb. 8.

Mentioning the success of Azerbaijan on the international scene, the head of state spoke about the reasons for the disastrous situation in neighboring Armenia.

Fairly calling Armenia “a political, economic, energy and transportation dead-end”, Ilham Aliyev once again reminded that Azerbaijan and its people haven’t forgotten their historical lands – Irevan Khanate, Zangazur and Goycha, and marked the return to these lands as “our political and strategic goal”.

President Aliyev’s speech caused a painful reaction in Armenia, which got used to unpunished attacks to its neighbors with territorial claims and convinced many sympathizing in its delirious “anciency” and “indigenousness” demagogy.

His speech triggered a reply in the form of big "ancient and great Armenia" lie bag. This kind of reaction from the Armenian authorities was expected: they received a clear message that Azerbaijan’s patience wears thin and promises no good for Armenia, thus their statements aren’t even worth mentioning.

But some representatives of Russian media began selectively collecting certain parts of these lies and pretentiously republishing them as “analytics”.

Those articles, which have no trace of scientific ground and include no credible sources to support their (or maybe Armenian? can’t tell – too similar) delusional claims, literally accumulate all political and historical nonsense of the latest Armenian agitprop.

Author of one of the first articles holds his discourse hopping from Chechen historiography to Alans, from Greek Homer to Croatians and trying to give himself credibility with such “scientific” and “solid” notions as “trolling”, “internet hype” and Armenian anecdotes.

At the same time he blames Baku of “war-mongering” and “history falsification”. But the incompetence of the author is clearly seen as soon as he claims that Caucasian Albanians, “who, it seems, however were not Turks”, were some kind of Proto-Iranians.

It is sad to see such absurdity challenging reader’s attention and time, because the author, “who, it seems, however” has no idea of the topic, should’ve read at least a few related Wikipedia articles, if he was in such a hurry to please someone with his commissioned writings. In foreign historiography (the author doesn’t trust Azerbaijani sources, does he?) the Caucasian Albans are considered the ancestors of today’s Caucasian-speaking nations. They also participated in ethnogenesis of Azerbaijani nation.

An author of another article retells the Armenian version of history of Yerevan and Armenia (or Hayastan, how the author calls it, not touching upon the reasons for the difference), omitting the period of Irevan and Karabakh Khanates and hypocritically calling the Ottoman and Safavi rule “occupation”.


"Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye," - anyone remembers this one?

Armenia, whose historical revisionism has never been doubted by anyone, is not getting tired of talking about its homemade “sea-to-sea country” concept based only on feverish fantasies and claiming lands of its neighbors. But such theories as well as the revanchist attitude don’t worry the bribed authors.

They prefer not to mention the Armenian state policy aimed to raising of new generations in the spirit of hatred towards everything Turkic and claims on vast areas of neighbors’ territories. For some reason, they don’t consider these policies to be a source of racism and aggression.

Never mind the state policy and historiography. The 30-year long occupation of Azerbaijani lands, which began with demonstrations of enraged crowd, worked up by the Armenian agitprop machine, putting the ideas of “long-sufferance” and “due revenge” into the heads of their people for decades, is out of sight of such scribblers. Everything mentioned is so clear that nothing new can be said to justify the true aggressor.

How did it come, that those, writing long meaningless opuses worth of the 20th century propaganda leaflets, don’t mention four resolutions of the UN Security Council, where Russia is a permanent member?

How come that those, foolish enough to blame president of the neighboring country, with whom even according to Armenian media Russian President Vladimir Putin has very amiable relations, didn’t find time to read at least one solid scientific source on the history of the region to see that the lands they write about had been belonging to Azerbaijani rulers and people for centuries?

Maybe demagogy covering the naming of historical khanates and states in Caucasus has been circulating for so long that made some unable to differentiate between black and white? Then I’d advice them to consider the history of Germany, Italy, Japan and even Russia itself – countries formed by the consolidation of feudal states.

Demagogy, however, has become a popular tool in the hands of Russian media outlets. The recent hysteria around Ukraine, the US and earlier – Turkey, habituated some authors to solve certain tasks by idle talk and populism.

Historical revisionism of modern pseudo-historians dropping unpleasant mentions of everything Scandinavian, Turkic or Mongolian is not seen, revanchist sentiments gaining momentum in the last years are not seen, demonization of West is not seen too. But as soon as there is an order for a few anti-Azerbaijani lines – with great pleasure!

Everything forgotten in Armenia – necessity of stayaway from aggressive calls, inadmissibility of revisionism and revanchism and undesirability of political and historical antagonism are all applied only to Azerbaijan.

I’d suggest looking at the situation from a bit different angle though, for it only emphasizes vulnerability and weakness of Armenian government and everyone involved. We all know that small dogs tend to bark louder. But the Arabs say, "The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on."

To sum it all up - the patience is running thin. Azerbaijani president once again pointed to that. Hopefully, to some people this will serve as a wake-up call.