text:
Khojaly: The Moment of Truth
Posted 22 March 2007 - 10:59 AM
[March 5, 2007]
We are pleased to publish excerpts from Tatul Hakobyan's upcoming book, with the working title Artsakh Diary , which deals with the tragedies of February 25-26, 1992 in Khojaly and of March 10, 1992 in Maragha, Nagorno Karabakh. The first casualty when war comes is truth. These words said of World War I can be applied to Khojaly and Maragha as well.
As military operations between Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan continued, several countries and organizations offered their mediation in settling the conflict, and in working out a truce first of all. Iran was especially active. The OSCE and Russia began showing a serious interest as well.
On February 25, 1992 Yerevan launched a political initiative. President Levon Ter-Petrossian appealed to the heads of 14 states asking to prevent further escalation of the situation which would only lead to a full-scale war. The heads of states and international organizations should restrain Azerbaijan by consistently condemning the militarization of that country and any actions that might upset the relative balance of powers in the region as well as influence the leaders of Russia and the CIS to hinder Azerbaijan by all means from obtaining and using CIS armaments. The Armenian leader stressed that we view the Nagorno Karabakh issue as an internal political conflict which should be solved exclusively through negotiations between the Azerbaijani government and the newly-elected leadership of Nagorno Karabakh, bearing in mind that Armenia has no territorial claims on Azerbaijan.
Ter-Petrossian urged the CIS, the OSCE, the UN, the European Union, and other organizations interested in establishing stable peace in the region to expedite the steps aimed at creating an efficient mediation mechanism for the Nagorno Karabakh conflict that would result in designing a comprehensive peace plan supported by all the interested parties. The Armenian leader emphasized that Turkey should continue to maintain its neutrality and try to alter Azerbaijan's discrepant stance toward Armenia by using its good offices with the Azerbaijani government and political forces. In exchange Armenia will use its influence on Nagorno Karabakh to persuade its leadership into unilaterally ceasing military operations for 24 hours effective the moment the Azerbaijani government assumes the obligation to halt military operations in the region for the same period of time.
Armenian special envoy at the time David Shahnazaryan says that at first the West, and the United States in particular, didn't show serious interest in mediation. Their policy at the time differed substantially from their present policy. They were not ready or even didn't want to assume any independent or active role. Their mission limited itself to the activity within the Minsk Group. At the time Russia was more active than the OSCE format in two ways through the ministry of defense and the ministry of foreign affairs, Shahnazaryan says.
However, the high-level Armenian-Azerbaijani meetings and numerous intermediary missions and visits were unable to prevent bloodshed between the two neighbouring peoples. Moreover, strange as it may sound, the most tragic events would usually take place at times of active international mediation. One such instance was Khojaly; another was Maragha.
The moment of truth
"The first casualty when war comes is truth." These words uttered by a US senator following World War I might be also applied to the Karabakh war and, in particular, to Khojaly. What really happened in the second-largest Azerbaijani settlement in Nagorno Karabakh, Khojaly, and the adjacent territories on February 25-26, 1992 when the civilian population fled to Aghdam through the corridor provided by the Karabakh forces remains one of the most debatable and unclarified issues of the Karabakh war. At least two things are clear the Karabakh forces left a corridor, and the civilian population suffered and a tragedy occurred.
When in 1994 Russian journalist Andrey Karaulov, the host of the TV program The Momemt of Truth asked then-Chairman of the State Defence Committee of Nagorno Karabakh Robert Kocharyan about the Khojaly tragedy, he responded, I would put next to this tragedy a series of other tragedies that would perhaps surpass the Khojaly tragedy in scale. These are the Sumgait and the Baku massacres, the depopulation of 28 Armenian villages, and the tragedy of the village of Maragha.
But, apparently, Khojaly requires a separate explanation. That is to say, this was the village that found itself in the thick of military operations. As I see it, the warring parties should be very careful in using human settlements for military purposes and this is exactly what had happened in Khojaly. There were four GRAD flamethrowers stationed inside the village which were systematically firing upon Stepanakert. And when a place turns into a position for firing GRAD missiles then, naturally, it draws enemy fire. For that reason a situation emerged in Khojaly where heavy battles for the settlement took place and, the fact was, during these battles the civilian population suffered, Kocharyan said.
When British journalist Thomas de Vaal asked Serge Sargsyan to tell him about the seizure of Khojaly the Armenian minister of defense responded, We prefer not to talk about that out loud. As for the number of losses, Sargsyan insisted that many things had been exaggerated and the retreating Azerbaijanis had manifested strong military resistance. But I think that the principal issue was completely different. Before Khojaly, Azerbaijanis thought that they could trifle with us; they thought Armenians were incapable of raising a hand against a civilian population. We were able to break this stereotype. This is what happened. And also we must take into consideration that among these men there were those who had escaped from the Baku and the Sumgait massacres, Sargsyan said.
In order to lend credence to assertions that the Karabakh forces had opened frontal fire on the fleeing civilian population and the Azerbaijani special platoon accompanying them from the Armenian village of Nakhichevanik, Thomas de Vaal quoted what Police Major Valery Babayan had told American reporter Paul Quin-Judge. Babayan had expressed the view that the main motive for these events was personal vengeance and that many of the participants of the attack on Khojaly were from Sumgait and other places like that.
Samvel Babayan, who was at the center of the events, has a completely different interpretation. During the Khojaly operation I was in charge of holding the Aghdam front and providing for a secure corridor along the river current so that the civilians could exit, and I accomplished that mission. The corridor was provided, but a strange thing happened. We were attacked from the direction of Aghdam. The population was supposed to pass through our positions and enter Aghdam. Among the Azerbaijani forces in Aghdam, the impression emerged that the Armenians were making a sally. The violence was committed by the Azerbaijani forces, whether wittingly or not, I don't know. We did not attempt at the destruction of the population. Generally, during the war we had always allowed the civilian population to leave. We were in a position to block the roads and annihilate 60,000 people in Kelbajar, but we purposefully postponed military operations and provided free passage. It was the same road that we had taken under our control in one stroke in 1994.
To be continued
Tatul Hakobyan
- onjig likes this
Posted 22 March 2007 - 10:59 AM
[March 12, 2007]
See also: Khojaly: The Moment of Truth
The assertions that for several successive days the Karabakh forces had warned the civilian population of Khojaly to leave and had provided a corridor to this end have been confirmed by Azerbaijani sources as well.
Khojaly resident Salman Abbasov consequently complained, A few days before those tragic events the Armenians had warned us many times over the radio that they were planning to seize the city and urged us to leave it. For a long time helicopters had been flying into Khojaly and it was not clear if anyone was concerned about our fate. Virtually, we had not received any help. Moreover, when there was a chance to evacuate the women, children, and the elderly, we were being persuaded not to leave.
In the early spring of 2005 Azerbaijani reporter Eynulla Fatulayev visited Khojaly. After returning to Baku he wrote in an article entitled They had time to help the cattle but not the humans, A few years ago I met with refugees from Khojaly temporarily sheltered in Naftalan. They openly acknowledged that for a few days before the attack Armenians had continuously warned the population over loudspeakers about the imminent operation and asked civilians to leave the encircled city through a humanitarian corridor along the Karkar River. According to refugees from Khojaly, they used the corridor and the Armenian soldiers on the far bank didn't open fire on them. Some soldiers from the detachments of the Popular Front had for unknown reasons evacuated some of the Khojaly residents toward Nakhichevanik, which was under control of the Askeran Armenian regiment.
With the help of the local administration of Askeran, the reporter familiarized himself with the locality, walking through the areas that Khojaly residents had passed through. After familiarizing myself with the geography of the area I can say for sure that the assumptions about the absence of a corridor are groundless. There was, in fact, a corridor, otherwise the residents of Khojaly, completely encircled and cut from the outside world, could not have broken through the circle and gotten out. For unknown reasons some of the Khojaly residents were directed toward Nakhichevanik. It looks like the detachments of the Popular Front aimed not at rescuing the residents of Khojaly but at bloodshed on the path to dethroning Mutalibov, Fatulayev wrote.
During an interview with Azerbaijani president Ayaz Mutalibov one month after the Khojaly tragedy, Czech reporter Dana Mazalova put the following question to him: What would you say about the Khojaly events, after which you resigned? At the time, corpses of people from Khojaly were discovered not far from Aghdam. Some one had shot them in the legs beforehand to prevent them from running away. Afterwards they were axed. On February 29 th my colleagues filmed them. When we next filmed on March 2 nd these corpses had been scalped. What kind of strange game was that? Mutalibov then said, As the rescued residents of Khojaly say, all that was organized to create grounds for my resignation. I don't think that the Armenians, who had manifested a clear and knowledgeable approach to such situations, would have allowed Azerbaijanis to obtain evidence that tied them to fascist acts.
If I declare that it was the fault of the Azerbaijani opposition I could be blamed for slander. But the overall picture of the conclusions is as follows: the Armenians had, in any case, provided a corridor to let the civilians escape. Why then would they shoot? Moreover, in the vicinity of Aghdam where at the time there was sufficient force present to assist people? Or they could have just agreed that the civilians leave The Aghdam detachment was located nearby and was obliged to seriously follow the development of events. As soon as Khojaly was surrounded by tanks it was necessary to immediately lead the civilians out. Earlier I had given similar orders regarding Shushi to evacuate women and children and to leave only men in the city. It's one of the laws of war civilians must be rescued. My conduct was appropriate and unambiguous I gave such orders, but why they weren't followed in Khojaly is not clear to me, Mutalibov said.
In succeeding years as well Mutalibov continued to insist, with some corrections, that Armenians had left a corridor for the civilian population to leave.
In the evening of February 25 th the late Minister of the Interior Tofik Kerimov reported to me on what had happened, but without details. He said that several hundred people had been shot in Khojaly itself. The first thing I did at the time was to telephone the leader of Nagorno Karabakh, a certain Mkrtchyan. I didn't know him, had never seen him but I knew his name. I asked him angrily how it was possible to shoot nearly a thousand civilians in Khojaly. He responded word-for-word as follows: It's nonsense! We didn't shoot anyone in Khojaly. When we took Khojaly, the residents had already left, since we had opened a corridor for them. Some of the residents are still there; they are staying in the building of the vocational school. We feed them, though we too have a shortage of food.' I didn't believe him and asked him to call Armen Isagulov, who was the head of the police department at the time, to the phone. He too told me that they had provided a corridor for the residents. That is why when I gave an interview then I said that I was told that a corridor had been opened for the civilian population. But I didn't assert whether the corridor had in fact been provided or not. I just appealed to the fact of the telephone conversation By the way, it is written in black and white in the report by the Memorial Human Rights Center that Elman Mamedov had been personally informed of the provision of the corridor, Mutalibov said later on.
A few days after the tragedy, Khojaly Mayor Elman Mamedov acknowledged, We knew that the corridor had been provided for the civilian population to leave.
News of the Khojaly tragedy reached Baku in the evening of February 25, 1992 that is, before the Karabakh forces started the military operations. Neither Minister of the Interior Kerimov nor Minister of National Security Huseinov was able to identify the source of that disinformation. And on the morning of February 26, Ayaz Mutalibov telephoned the Speaker of the Nagorno Karabakh parliament, Artur Mkrtchyan, and the head of the police department, Armen Isagulov, to find out what had really happened.
On the evening of February 26, realizing that the loss of Khojaly would mean the defeat of Mutalibov, the Ministry of the Interior of Azerbaijan released a statement saying that the attack by the Armenian guerilla in the direction of Khojaly has been repulsed and the Azerbaijani forces have regained the control of the city. But this information was immediately refuted by the information center of the Popular Front, which announced that that two trucks full of bodies of slain residents of Khojaly have arrived to Aghdam.
To be continued
Tatul Hakobyan
Posted 22 March 2007 - 11:00 AM
[March 19, 2007]
See also: Khojaly: The Moment of Truth, Khojaly: The Moment of Truth - 2
British journalist Thomas de Vaal believes that the Khojaly attack began on the night of February 26 - in commemoration of the anti-Armenian pogroms in Sumgait that had taken place four years earlier in February 1988. The 366 th regiment of the Soviet Army supported the Armenians with armoured equipment. They surrounded Khojaly on three sides, after which the Armenian soldiers entered the city and suppressed the resistance of the local defenders, de Vaal wrote.
There seem to be some inaccuracies here. First, would it have been logical for the Karabakh forces to seize Khojaly in the days of remembrance of the Sumgait massacre? Besides, the Sumgait events took place on February 27 and 28, so according to the logic of taking revenge the Karabakh forces should have started the attack on Khojaly on the night of February 27. The capture of Khojaly was of invaluable significance for the Karabakh forces and today, years after the cessation of military operations, assumptions regarding the approximate coincidence of certain dates are beside the point. After all, Khojaly and the whole Karabakh conflict was a ruthless war in the harshest sense, and who would have been thinking about historical parallels?
Furthermore, both Azerbaijani and Armenian sources insist that the Karabakh forces had been planning the Khojaly attack for an earlier date but for some reasons had postponed it.
In mid-February on the eve of his visit to Iran, Ayaz Mutalibov ordered the Shushi commandant, Rahim Ghaziyev, to maintain a truce in his absence and not to fire in the direction of Stepanakert. But within hours after his departure to Iran, a fierce bombardment of Stepanakert and, in particular, the 366 th motorized regiment began. In response, the Karabakh forces attacked Khojaly. The exchange of fire lasted for a few days from February 14 to February 16.
Shells rained down on us from Stepanakert. It was a nightmare. I gave the order to open fire on Stepanakert from the Grad missile system. Our soldiers could not fire accurately using the coordinates. Four of the Grad barrels were out of order. One of our soldiers climbed up the [Shushi] tower and was telling us whether the shells had fallen on the military camp or not. Suddenly he shouted that several shells had hit the camp. Five of the regiment's armored vehicles were destroyed, Ghaziyev recalled.
According to Ghaziyev, there was only one Grad system in Shushi at the time that could be used during positional battles. On February 16 we received information about preparations for an attack on Khojaly. Our forces stationed in Shushi successfully prevented the attack with the help of this very Grad system, which we used to bombard the enemy positions. On February 25 we again received information about another attempt to attack Khojaly. I assure you we didn't have enough ammunition to assist the Khojaly residents and to stop the Armenian attack. We didn't use the Grad system at that time since a thick fog had floated over Shushi On one of those days I telephoned Mutalibov and informed him of the danger threatening Khojaly. The president said that the minister of the interior, Tofik Kerimov, had assured him that the situation was stable. I realize that a trap was set for Mutalibov in Khojaly. But it's not true that I opened fire on Stepanakert contrary to the president's orders.
Before Khojaly the Karabakh forces had already had the experience of successful military operations in several other locations. The head of the standing committee on foreign relations of the Nagorno Karabakh parliament, Levon Melik-Shahnazarov, wrote that military successes in Togh and Sarinshen had been followed by victories in Lesnui (Meshali), Malibeylii, and Ashaghi Ghushchular (these operations were planned by Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan; the commander in charge was Valery Babayan) and that heavy fighting had resulted in the liberation of the Stepanakert suburb of Krkzhan.
It's hard to overestimate the significance of Khojaly for both the Armenians and the Azerbaijanis. Khojaly separated the south of Karabakh from the north. Nagorno Karabakh's only airport was located in Khojaly and for the blockaded Artsakh Armenians, it was the sole link to the outside world. And finally, Khojaly was also used for bombarding Stepanakert and other Armenian settlements, Melik-Shahnazaryan wrote.
The Khojaly operation was planned and headed by the commander of the Karabakh Forces, Arkady Ter-Tadevosyan, known as Commandos. The Karabakh military units were supposed to enter Khojaly from four directions: first from Mehtishen, second from Noragyugh, third from Katuk and fourth from the vicinity of the airport. A corridor for the civilians and the retreating Azerbaijani soldiers was left along the Karkar River.
Besides, some weeks before the attack the Karabakh side had repeatedly warned Baku and the residents of Khojaly that the city would be attacked. The Karabakh forces employed such tactics throughout the course of the entire war. This had a dual purpose. First, to spread panic among the residents and to make the civilians leave before the military operations began and, second, the absence of the civilian population demoralizes the army, its desire to fight withers and the soldiers think above all about not getting killed and, if possible, running away. Under such circumstances, as the subsequent military operations showed, the Karabakh side suffered unbelievably fewer losses, Melik-Shahnazaryan wrote.
The Khojaly operation began at 11:00 p.m. on February 25, that is, a few hours after Mutalibov was informed about the massacre of the civilian population of Khojaly. Some two and a half hours later it had become clear from the exchange of radio messages by Azerbaijani radio operators that the military were abandoning the city along with the civilians. Only one unit fortified its position in a five-story building and put up resistance, but by 4:00 a.m. on February 26 some of them had been destroyed and others had surrendered.
Was it possible that reinforcements could have been brought up to Khojaly from Aghdam, which was, at the time, controlled by military units of the Popular Front? In fact, Khojaly was surrounded on four sides and from the military standpoint its defense was vulnerable. The contacts between Khojaly and other settlements in Azerbaijan and Aghdam, in particular, were maintained by means of helicopters. The last flight to Khojaly before the Karabakh forces captured the city took place on February 13. According to various estimates, about 3,000 residents remained in Khojaly as of February 25 and the commander of the airport emergency platoon with its 160 soldiers, Arif Hajiyev, was in charge of the defense of the city.
On the other hand, it is impossible to understand why the civilian population was not withdrawn when the downfall of Khojaly all too obvious to the Azerbaijani side. One of the reasons for this was, perhaps, the internal troubled situation in Azerbaijan. There was no unified military command, although the Azerbaijani forces concentrated in Aghdam could have rendered assistance to the Khojaly defenders. The following is an extract from an interview with Rahim Ghaziyev:
Why was no assistance was rendered to Khojaly residents in time?
As of February 25, there were 12 T-72 tanks, 12 armored vehicles, 4 Grad missile launchers, 40 cannons and 2,500 soldiers in Aghdam. All this could have been directed at the Khojaly defense but no assistance was rendered.
Why not?
I don't know. It was enough to open fire from the Grad system. There was a sniper Private Inchipirenko. He could have hit any target. Can you imagine that? But it turned out that the Grad system disappeared.
If I'm not mistaken, Tamerlan Garayev and Fahmin Hajiyev were in Aghdam at the time
Yes. And Tair Aliyev was the commander in charge of the entire Karabakh front. You say that I was appointed the Shushi military commandant. But I learned about that decree from a TV programs. I had no documents, not a stamp, nor any normative act.
During the Khojaly operation the minister of defense of Azerbaijan was Tair Aliyev, who had held this position for a very short period of time. In fact, over the course of six months in 1991-1992 there were four ministers of defense in Azerbaijan, which, in itself, is nonsense for a warring state. The first defense minister was Soviet Army General Valeh Barshadly. Soon after he was replaced by Tajeddin Mehtiyev, who was forced to resign after the defeat in Karintak. Mehtiyev was replaced by Tair Aliyev. On March 17, after the Khojaly operation and the resignation of President Mutalibov, Rasim Ghaziyev was appointed defense minister.
After the capture of Khojaly, our troops found 11 bodies of civilian residents, not counting, of course, the losses among the Azerbaijani military. Another several hundred civilians - more precisely 734 people some of whom were Meskheti Turks, were brought to Stepanakert. By February 28 all the captive Khojaly residents had been handed over to the Azerbaijani side, Melik-Shahnazaryan wrote.
The Meskheti Turks had been resettled in Khojaly since 1989. Azerbaijan had gradually resettled about one thousand Meskheti Turks expelled from Uzbekistan in Khojaly, thus artificially increasing the population of the town. If in 1989 there were about 1,600 residents in Khojaly, in 1991 this number had reached 6,300, and that year Khojaly was given a status of a town. Political analyst David Babayan says that according to the 1926 census Khojaly was a completely Armenian village with 888 residents.
In the 1950s Azerbaijanis began settling in Khojaly and by the early 1960s an Azerbaijani village of Khojaly had emerged next to the Armenian one. By 1977, no one talked about the Armenian Khojaly anymore. By 1989 Khojaly was already a completely Azerbaijani village with 1,661 Azerbaijani residents, Babayan said.
To be continued
Tatul Hakobyan
- onjig likes this
Posted 22 March 2007 - 11:20 AM
Posted 06 April 2007 - 01:10 AM
[March 26, 2007]
See also: Khojaly: The Moment of Truth, Khojaly: The Moment of Truth - 2, Khojaly: The Moment of Truth - 3
The greatest human tragedy in the days of the Karabakh war was undoubtedly Khojaly. During no other military operation did so many civilians, including women and children, suffer as in Khojaly. The actual number of the people killed is still debated todaydiffering figures are put forth and official Baku continues to use the Khojaly tragedy for its own political ends.
How many people were killed in Khojaly? Different numbers have been put forward at different times from 200 to more than 600. Thomas de Vaal considers the number made public following the investigation conducted by the Azerbaijani parliament, 485 people, to be most realistic. This number includes all the people killed during the Khojaly operation, including those who froze to death during the escape.
A member of the parliamentary commission, Namik Aliyev, told the visiting Helsinki Watch team in April 1992 that 213 residents of Khojaly had been buried in Aghdam. Another official, Aydin Rasulov, assured the same team members that the number of civilians killed exceeded 300 - not counting those who had frozen to death on the way to Aghdam. On February 27, 1992 the imam of the Aghdam mosque showed American journalist Thomas Goltz a list of 477 names of people killed. The same year Azerbaijani newspaper Ordu printed a list of 636 people killed in Khojaly.
On March 4, 1992 the Nagorno Karabakh parliament made the following statement: The neutralization of weapon installations of the Azerbaijani armed units and the unblocking of Nagorno Karabakh's only airport near the village of Khojaly have prompted wide reaction from Azerbaijani and foreign mass media. The armed units of the National Army of Azerbaijan stationed in Khojaly had completely blocked the roads connecting the Askeran region of NKR with the capital of the republic, and had periodically bombarded Stepanakert and other Armenian settlements with heavy artillery. It was possible to overcome the famine that had originated as a result of the blockade only by putting the airport into operation. Although the NKR self-defense forces had left a corridor for the residents of Khojaly to leave the zone of military operations, a portion of the civilian population of the village didn't avail itself of this opportunity. All of them some 200 people - by their own wish and without any precondition were accompanied to the other side of the border. The Presidium of the Supreme Council of NKR once again declares its readiness to settle all the problems between Nagorno Karabakh and Azerbaijan exclusively by peaceful means, at a negotiating table.
What Chingiz Mustafayev filmed
Azerbaijani cameraman Chingiz Mustafayev shot footage in the vicinity of Aghdam first on February 29 th and then on March 2 nd . It was his footage that was shown at the extraordinary session of the Azerbaijani parliament. The locality where Mustafayev had filmed the corpses was under Azerbaijani control, or more precisely, under the control of armed units of the Popular Front this can be clearly seen from the footage. It is a fact that the corpses had been mutilated before the second time Mustafayev filmed on March 2 nd . Mustafayev informed Mutalibov of this. It was President Mutalibov, incidentally, who had sent him to film the scene. According to certain information, Mutalibov warned: Chingiz, don't say a word to anyone that something is wrong, or they will kill you. The area where the corpses were mutilated was at a distance of a few hundred meters from the positions of the Popular Front and was easily controlled by snipers. Mustafayev simply would not have been able to film in those areas if they had they been under the control of the Karabakh forces.
A few months later Mustafayev was killed while doing routine filming inside a sector of military operations controlled by the military units of the Popular Front. Why he was killed is still debated. The Karabakh side insists that Mustafayev was a victim of Khojaly. Both Mutalibov and Mustafayev firmly believed that the Popular Front had tried to come to power by taking advantage of the Khojaly tragedy. This is what happened immediately after Khojaly, and what is more, it was Mustafayev's footage that was used to accuse Mutalibov.
Tens of thousands of protesters gathered in front of the Azerbaijani parliament building to demand Ayaz Mutalibov's resignation. During the March 5, 1992 extraordinary session of the Supreme Council of Azerbaijan, Elmira Kafarova submitted her resignation and the Dean of the Medical Department at Baku University, Yaghub Mamedov, was elected speaker of parliament. The demonstrators kept the parliament building under siege, holding parliament members inside. Mutalibov called the unfolding events a coup d'etat. On March 6 th he resigned and Mamedov became the acting president until the presidential election was held.
This is how Mutalibov commented on these events: My resignation was forced. I had no intention of leaving but when I realized that everything had been scrupulously planned and the left and the right had united against the president I decided not to provoke confrontation. The retired president believed that following his resignation the Karabakh issue would be speculated on within the internal political struggle and the further spread of war would become irreversible. The Popular Front blamed us for not being able to solve the Karabakh problem. And now they have to give the people assurances that they are able to solve it. There are two ways: either more resolute actions, since I was blamed for indecision, or a compromise Suppose, they succeed in uniting all our forces. In that case all this could turn into a large-scale war without any clarity regarding who is going to win, though no one in Azerbaijan wants to fight anymore.
Tatul Hakobyan
- onjig likes this
Posted 16 February 2009 - 12:56 PM
- The traditional anti-Armenian campaign connected with the events of 1992 in Khodjalu settlement begins in Azerbaijan. At that, the official Azerbaijani propaganda does not disdain to use any methods and means to display the Armenian side as a party responsible for the tragedy and to inject another portion of poison of Armenian phobia into the world public consciousness and the consciousness of its own people. Moreover, Baku goes on circulating the already unmasked frauds. Thus, next year the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic drew the publics attention to a forged photograph exposed in a number of Azerbaijani websites, including the website of Heydar Aliyev Foundation, which is very respectable in Azerbaijan (www.azerbaijan.az). It has been mentioned, that the propaganda machine of the neighboring republic tries to use the fact that besides a great number of corpses of civilians in the foreground of the photograph, outskirts of a settlement are seen in the background, which, in principle, should add verisimilitude to Bakus version on mass killings of Azerbaijanis in Khodjalu. Meanwhile, color version of the above-mentioned photograph absolutely refutes it, namely the faces of the deceased, their garments, etc. In fact, this photograph is directly connected with the events in Kosovo. Namely as that the photograph along with a great number of the others was exhibited in one Serbian, one Albanian, and in one specialized German forum, in internet-page of reputable edition New York Times etc. However, the mentioned undisguised fraud still remains in a number of Azerbaijani sites, thus deluding those uninformed. Booklets with similar fraud are circulating all over the world. The NKR MFA Information Department reminds that on February 25-26, 1992, the Karabakhi side launched a military operation to release the only airport of the republic, situated near Khodjalu settlement and to neutralize the weapon emplacements of the enemy in Khodjalu, from where since summer of 1991 the populated areas of Nagorno Karabakh have been regularly exposed to attacks of the Azerbaijani special police squads (OMON), artillery bombardments from Alazan, Crystal and rocket facility of volley fire Grad. The release of the airport and neutralization of weapon emplacements of enemy in Khodjalu was of vital importance for the NKR people. The subunits of the NKR Defense Army granted a corridor to the peaceful population for safe and timely leaving the battle zone and the Azerbaijani side was informed of it beforehand. It is well-known that the NKR authorities informed the Azerbaijani side of preparation for the neutralization of the Khojalu weapon emplacements two months prior to the operation and that was repeatedly confirmed by the officials of Azerbaijan, in particular, by the then president Ayaz Mutalibov. However, the leadership of Azerbaijan did not undertake anything to help the peaceful population to leave the battle zone. Moreover, a column of peaceful population was shot near the border of Aghdam region, which was later on confirmed by Mutalibov, who connected the crime with the oppositions efforts to remove him from the office by making him responsible for everything. The territory where subsequently many corpses were filmed is 3 km far from Aghdam and 11 km from Khojalu. Up to the fall of Aghdam (summer 1993) this area was under permanent control of the Azerbaijani units, which excluded the access of the Karabakhi self -defense units there. Some details of this military operation are so far shrouded in mystery and namely using this circumstance official Baku tries to profit from it to gain its political goals. It is noteworthy, that all the propaganda is being carried out with pronounced anti-Armenian insinuations and is used for forcing ethnic intolerance and hatred towards Armenians among Azerbaijanis. Unfortunately, the topic of khodjalu remains to be one of the cornerstones of the Azerbaijani domestic and foreign information or rather misinformation policy within the context of the Karabakh problem in general.
Posted 24 February 2009 - 11:52 AM
- In early 1992, on the night of 26 February Armenian troops neutralized Khojaly and the operation was successfully completed. Khojaly had an important strategic geographical occupation it controlled over Stepanakert-Askeran roads, as well as the only airport of Nagorno Karabakh was situated there. Though the Armenian party informed the Azeris, and the civilian population was given an opportunity to leave the area through a safe corridor, thousands of Azeri Turks were dead in the aftermaths of the military activities. Khojaly events give birth to many questions. For example, why the civilian population was not isolated from the area, taking into account the point that according to Azeri mass media the cattle was successfully isolated from the area? Another important point is the fact that many dead people from civilians were found in the territory of Azerbaijan just next to the Azeri military points. They keep silence regarding the fact that Armenian troops found many Azeri who were lost and helped them. Those dark pages of Khojaly events remained unrevealed and some years later it was labeled as tragedy and an anti-Armenian campaign launched all over the world. Every February-March special events commemorating those victims are held by Azeri and Turkish communities, different organizations which have one mission to inform as many foreigners as possible about Armenian fascism and terror. Those activities are well planned to veil Armenian campaign of Sumgait genocide and Armenian Lieutenant Gurgen Margaryans murder. During the year Turkey uses Khojaly as a card opposing to Great Armenian Genocide.
Posted 22 August 2011 - 03:37 PM
Свидетельства турок-месхетинцев из Ходжали
Mtsxeti turqeri vkayutyuner khojalu depqeri masin
Posted 22 August 2011 - 11:58 PM
Дана Мазалова о Ходжалу
Posted 18 February 2013 - 09:13 AM
expense of lives»
A new documentary film about the events between November 1991 and
February 1992 has been launched in Yerevan, telling about the
breakthrough of the blockade of Stepanakert (capital city of Nagorno
Karabakh Republic), as well as criminal activities of the political
elite of Baku which led to the tragic deaths of civilians in Khojaly.
A two-part documentary, entitled `Between hunger and fire: Power at
the expense of lives', presents a bunch of compelling evidence about
criminal activities of the political elite of Baku, which victimized
women, elderly and children.
The research group, which initiated the film-investigation, reports
that the documentary for now will be launched in Russian and English,
while 7 more language translations will follow soon.
Utilizing a huge number of documentary materials, the film will be of
interest not only for wider audience, but also to research and expert
community. The archive, assembled during the investigation of tragic
death of civilians in Armenian-populated Stepanakert and
Azerbaijani-controlled Aghdam region, entails grounds for wider-scaled
documentary projects. The latter will shed light on a range of
traditional speculations and manipulations by Azerbaijan, which was
tasked to deport the civilian population of Nagorno Karabakh Republic
>From their ancestral homeland.
`Between hunger and fire: Power at the expense of lives'
- MosJan and onjig like this
Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:32 AM
14:02 20/02/2013
"Between hunger and fire. Power at the expense of lives" - a
two-series documentary, released in February 2012
(), is now available to the
English-speaking audience as well
(). The two-series
documentary film is about tragic events which took place in Nagorno
Karabakh between November 1991 and February 1992.
The research group, composed of historians, retired politicians
and investigative journalists, presents compelling evidence about
that period, sheds a new light on the blockade of Stepanakert - the
nation's capital -- as well as on activities of the political elite
of Azerbaijan which let the tragic events of Khojaly (now Ivanyan)
happen. The archival materials, assembled during the investigation,
questions a range of traditional speculations and manipulations by
Azerbaijani government, the media and 'expert community'.
The English translation of the documentary attracted unprecedented
interest among the international community. In less than a week,
more than 100.000 people watched the film on YouTube channel.
Miro Khanzadian, who is the Director of Operations of GlobalHye
Information Services, resident of Los Angeles, CA, has been one of
many who disseminated the movie across international community.
"When we, Armenians, as people are united against injustice we will
prevail. Throughout history the Armenian people have reached victories
within short time and much less resources than our adversaries
when we have been united. Because history is on our side!", said
Mr Khanzadian. The GlobalHye Information Services, at the words of
Mr Khanzadian, aims at reaching, educating and motivating as many
Armenians as possible through large Global Email database.
The facts and figures, shown in the documentary, are recollected
from archival materials found in diverse, including Azerbaijani,
sources, whereas residents of Stepanakert and Karabakh Defense Army
soldiers and officers speak of the blockade of nation's capital and
the specifics of the operation to breach the blockade.
Rich of first-time ever released materials,the documentary also
features a rare interview of first president of Azerbaijan, Ayaz
Mutalibov, where the latter argues the Khojaly tragedy was abused to
topple him.
Overall, the film shows how the Aliyev regime, step-by-step, toppled
political opponents and seized the power in Azerbaijan and has been
ruling the country for two decades now, silencing all the courageous
individuals that dared to tell the truth about the incidents in
Khojaly village and around Aghdam region.
Posted 25 February 2013 - 09:55 AM
A new documentary on Khojaly issue and Nagorno Karabakh liberation war: more than 210.000 viewers and counting
"Between hunger and fire. Power at the expense of lives" -- This is a new, two-series English-language documentary that tells about the blockade of Stepanakert – capital of Nagorno Karabakh Republic – in between November 1991 and February 1992. The film uncovers a story of bombardments, country-wide destructions and atrocity crimes against local Armenian population, as well as maneuvers of Karabakh Self-Defense forces to calm down the heavy-artillery fire from around the surrounding hills of the capital, foremost stationed in Khojaly town.
The 90-minute, two-part documentary, released on YouTube (), gathered around 210.000 viewers in around a week, and counting.
The documentary was originally released in Russian in February 2012 (), and attracted considerable attention and interest in Armenia and beyond. The "Moscow" cinema of Yerevan, various local universities hosted public screenings, discussions and lectures on the film. The documentary, part of larger endeavours, has been initiated by the Information and Public Relations Centre of the Administration of the President of Armenia.
A heavyweight against the anti-Armenian propaganda and policy of racism, sponsored by Azerbaijani government and affiliated funds, the documentary is available in English either – for the wider international community to have a wider perspective on the Khojaly events and the Karabakh liberation war at all.
It is noteworthy that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled in Fatulayev v. Azerbaijan case (2010), that freedom of speech, pluralism and tolerance are essential values for an eventual democratic governance in Azerbaijan, which it aspires to have -- to the contrary of human rights watchdog annual reports.
"Moreover, the Court notes that it is an integral part of freedom of expression to seek historical truth… For example, there are conflicting views as to whether a safe escape corridor was provided to the civilians fleeing their town…" (para 87).
First-time ever published archival documents, testimonies, photographs, maps and interviews recollect the developments of those days of war in February 1992, offering new evidences and challenging facts against the anti-Armenian and racist propaganda of hatred and xenophobia, championed by Azerbaijan and its government affiliated funds, which had been presenting 'Khojaly events' in a carefully 'doctored' and 'tailored' way so far.
The film is considered for an audience of 18 and over only, as it contains detailed violence content and uncovered photographs that may cause mental unrest.
Source: Panorama.am
Posted 19 March 2013 - 08:50 AM
March 18
"Ayaz Mutallibov had the reputation for being rather tolerant, and 20
years later he declares that he forced Mikhail Gorbachev to conduct
Koltso (The Ring) operation", the former First Secretary of the
Communist Party of Armenia, currently the leader of Democratic Party
Aram Sargsyan said at a meeting with reporters today, in connection
with the recent statements of former Azerbaijani President Ayaz
Mutallibov regarding Nagorno Karabakh.
He said the Azerbaijani side has never showed humane feelings for
Armenians, while Mutallibov himself in the 1990s demanded that M.
Gorbachev should deport all Armenians from Karabakh.
"In 1991 Mutallibov approached me in Moscow and asked me to postpone my
meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev, promising to stop deporting Armenians
in return for that, but I refused," the speaker noted.
When recalling his meeting with Mutallibov in Moscow in 1995, Aram
Sargsyan said at that time Mutallibov admitted that Azerbaijan lost
the Karabakh war, but he added that the Armenians should not demand
that Azerbaijan recognize the independence of Nagorno Karabakh.
According to A. Sargsyan, Armenian diplomacy should use these
statements of Ayaz Mutallibov in order to respond to Azerbaijan's
misinformation concerning the Ring operation and the Khojalu events.
Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:56 AM
12:20, 20 March, 2013
YEREVAN, MARCH 20, ARMENPRESS: Armenian Embassy in Egypt hosted
the presentation of "Sumgait: Ordinary Genocide" documentary film
in Arabic. As Information and Public Relations Department of the
Foreign Affair Ministry told Armenpress, Egyptian politicians, NGO
representatives, intellectuals, journalists and Egyptian Armenian
community members attended the demonstration of the film.
Armenian Ambassador to Egypt Arman Melikyan delivered a speech before
the launch of the film demonstration. Armenian diplomat in particular
stated Sumgait massacre had been sketched in advance by Azerbaijani
authorities. Ambassador Melikyan noted official Baku in order to avoid
the responsibility for accomplishing pogrom and ethnic cleansing
of Armenians in Sumgait, Baku, Kirovabad and Maragha is trying to
misguide the international society by spreading fake propaganda about
Khojaly events.
Posted 02 November 2013 - 11:11 AM
PanARMENIAN.Net - 30,000 people died in the Nagorno Karabakh war, and one million were displaced from their homes, and many more live with the ongoing effects of this unresolved conflict. Despite this widespread human tragedy, the fate of those that lost their lives during the events in and around Khojalu on February 26, 1992, have gained a disproportionate amount of notoriety and publicity. 20 years later, the facts of what happened that night have been consumed by the mythology and sensationalism propagated by the Azerbaijani government, Russell Pollard, an English photojournalist and writer, says in his article published on Artsakh.org.uk, the website he founded 18 months ago.
"Throughout the many texts that report on the events in Khojalu the only consistent piece of data, now, is the number of people who were alleged to have been killed that night –" 613", although this number has almost doubled since 1994. Khojalu was a strategic location, with it being the site of the only airport in the original Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO) as well as a military base from which attacks were being launched onto Stepanakert; it was a key element in the Azerbaijani blockade of the region, together with Aghdam, and Shushi. The airport was home to the OMON (Special Purpose Mobile Unit – Police/Army) of Azerbaijan who were notorious for their tactics against Armenians," Mr. Pollard reminds.
"The Armenian plan was to neutralize the military hardware, seize the airport, and occupy the city. To avoid unnecessary loss of life the Armenians gave the people of Khojalu, and the authorities, notice of this plan, in order that they could evacuate themselves. This was confirmed in an interview between Chingiz Mustafayev (Azerbaijani journalist) and Elman Mammadov (Head of the Khojalu Executive Board) held in the following few months before Mustafayev's death in June 1992. So why weren't all of the population evacuated, leaving the military to defend the city against the Armenians. One could surmise that maintaining a "human shield" was a useful "military strategy", particularly as the Meskhetian Turks were not "true" Azerbaijanis. Ultimately it was convenient for the Azerbaijanis to "blur the lines" between the military and the civilians. This was used to greater effect on February 25/26th," he writes.
Presenting the story of the events, Mr. Pollard offers comments by Eynulla Fatullayev, Azerbaijani journalist and human rights activist, who stated in his book "Karabakh Diary" that:
"…… for the sake of fairness I will admit that several years ago I met some refugees from Khojaly, temporarily settled in Naftalan, who openly confessed to me that, on the eve of the large-scale offensive of the Russian and Armenian troops on Khojalu, the town had been encircled [by those troops]. And even several days prior to the attack, the Armenians had been continuously warning the population about the planned operation through loudspeakers and suggesting that the civilians abandon the town and escape from the encirclement through a humanitarian corridor along the Karkar River. According to the Khojalu refugees' own words, they had used this corridor and, indeed, the Armenian soldiers positioned behind the corridor had not opened fire on them…
Having crossed the area behind the Karkar River, the row of refugees was separated and, for some reason, a group of [them] headed in the direction of Nakhichevanik. It appears that the National Front Army battalions were striving not for the liberation of the Khojalu civilians but for more bloodshed on their way to overthrow A. Mutalibov [the first President of Azerbaijan] …"
The theory that everyone was killed in Khojalu puts all the blame on the Armenians and is convenient. Knowing that people were deliberately taken in the wrong direction, and died as a result, would be most embarrassing for the Azerbaijani government, Mr. Pollard says.
"The facts of the 26th February 1992 are very complex and we are unlikely, ever, to discover the absolute truth. It is clear that the citizens of Khojalu died in different ways in a variety of locations for many reasons and through the actions of all involved. The concerted effort by the Azerbaijani government to contort the truth and lay the blame, solely at the door of the Armenians is a cynical misrepresentation of the facts and the act of securing "political sympathy" from unsuspecting governments is one of gross deception. This is only made more obscene by the way that this has been achieved on the back of the unnecessary deaths of innocent people resulting from the questionable conduct and incompetence of the Azerbaijani authorities in 1992! I only hope that people now examine the facts and make an informed independent judgment on this issue and stop being fooled by the guile of the Azerbaijani government," he concludes.
Posted 13 March 2014 - 11:36 AM
Ի.Ղ. Ղուկասով
Գնդապետ, ՀՀ պաշտպանության նախարարի խորհրդական Արցախյան պատերազմի տարիներին
Խոջալուից խաղաղ բնակչությանը դուրս բերելու միջանցքի կանխամտածված ստեղծումը նպատակ ուներ, նախ, մարդասիրական վերաբերմունք ցուցաբերել խաղաղ բնակչության հանդեպ, թույլ չտալ, որ զոհեր լինեն, նրան գրավել դեպի մեր կողմը և ցույց տալ, որ մենք մարտնչում ենք ոչ թե խաղաղ բնակչության, այլ զինված հակառակորդի դեմ, որն իր հրաձգությամբ ստիպում է հայ բնակչությանը զինված դիմադրություն ցուցաբերել։ Երկրորդ նպատակը քաղաքի պաշտպանության պաշտպանական պոտենցիալի թուլացումն էր։ Քաղաքի պաշտպանների ուղեկցությամբ բնակչության դուրսբերումն այդ միջանցքով պետք է հանգեցներ նրա պաշտպանների թվի կրճատմանն ու նպաստեր «լեգալ» դասալիքների ի հայտ գալուն, որոնք քաղաքից դուրս եկող խաղաղ բնակչությանն ուղեկցելու պատրվակով կլքեին պաշտպանական դիրքերն ու դրանով իսկ կթուլացնեին քաղաքի պաշտպանությունը։ Բացի այդ, հակառակորդը կգար այն մտքին, թե՝ «ում պաշտպանի, եթե տեղի բնակիչները խուճապահար թողնում են իրենց տունուտեղը, իրենց հողը»։ Տեղի բնակիչները հիմնականում քաղաքի պաշտպանությանը մասնակցող մարտիկների հարազատներն էին, որոնք իրենց հարազատների ու մերձավորների անվտանգ ելքն Աղդամի շրջան (Ադրբեջանի տարածք) ապահովելու համար ստիպված կլինեն լքել իրենց պաշտպանական դիրքերը։
Հայտնի են ինքնապաշտպանության ջոկատների մարտիկների հետ ուս ուսի հայրենի օջախի պաշտպանության գործին հայ բնակչության ակտիվ մասնակցության բազմաթիվ օրինակներ։ Օրինակ, ադրբեջանցիները, չնայած կենդանի ուժի և մարտական տեխնիկայի մեծ գերազանցությանը, 1992թ. հունվարին այդպես էլ չկարողացան տիրել Քարինթաղ բնակավայրին, իսկ 1992թ. հունվար-մարտին՝ Ասկերանին։
Եթե միջանցք չթողնվեր, հակառակորդը խաղաղ բնակչության հետ միասին ստիպված էր լինելու կատաղի պաշտպանվել և կռվել յուրաքանչյուր դիրքի, փողոցի ու տան համար։ Ինքնապաշտպանության գրոհող հայկական ջոկատները կենդանի ուժի և մարտական տեխնիկայի մեծ կորուստներ կկրեին։ Քաղաքի գրավումը կարող էր ձգձգվել, ինչին մեր ջոկատները պատրաստ չէին իրենց մարտական ու թվային կազմով։ Փողոցային մարտերում գերազանցություն կունենային քաղաքի պաշտպանները, քանի որ կենդանի ուժի հարաբերակցությունը 1։1-ի էր։
Այսպիսով, Խոջալուն վերցնելու գործոններից մեկը դարձավ գործողության պլանով նախատեսված՝ բնակիչների ու քաղաքի պաշտպանների կամավոր ելքը հատուկ կազմված միջանցքով դեպի Աղդամի շրջան, տարածք, որը վերահսկվում էր ադրբեջանական բանակի կողմից։
Եվ մենք ստիպեցինք հակառակորդին քաղաքը թողնել այդ միջանցքով, ինչը վնաս հասցրեց նրա պաշտպանությանը։ Ընդ որում՝ կռվողների որոշ մասն իր պաշտպանական դիրքերը լքեց ինքնուրույն, իր նախաձեռնությամբ, առանց հրամանատարության հրամանի։ Ինքնապաշտպանության հայկական հարձակվող ջոկատներից ունեցած վախն ավելի ուժեղ էր յուրաքանչյուր մարտիկի ու բնակչի՝ իր օջախը, քաղաքը պաշտպանելու պատասխանատվության զգացումից։
Մինչև մարտն սկսվելը հայկական հարձակվող խմբավորման հրամանատարությունը, Ժնևի կոնվենցիայի ոգուն համապատասխան, բարձրախոսներով և ռադիոկապի միջոցով քաղաքի բնակչությանն առաջարկում էին, զոհերից խուսափելու նպատակով, հեռանալ թողնված միջանցքով։
Եվ այդ միջանցքը հուսալի էր գործում։
Ոստիկանության աշխատակից Բախթիյար Ասլանովի հուշերից. «Մեր՝ զենքը ձեռքներիս մարդկանց խնդիրն այն էր, որ նվազագույն կորուստներով բնակչությանը դուրս բերենք քաղաքից։ Ալիֆ Հաջիևի հրամանով երեք անգամ գնացել եմ Աղդամի շրջանի Շելլի գյուղ և վերադարձել։ «Կյանքի այդ ճանապարհին» փրկվել է մինչև 150 մարդ։ Երբ վերադարձա չորրորդ անգամ, տեսա, որ Ալիֆն իր սակավաթիվ ջոկատով շարունակում է կռվել»1։
Ոստիկանության կապիտան Սեդիկ Մամեդով. «...Խաղաղ բնակչությանը փրկելու նպատակով ստիպված ենք սկսել տարհանումը քաղաքից։ Բնակչությանը տարանք Նախչավանիկի ուղղությամբ, այսպես կոչված «միջանցքով»։ Ճանապարհ ընկավ 40-50 մարդ։ Խոջալուում բոլոր նրանք, ովքեր զենք ունեին՝ ոստիկանները, զինծառայողները, գնում էին առջևից, բոլորը թշնամու դեմ կռվում էին հարձակումը խափանելու համար»2։
Խոջալուի քաղաքապետ Էլման Մամեդովը հաստատում էր. «Մենք գիտեինք, որ այդ միջանցքը նախատեսված է խաղաղ բնակիչներին դուրս բերելու համար»։ Նա ինքն էլ ավելացրել է. «Քաղաքը վերցնելու գործողության մասին տեղեկությունից հետո ես Աղդամին խնդրեցի ուղղաթիռներ ուղարկել՝ ծերերին, կանանց և երեխաներին դուրս բերելու համար։ Մեզ հավաստիացրին. «Վաղը գործողություն ենք իրականացնելու և կոտրելու ենք շրջափակումը»։ Օգնությունն այդպես էլ չեկավ»3։
Ադրբեջանի նախկին նախագահ Ա.Մութալիբովը չեխ լրագրողուհի Դանա Մազալովային տված հարցազրույցում, որը հրապարակվել է 1992թ. ապրիլի 2-ի «Նեզավիսիմայա գազետա»-ում, ասել է. «Ադրբեջանական կողմը տեղեկացված էր Խոջալուն գրավելու գործողության մասին, և գործողության ընթացքում հայկական կողմը միջանցք էր թողել խաղաղ բնակիչներին Խոջալուից Աղդամի շրջանում անվտանգ տեղ դուրս բերելու համար»։ Նա հարց է տալիս. «Ուրեմն, ինչո՞ւ պետք է նրանք կրակեին։ Մանավանդ Աղդամին մոտ տարածքում, որտեղ բավականաչափ ուժեր կային՝ գալու և մարդկանց օգնելու համար»։ Այնուհետև նա ասում է. «Ինչպես ասում են իրենք՝ փրկված խոջալուցիները, այդ ամենը կազմակերպվել էր, որպեսզի իմ հրաժարականի համար առիթ լիներ։ Ինչ-որ ուժ գործում էր նախագահի վարկաբեկման համար։ Ես չեմ կարծում, թե հայերը, որոնք շատ հստակ ու գործիմացությամբ են վերաբերվում նման իրավիճակներին, կարող էին ադրբեջանցիներին թույլ տալ իրենց ֆաշիստական գործողություններում մերկացնող փաստաթղթեր ստանալ։ Կարելի է ենթադրել, թե ինչ-որ մեկը շահագրգռված էր, որպեսզի հետո այդ կադրերը ցույց տար Գերագույն խորհրդում և ամեն բան ուղղվեր իմ անձի դեմ»։ 1992թ. մարտի 6-ին Ա.Մութալիբովը հրաժարական տվեց Ադրբեջանի Ժողովրդական ճակատի պահանջով։
«Реальный Азербайджан» թերթի գլխավոր խմբագիր Էյնուլա Ֆաթուլաևը 2005թ. «Ղարաբաղյան օրագիր» շարքում գրում էր. «Հարձակումից դեռ մի քանի օր առաջ հայերն անընդհատ բարձրախոսով նախազգուշացնում էին բնակչությանը ծրագրվող գործողության մասին, քաղաքացիական բնակչությանն առաջարկում էին թողնել ավանը և շրջափակումից դուրս գալ Գար-Գար գետի երկայնքով ձգվող մարդասիրական միջանցքով»։ Այս մասին նրան պատմել էին խոջալուցի փախստականները, որոնք օգտվել էին մարդասիրական միջանցքից և ողջ էին մնացել, քանի որ «միջանցքի հետևում գտնվող հայ զինվորները նրանց վրա կրակ չէին բացել»։ Նույն տեղում նա պնդում է. «Միջանցքն իսկապես կար, այլապես լիովին շրջափակված և արտաքին աշխարհից կտրված խոջալուցիները ոչ մի կերպ չէին կարողանա ճեղքել օղակը և դուրս գալ շրջափակումից։ Բայց հաղթահարելով Գար-Գար գետը՝ փախստականների շարանը բաժանվեց... Ինչպես երևում է, ԱԺՃ գումարտակները ջանում էին ոչ թե ազատագրել խոջալուցիներին, այլ ծարավի էին արյան Ա.Մութալիբովին պաշտոնանկ անելու ճանապարհին»։
Այս մասին, ըստ իրանական «Առաննյուզ» լրատվական գործակալության, է վկայում Իրանի հոգևոր առաջնորդի ներկայացուցիչ, Արդեբիլ քաղաքի իմամ-ջումա, այաթոլա Սեիդ Հասան Ամելին. «Պետական հեղաշրջման հաջող իրականացման համար անհրաժեշտ էին մեծ կորուստներ ճակատում, հարկավոր էր ուղիղ իմաստով ծանր ողբերգություն։ Հենց նման պայմաններում էր սարքվում Խոջալուի ողբերգությունը»։ Այնուհետև. «Մութալիբովը ռուսների հովանավորության տակ էր։ Ռուսնե՞րը պետք է նրա տապալմամբ իշխանության բերեին Էլչիբեյին։ Իհարկե, ոչ, և պետական հեղաշրջումը ռուսամետ ղեկավարության դեմ էր... Դա ղարաբաղյան ճակատում Իրանի ակտիվացումը կասեցնելու նենգ պլան էր, որն իրականացվեց անմեղ մարդկանց արյան գնով։ Այդ ամենի հետևում կանգնած էր «Էրգենեքոնը», իսկ իրականում՝ «Մոսադը»4։
1991թ. նոյեմբերից մինչև 1992թ. փետրվար խոջալուցիները քանիցս հեռագրեր են ուղարկել Նախիջևանի Հանրապետության ղեկավարություն՝ Հեյդար Ալիևին, օգնություն խնդրելով քաղաքի պաշտպանության համար։ Էլման Մամեդովը 1991թ. վերջին ուզում էր գնալ Նախիջևան՝ Հ.Ալիևի մոտ և պատմել նրան Խոջալուի պաշտպանության խնդիրների մասին։ «Այն ժամանակ բոլոր նրանց, ովքեր արտաբերում էին Հ.Ալիևի անունը, խստորեն պատժում էին։ Խոջալուցիները դրանից չէին վախենում»5։ Հ.Ալիևը ոչինչ չէր կարող նախաձեռնել։ Նա միայն ասաց. «Արյունահեղությունը մեզ ձեռնտու է», և նույնպես ուզում էր հարված հասցնել Ա.Մութալիբովին։
Խոջալուի բնակիչ Բահման Խալիլով. «Ողբերգությունից մի քանի օր առաջ հայերը մի քանի անգամ մեզ տեղեկացրել էին, որ վերցնելու են քաղաքը, և պահանջում էին, որ մենք դուրս գանք քաղաքից... Մենք գիտեինք, որ որևէ մեկից օգնություն չէինք կարող սպասել։ Որոշեցինք հնարավորության դեպքում տարհանել կանանց, երեխաներին և ծերերին։ Մեզ խոստացել էին, որ Ասկերանի ազատագրման շտապ գործողություն է պատրաստվում՝ Խոջալուի հետ միավորվելու նպատակով։ Այդ ամենը սուտ էր։ Այսպիսով, Խոջալուն զոհաբերվեց հանրապետության ղեկավարության մեղքով»6։
«Azerbaycan» թերթի 1997թ. փետրվարի 26-ի համարում տպագրվել է ոստիկանության լեյտենանտ Շահիդ Մուրադովի պատմածն այդ մասին։ Գրոհն սկսվելուն պես նա գնացել է իր դիրք, որտեղ 12 պաշտպաններ կռիվ էին մղում։ Հրաձգությունը բռնել էր ողջ քաղաքը, հարկավոր էր փրկել խաղաղ բնակիչներին։ «Մեր խումբը քաղաքի ծայրամասում դիրքեր զբաղեցնելու համար գալիս է նոր կառուցված հինգհարկանի բնակելի տան մոտ և այնտեղ տեսնում 70-80 թաքնվող մարդիկ։ Այդ տան մոտ էլ գտնվում էր գումարտակի հրամանատար Թոֆիկ Հուսեյնովի ՈւԱզ-469 ավտոմեքենան։ Մեքենայի մեջ շատ զենք ու զինամթերք կային։ Խոսելով բոլորի հետ՝ ներս մտանք տուն, դիրքեր գրավեցինք և սկսեցինք սպասել հակառակորդին։ Փետրվարի 26-ի առավոտյան տեսանք, որ երկու մարտական ուղղաթիռ իջավ Խանքենդի։ Հայերը, իմանալով մեր տեղը, պահանջեցին, որ գերի հանձնվենք։ Այն բանից հետո, երբ մենք հրաժարվեցինք, հայերը գրոհի անցան։ Ես հրամանատարությունը վերցրի ինձ վրա. ոչ ոք չէր ուզում հանձնվել։ 12 ժամ մենք դիմադրեցինք։ Դիմադրությունը շարունակվեց մինչև մութն ընկնելը։ Մութը դարձավ մեր փրկարարը։ Լիակատար խավարի մեջ մենք դուրս եկանք տնից։ Հայերը չկարողացան կանգնեցնել մեզ։ Մեզ հետ վերցնելով խաղաղ բնակիչներին՝ մենք ճանապարհ ընկանք դեպի Աղդամ։ Հասանք Նախչավանիկ գյուղ և հանդիպեցինք հայերի հետ։ Նրանք ասացին, որ եթե զենքներս վայր դնենք ու հանձնվենք, մեզ ողջ բաց կթողնեն դեպի Աղդամ։ Սա հայկական հնարք էր։ Մենք լավ գիտեինք, որ եթե զենքը վայր դնենք, մեզ կոչնչացնեն։ Դրա համար էլ մենք այդ առաջարկությանը պատասխանեցինք կրակով։ Դրանից հետո նրանք հեռացան մեր ճանապարհից։ Մենք խաղաղ բնակիչների հետ գնացինք դեպի Աղդամ»։
Կարելի է կարծել, թե այդ տանը գտնվողները մտածում էին, թե հայերը դեռ չեն գրավել Խոջալուն։ Դրա համար էլ նրանք փետրվարի 26-ի գիշերը չեն հեռացել քաղաքից և այնտեղից դուրս են եկել միայն փետրվարի 27-ի գիշերը՝ համոզվելով, որ քաղաքում, իրենցից բացի, ադրբեջանցիներ չկան։
Լեյտենանտ Շ.Մուրադովի պատմածից պարզ է դառնում, որ փետրվարի 27-ի գիշերը կռվողները 70-80 տեղաբնակների հետ Խոջալուից ոտքով, առանց կորուստների հասել են ադրբեջանական բանակի զինված կազմավորումների կողմից վերահսկվող Աղդամի շրջան։ Նրանք հրաձգության և հարձակման չեն ենթարկվել հայերի կողմից, ինչը հաստատում է այն, որ Հայաստանի ինքնապաշտպանության ջոկատների մարտիկները կապ չեն ունեցել Խոջալուի խաղաղ բնակիչների ու պաշտպանների զոհվելու հետ՝ քաղաքի սահմաններից դուրս և Աղդամի շրջանի տարածքում։
Մարդասիրական միջանցքը սկսվում էր Խոջալուի արևելյան ծայրամասից և անցնում Գար-Գար գետի երկայնքով՝ հյուսիս-արևելքից դեպի Աղդամ։ Միջանցքի լայնությունը 120-300 մետր էր և ավելի։ Հարձակումը տեղի էր ունենում չորս ուղղությամբ, բայց շրջապատման համապարփակ օղակ չկար, մեր ուժերը պարզապես չէին բավարարում, և դրանից նույնպես օգտվեցին խոջալուցիները Աղդամի շրջան հեռանալիս։ Մեր ունեցած բոլոր ջոկատները գործի դրվեցին Խոջալուն վերցնելու համար մարտում, որն ավարտվեց միայն փետրվարի 26-ի առավոտյան ժամը 7-ին։ Բայց դիմադրության առանձին օջախներ մնացել էին, և մենք ջոկատներ չունեինք քաղաքից դուրս գործողությունների համար։ Խոջալուից դուրս եկած խաղաղ բնակիչներին և նրանց ուղեկցող մարտիկներին մեր ջոկատները չեն հետապնդել, քանի որ մարդ չկար, որ հետապնդեր, և դա պլանավորված էլ չէր։
Բացի այդ, Ադրբեջանի պաշտպանության նախարարությունը Աղդամ քաղաքի շրջանում հարձակողական զորախմբավորում ուներ, որը հաշվված ժամերում պատրաստ էր գրավել Ասկերանը և ապաշրջափակել Խոջալուն։ Այս պլանի մասին Ադրբեջանի Զինված ուժերի Գլխավոր շտաբի պետ, գեներալ-մայոր Դադաշ Ռզաևն անձամբ պատմել է Խոջալուի շրջանի գործադիր իշխանության ղեկավար Էլման Մամեդովին (որը գլխավորում էր քաղաքի պաշտպանությունը), երբ վերջինս 1992թ. փետրվարի 10-11-ին գտնվում էր Բաքվում՝ քաղաքի և ողջ շրջանի պաշտպանության ուժեղացմանը նվիրված հարցերով։ Այն ժամանակ Դ.Ռզաևն ասել էր, որ Խոջալուի ապաշրջափակման և Ասկերանի ու Աղդամի հետ հաղորդակցության բացման պլանն արդեն պատրաստ է, և մի քանի օր հետո Խոջալուն գործողությունն սկսելու ազդանշան կստանա։ Բայց խոջալուցիներն ազդանշանն այդպես էլ չստացան։
Իսկ 1992թ. փետրվարի 17-ին Ղարաբաղի գոտու ներքին գործերի վարչության պետի տեղակալ, գնդապետ Շ.Ջանգիրովը Աղդամի ներքին գործերի շրջանային վարչությունում տեղի ունեցող խորհրդակցությունում, որին մասնակցում էին Աղդամի կայազորի բոլոր զորամասերի և միավորումների հրամանատարները, զեկուցեց Խոջալուի ապաշրջափակման՝ Դ.Ռզաևի պատրաստած գործողության պլանի մասին։ Դրա իրականացման ժամկետը՝ փետրվարի 21-25, անընդհատ հետաձգվում էր, և գործողությունը չիրականացվեց։ Այս իրավիճակում ինքնապաշտպանության հայկական ուժերն առաջ անցան ադրբեջանցիներից և փետրվարի 26-ին գրավեցին Խոջալու քաղաքը։
Ոչ մի հայ մարտիկ չէր համարձակվի մտնել Ադրբեջանի զորքերի Աղդամի խմբավորման տեղակայման շրջան, քանի որ դա պարզապես կործանարար կլիներ նրա համար և կհրահրեր ադրբեջանցիներին հարձակողական գործողություն սկսել՝ Ասկերանը գրավելու և Խոջալուն ապաշրջափակելու նպատակով։ Հայկական զորքերի ղեկավարությունը սպասում էր, որ կարող է օգնություն ցուցաբերվել քաղաքի պաշտպաններին Աղդամից, Շուշիից ու ադրբեջանական այլ բնակավայրերից և զգուշանում էր դրանից։ Ուստի, հայկական ջոկատները չէին կարող մտնել ադրբեջանական զորքերի կողմից վերահսկվող Աղդամի արվարձան և ոչնչացնել Խոջալուն մարդասիրական միջանցքով լքած խաղաղ բնակիչներին։
Ողբերգությունն իրականացվել է ադրբեջանական զինվորական կազմավորումների կողմից, ադրբեջանական ԶՈւ-ի կողմից վերահսկվող տարածքում՝ Աղդամի արվարձանում, որտեղ հայ մարտիկը մտնել չէր կարող, քանի որ այնտեղ խոշոր հարձակողական խմբավորում կար։ Որ այն գործի չդրվեց, վկայում է նախագահի թիմում առկա հակասությունների և այն մասին, որ ԱՀ ՊՆ-ում կային ԱԺՃ կողմնակիցներ, որոնք առիթը բաց չէին թողնում նախագահին վնասելու համար։ Ընթանում էր կոշտ քաղաքական պայքար իշխանության համար, և այդ նպատակին հասնելու համար քաղաքական հակառակորդներն օգտագործում էին բոլոր միջոցները, ընդհուպ մինչև իրենց քաղաքացիներին ոչնչացնելը։ Անգամ այնպիսի խոշոր քաղաքական գործիչ, ինչպիսին էր ինտրիգան Հեյդար Ալիևը, ողջունում և անհրաժեշտ էր համարում իշխանության համար պայքարում զոհաբերել սեփական ժողովրդին։
Ռուսամետ նախագահ Ա.Մութալիբովին ներքաղաքական պայքարից դուրս թողնելու հարցում շահագրգռված էին օտարերկրյա պետությունները, մասնավորապես Թուրքիան և Իսրայելը։ Որպեսզի Ադրբեջանում իշխանության գային հակառուսական ուժերը, անհրաժեշտ էր վարկաբեկել գործող նախագահին։ Դա կարելի էր անել՝ նրան մեղադրելով Հայաստանի դեմ պատերազմում ադրբեջանական բանակն անհմուտ ղեկավարելու և չարդարացված մեծ կորուստների մեջ։ Տարբերակները մի քանիսն էին, և դրանցից մեկն ադրբեջանական զինվորականների կողմից վերահսկվող Աղդամի շրջանի տարածքում Խոջալուի խաղաղ բնակիչների հետ կապված ողբերգական իրադարձությունները դարձան։ Ա.Մութալիբովին պաշտոնանկ անելուց հետո ԱՀ-ում իշխանության եկան թուրքամետ և հակառուսական առաջնորդներ։
Այսպիսով՝ կարելի է անել հետևյալ հետևությունները.
Խոջալուի խաղաղ բնակիչները գնդակահարվել են ադրբեջանական զինված կազմավորումների կողմից վերահսկվող Աղդամի շրջանում և ԼՂՀ՝ Աղդամի շրջանին հարակից տարածքում։ Նրանք են կրում խաղաղ բնակիչների զոհվելու պատասխանատվությունը։
Հայաստանի ինքնապաշտպանության ջոկատների մարտիկներն այդ ողբերգությանը չեն մասնակցել։
1 «Бакинский рабочий», 26.02.1997г.
2 «AZERBAYCAN», 26.02.1997г.
3 «Мегаполис-экспресс», № 17, 1992г.
4 Аятолла Амели рассказал сенсационные сведения о событиях в Ходжалу: За всем этим стояли «Эргенекон» и «Моссад», http://www.panorama..../12/imam-ameli/
5 «Xalg gazeti» , 26.02.1997г.
6 «Respublika», 26 փետրվարի 1997թ.։
Հիմք՝ http://www.noravank....LEMENT_ID=12566
Posted 16 February 2015 - 04:26 PM
American blogger: Azerbaijan exercises falsifications by propagating image of victim
''The Assembly of Friends of Azerbaijan,'' an affiliate of Turkish lobbying organization, associated with Fethullah Gulen, an influential Muslim spiritual figure, sent invitations to Kansas Legislators to attend a meeting titled "Remember the Khojalu Tragedy." American blogger of ''Defining the Narrative'' carried out a personal research, ending up urging his friends in the Kansas Legislature not to be misled by the Azerbaijani propaganda, as long as the events in Khojalu were ''not a genocide by any stretch of the imagination,'' unlike the Armenian Genocide committed by the Turks in 1915. He also warned that some of the photos presented during the event, could possibly be taken in other places, in Kosovo for instance, in 1999.
It's noted in the article, that today Armenia is in good relations with pretty much everyone other than its neighbors -Turkey and Azerbaijan, who have blockaded the Armenians for 20 years following a war over Nagorno Karabakh which left Armenia in control of NK; Azerbaijan is unwilling to let it go.
The Azerbaijanis and the Turks call the Khojalu battle everything from a tragedy, to a massacre, to genocide, the article reads. The loss of civilian life in a war-zone is indeed a tragedy, but this hardly constitutes a "genocide." Especially, if the town of 6,000 had been warned beforehand to be evacuated, and a safe corridor was available for that purpose.
Citing an excerpt from the Human Rights Watch 1993 report, the author points out to the fact, that indiscriminate attacks commenced from both sides. He also cites the British journalist Thomas de Waal, who noted that the events in Khojalu were a result of a spontaneous, rather than deliberately planned action.
''But the Azerbaijani websites such as 'Azerbaijan.az' serve as a propaganda tool to absolve Azerbaijan of any wrong doing, playing the victim, while placing all the blame for Khojaly at the feet of Armenia. Did I mention there were somewhere between 1000-3000 Jihadi mercenaries from Afghanistan and Chechnya fighting with the Azeri's during the war?'' the blogger writes.
Also, making a research over the situation in Azerbaijan, the blogger writes that the country is run by an autocratic regime of a clan who controls just about everything including the banks, the oil, the government, education and the media propaganda machine. The clan run Heydar Aliyev Foundation propagates a favorable narrative to perspective international partners and allies. Also SOCAR (the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijani Republic) hosted a large-scale lobbying event in Baku. According to an article posted on the website ''The Washington Diplomat'', 317 delegates from 42 states, including 11 sitting members of Congress, 75 state representatives and three ex-insiders of White House – political strategist David Plouffe, former press secretary Robert Gibbs and ex-deputy chief of staff Jim Messina took part in the event. The article read that Plouffe, Messina and Gibbs were given five-figure sums to speak at the forum, praising Azerbaijan. All in all, $1.5 million were spent on holding the event.
In its turn, CASILIPS (Citizens against Special Interest Lobbying in Public Schools) noted that the organizer of the event was Kemal Oksuz ("Kevin" Oksuz), who is a major player in the Gulen Movement in Azerbaijan and has connections in various states.
On February 26, 1992, during the war in Karabakh, around 200 to 300 people (according to Human Rights Watch, and 600 according to the version propagated by Azerbaijan) were killed in unknown circumstances near the city of Aghdam. They have been deliberately withheld by the Azerbaijani authorities in the midst of the military actions. Population of the village of Khojalu, which was one of the firing points shooting at the blockaded Stepanakert (among five others) was kept in the village for months by force and was not evacuated by the authorities of Azerbaijan deliberately, in order to use them as human shields later.
Residents of Khojalu coming out through the humanitarian corridor, that the self-defense forces of NKR had left open, freely passed more than 10 km and reached the Aghdam city controlled by the Azerbaijani troops. Later, not far from the positions of Azerbaijani troops dead bodies of the villagers were found. The exact death toll remains unknown as the official Baku publishes data contradicting each other.
Parliamentary Commission investigating the tragic death of the civilians at Aghdam city was dissolved by the order of Heydar Aliyev, the investigative materials are kept secret.
Source: Panorama.am
- onjig likes this
Posted 25 February 2015 - 01:32 PM
Armine Adibekyan: Azerbaijan does not look for justice in Aghdam events but indulgency for further atrocities against Armenians
Panorama.am held an interview with the head of the "Xenophobia Prevention Initiative" NGO, sociologist Armine Adibekyan.
- Each year at the end of February Azerbaijan with a widespread propaganda marks the Aghdam events that took place in 1992, which are called "Khojalu events". How would you comment on this campaign?
- I will not relate again and again what happened that time, I'd like to talk about what's going on today. The arguments of the Armenian side can be found in the film titled "Between hunger and fire". And if somebody needs it is possible to organize objective and rational discussion with facts and not emotions, whims and wishes. But this is not possible as it never has been before. The active and uncontrollable replenishment of the emotional sphere is the the only and primary challenge facing the Azerbaijani side, and they do it as they can. The Armenian side has repeatedly called the for discussion.
- What is the grounded disposition of the Armenian side based on?
- We use only the Azerbaijani sources and the chronicle of those years. We compare them with each other, and not with the "Armenian version". Our arguments are based also on the contradictions of Azerbaijani propaganda. After all, the one who tells the truth does not need to lie, to change the story and the testimonies. The falsification of photographs is the tip of the iceberg. Everything that is connected with the concept of "Khojalu" is being falsified – starting with illustrations and lists ending with the testimony of witnesses. At present they have are on a new type of retrospective interpretation and presentation of facts. For example, Gyulali Binalu who had been "in captivity" in an interview tells about "the horrors" of captivity, where he was tortured by Robert Kocharyan. However, he or maybe the journalists have forgotten that in February 1992, he had given an interview and on the newsreel he did not leave the impression of a man who had been tortured. By the way, the next day, after the interview, this group of people was transferred to the Azerbaijani side. And Robert Kocharyan not only did not participate in the interrogations, but he was not present in the newsreel either. Another "witness" in the film "When the sun went out" gives evidence, but cannot exactly remember the name of her husband, calling him Elmar Akhmedov Naib oglu, who, according to the official list of the victims, at that time, February 26, 1992 was only 6 years old. The third one, Panah Magerramov, says that he had his ear cut off, while on the photograph accompanying the journalistic investigation, we see that both of his ears are on their placec. And the photograph clearly shows that these are his "native" ears, not prosthesis. What can be expected from ordinary mortals, if "competent" people, such as Ramiz Fataliyev (the chairman of the commission of on investigation of the Khojaly tragedy at Milli Mejlis of Azerbaijan), after 23 years, instead of talking about what they know and about the results of the investigation, build their evidence based on "confessions of Zori Balayan" or authoritatively' claim via facebook that "there were 710 dead (instead of 613 yet unproven), and more than a hundred of children"? I tried to contact Ramiz Fataliyev through Facebook in order to get clarifications on topic, but received no response. By the way, any attempt to get a response from "competent" people on specific question remain in dead silence on certain allegations or facts.
- We would like to address the issue of falsifications in the lists of those dead ...
- The falsified lists of the dead in Khojalu have been studied back in 2012 in details. It is important to note several vital points - there are three official lists differing from one another; none of them contains 613 names (available options are: 630 names, 601 names, 508 names); over 70% of the victims are men aged 18 to 60 years, some of them have no relation to Khojalu at all - they have been killed in another time and another place.
- And, nevertheless, the Azerbaijani side periodically threatens to appeal to the International Court of Justice on wording "Khojalu genocide."
- As I said earlier, with such an approach and a collection of "factual" materials they have nothing to go to court with, thus the talks about the international court – the talks in favor of the poor, as well as the threats are designed for the ignorant ones. Anyway, if they are going to court with the facts that they have in their hands then I will attend that court with pleasure.
As for the considering the events that took place as a genocide, which supposes "total or partial physical destruction of an ethnic group", here there are a lot of white spots too. Azerbaijan's population in 1992 was 7,324,100 people. They will have to try very hard to prove that the death of three, even six hundred people, as the report of the international organization "Human rights watch" reads, served a threat to existence of an ethnic group that consisted of seven million people. It is, I think, needless to say that basically members of other ethnic groups like Meskhetian Turks, who were settled in the epicenter of the battle deliberately, were killed.
They are not looking for justice, but a "victory", as they understand it, which over the time will give them a moral justification in the eyes of the outside world for the atrocities and massacres planned against the Armenians. Perhaps it is already giving, judging by the statements of the first party of Azerbaijan, which are rather plain: "We will avenge", "Armenia must cease to exist," "we'll be back, we'll destroy and we'll build our own one". In particular, the main product of propaganda in 2015 "Khojaly: A trial over Armenia" testifies this fact. People, who want to reveal the truth and justice, would call the book "The trial of the guilty." But Armenia and the Armenians are already considered as a culprit without trial or investigation. They need not the true, but the indulgency.
Source: Panorama.am
- onjig likes this
Posted 25 February 2015 - 01:49 PM
19:21, 24 Feb 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan
Speaking at the Parliament today, Chairman of the National Assembly's
Standing Committee on Foreign Relations Artak Zakaryan referred to
the Azerbaijani propagana campaign on the so-called "Khojaly" events:
"Azerbaijan's costly propaganda in different corners of the world is
continuing its fraud march, which in these days is devoted to so-called
"Khojaly," actually to the Aghdam events. What happened?
On February 26, 1992, Aghdam events took place, which are
interpreted as "Khojaly massacre" by Azerbaijan. During these events,
the Azerbaijani armed groupings ruthlessly shot down a number of
residents of Khojaly settlement in a territory under their control. In
order to overthrow President Muthalibov, the opposition Azerbaijani
National Front used the forced operation of Karabakh armed forces
aimed to suppress the Azeri shooting, as this was where capital
Stepanakert and surrounding areas were being shelled from. This is
also evidenced by President Ayaz Mutalibov in his interview on 2th
of April, 1992 to " Nezavisimaya Gazeta." Before the operation, the
Karabakh side, according to the norms of humanitarian law, informed
Khojaly authorities about planned operation and leaving a corridor
for the safe evacuation of Azerbaijani population.
After the tragic events in the territories controlled by Azerbaijanis
Azeri journalist Cnigiz Mustafaev photographed and filmed the dead
bodies which were not disfigured. The existing files confirm that
the Karabakh side physically was not able to access the territories
where the people were killed and the bodies were disfigured.
After the upheaval followed by Khojaly provocation, the Azerbaijani
new leadership headed by Abulfaz Elchibey, initiated a deliberate
falsification of the events to conceal his monstrous crime interpreting
it as "a massacre" of civilians by Karabakh forces.
This policy is being continued by official Azerbaijan till today. By
distorted propaganda of presenting Aghdam events as massacre of Khojaly
Azerbaijani authorities are trying to hit the international reputation
of two Armenian states, to impose the distorted interpretation of
the events on the international community to boost anti-Armenian moods.
I call on our partner parliamentarians from different states,
municipal and provincial councils to avoid the pitfalls of Azerbaijani
propaganda. Don't buy into false information and fictitious events.
Keep clean the parliamentary agendas and don't let the Azerbaijani
propaganda penetrate there. If you are looking for those responsible
for Khojaly events, so look for them in Azerbaijan."
- MosJan and onjig like this
Posted 27 February 2015 - 10:12 AM
Monday, 23 February 2015 17:07
On the eve of the next anniversary of the Khojalu events of February
1992, Azerbaijan is intensifying its anti-Armenian campaign aimed
at spreading the propaganda myth invented by the authorities in Baku
about the massacre of the civilians of Khojalu by the Armenian armed
forces. Both Armenian and foreign and even Azerbaijani experts have
written and spoken much about the tragedy of the population of this
settlement. It should be emphasized that they have done it truthfully
and objectively.
And the truth is that the tragedy really took place, and people really
died, but not in Khojalu, through no fault of Armenians, and not in
the amount that Azerbaijan presents to the world by all means.
Let's remind that since the spring of 1991, the NKR capital city and
a number of settlements had been regularly subjected to artillery
bombardment, including from 'Grad' multiple rocket launchers from
Khojalu, which was turned into a fortified military base by the
Azerbaijani authorities. The military-political leadership of the NKR
imperatively faced the issue of eliminating the military base, which
played an important role in the policy of the Azerbaijani leadership
on the final destruction of Artsakh, as well as unlocking the only
(Stepanakert) airport in the Republic.
The military operation was held on February 25-26, 1992, and ended
with the victory of the NKR armed forces. It is very important to
emphasize that the Karabakh commanders, to avoid civilian casualties,
warned the Azerbaijani side about the impending operation and provided
a humanitarian corridor for the civilians to safely leave for Agdam,
which was under the control of the Azerbaijani armed forces that
period. But then something unexpected happened - at the approaches
to Agdam, part of the Khojalu people was met with fire and ruthlessly
killed by their own armed units.
But, was the tragedy really unexpected? The facts cited by the Armenian
and some Azerbaijani journalists irrefutably evidence that the tragedy
was deliberately committed by the Azerbaijanis themselves, or rather,
by representatives of the Azerbaijani Popular Front to overthrow
the then President Mutalibov, which he also admitted. That is, the
residents of Khojalu became victims of the dirty struggle of the
Azerbaijani political forces for power. Despite the numerous facts
confirming the absolute fault of the Azerbaijani side in the deaths
of the civilians of Khojalu, the official Baku propaganda created an
ideological myth about the "Khojalu genocide", sparing no efforts
and resources, including financial, to impose it on its own people
and the international community.
Lie and falsification have always been the basis of the state
anti-Armenian policy of Azerbaijan. The issue of "Khojalu" continues
to be one of the cornerstones of the Azerbaijani propaganda, which is
used as a tool for both internal and external information policy. It
is, in particular, designed to support the Armenian-phobia in the
Azerbaijani society, is used as a kind of counterbalance to the
Armenian pogroms in Sumgait, Baku, Kirovabad and other settlements,
as well as a mechanism to counter the process of international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
As might be expected, Azerbaijan, this year too, has continued its
targeted disinformation of the international community about what
happened in Khojalu. In the framework of the international campaign
"Justice for Khojaly!" carried out under the leadership of Vice
President of the Heydar Aliyev Foundation Leyla Aliyeva, the Europe-
Azerbaijan Society has published the book "Khojaly. The witnesses of
the war crimes. Armenia on the dock" in Russian and Turkish in St.
Petersburg and Istanbul. One can hardly doubt the "stuffing" of this
book, as well as the fact that it lacks the well-known persons in
Azerbaijan that confirm the undeniable truth - the deaths of the
civilians of Khojalu lie on the conscience of the Azerbaijani side,
which committed a crime against its own people in the struggle
for power.
Let's list them. Ayaz Mutalibov, the then President: "Armenians
provided a corridor, through which the people could escape. Why should
they shoot then? Especially in the territory close to Agdam, where
enough forces were located by that time to go and help the people".
Arif Yunusov, an Azerbaijani human rights activist, who is now in
prison: "The town and its inhabitants were deliberately sacrificed
for a political purpose".
Tamerlan Karayev, former Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of Azerbaijan:
"The tragedy was committed by the Azerbaijani authorities,
specifically, one of the top officials".
Former President Heydar Aliyev stated in April 1992, as reported by
Bilik-Dunyasi Agency: "The bloodshed will benefit us. We should not
interfere in the course of events".
Vagif Huseynov, former Minister of National Security of Azerbaijan:
"The January 1990 events in Baku and the events in Khojalu are the
job of the same persons".
Operator Chingiz Mustafayev, who, as a result of his own investigation,
concluded that the Azerbaijani side had been involved in the crimes
against the people of Khojalu, was killed. The editor of Monitor
magazine, Elmar Huseynov, who published a report from Karabakh,
was also killed. In the report, journalist Eynulla Fatullayev wrote
that "according to the people of Khojalu, they took advantage of the
corridor, and the Armenian soldiers, standing on the other side of
the corridor, didn't really fire them...".
This is the true and not fictional justice, the truth about Khojalu.
But, do the current authorities of Azerbaijan, who continue fanning
the Khojalu myth, need it?
Leonid MARTIROSSIAN Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
We had a brilliant story teller in school today! She read us Goldilocks and the 3 Bears using her own story words. We joined in with the bits we know.
Recent Posts
Other Class blogs
Tags1 more 1 less 1-1 counting Alfie car wash role play Challenge time Charlie Child initiated learning Children in need colour blocking conkers cooking in reception counting in a set critical thinking skills Dance Danielle drain pipe early mark making Early Years art Early Years challenges early years fairytales Early years pirates Early years problem solving Exploration fairytale day Farming and Countryside Award farming award fine motor Finley forest Forest school Foundation Stage Problem solving fun run garage role play gloop goldilocks and the 3 bears eyfs healthy eating in reception Initial sounds Jack kadinski in early years learning outdoors letter formation Liam Lucy Mark making mark making in maths matching music and movement matching numeral to quantity mathletics Mondrian non-fiction number challenge Operation Christmas Child outdoor learning outdoor learning eyfs Outdoor literacy Outdoor literacy eyfs outdoor maths outdoor maths in reception outdoor play phase 2 phonics games phonics Piet Mondrian pirates Pirates topic early years planting PSHE Rain play Remembrance safe and happy self initiated exploration Serenity talk for writing in reception teaching settings in reception Thinking skills water play

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What are bedrest studies?
Bedrest studies offer scientists a way to see how the human body adapts to weightlessness. They allow researchers to test techniques to counteract the negative effects of living in space.
The results benefit people on Earth – many negative effects of living in space are shared as people get older naturally, such as osteoporosis, muscle loss and orthostatic intolerance.
Volunteers spend usually from five to 60 days in bed with their head down, usually at 6° below the horizontal. They may not stand up unless a research programme demands it and must perform all daily activities in bed including eating, showers and exercise.
By submitting themselves to this upside-down regime, the volunteers' bodies start to adapt as if they were in space.
Scientists monitor the volunteers continuously to understand how their bodies change and why. Results allow measures to be devised that will help astronauts on space missions as well as bed-ridden people recuperating from illness.
Bedrest studies offer a cheaper and more practical alternative to studying human bodies in space. The research often takes place in hospitals or clinics with specialised equipment and personnel.


text:
Night Shift Belly
By Jenny Jennings Foerst
Disruption of sleep-wake cycles damages the intestinal wall and promotes inflammatory disease.
Disruption of sleep-wake cycles damages the intestinal wall and promotes inflammatory disease.
My friend Liana is no pub crawler. Otherwise, her night shifts might well kill her. An acute-care psychiatric nurse in Lincolnshire, England, Liana and her colleagues entertain a running joke they call "night shift belly." Whenever they must work two or three 12-hour night shifts in a row, they've noticed that they share the same intestinal distress. In unison they walk the ward, hitting the yogurt cup.
Ali Keshavarzian, a gastroenterologist at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, knows that Liana isn't imagining things. In a recent study published in PLoS One, Keshavarzian and his coauthors show that disruption of circadian rhythms, which regulate sleep-wake cycles, weakens the lining of the gut. The health implications are significant: Circadian disruption can hasten and exacerbate alcoholic liver disease, and by itself can harm the gut lining as severely as alcohol abuse.
The path to discovery began with Keshavarzian's clinical observations at Rush. "He had several patients with Crohn's disease, an inflammatory bowel disease," says his coauthor, Keith C. Summa, an M.D. and Ph.D. student at Northwestern University. "He noticed that several would suffer flare-ups while working night shifts; in contrast, when they were on the stable day shift, they were better able to manage their disease." He also noted similar intestinal distress among some of his other patients who were alcoholics. Both groups suffered from "gut leakiness," a syndrome in which toxins pass through a weakened intestinal wall into the circulatory system, causing systemic inflammation.
Keshavarzian wondered about the connection between the two patient populations and suspected that the common factor might explain why only about 30 percent of heavy drinkers develop severe liver disease. Research had shown that alcoholics with liver disease tend to have gut leakiness, but why or how the condition developed was unknown. The night shift belly phenomenon hinted to Keshavarzian that circadian disruption could be a risk factor for gut leakiness and therefore alcoholic liver disease.
With these thoughts in mind, Keshavarzian contacted Summa's mentor, Fred W. Turek, director of the Center for Sleep and Circadian Biology at Northwestern, to collaborate on a mouse model of inflammatory bowel disease. After some preliminary experiments, Keshavarzian and the sleep research team decided to pursue a mouse model of alcoholic liver disease instead, because alcoholism offered a surer way to elicit inflammatory disease.
"What is so dangerous about gut leakiness," says Summa, "is that the bacteria in your gut have toxins and proteins that cause inflammation, and these molecules can cross the wall of the intestines." The liver attempts to process the toxins, which promotes liver disease. "Alcoholic liver disease serves as a model for studying induced inflammation," Summa continues. "It had the added benefit of differential susceptibility: Some people who drink are protected, while others are vulnerable."
To mimic the effects of shift work or jet lag in humans, Keshavarzian and his collaborators exposed the mice to a repeating reversal of the light-dark cycle, which consisted of 12 hours of light and 12 of darkness. For one week, lights came on at 6 a.m.; for the next week, they came on at 6 p.m. The researchers also divided the mice into two dietary groups. One ate food containing alcohol; the other group was alcohol-free. After exposing the mice to light-dark cycle reversals for three months and feeding them their assigned diets for 10 weeks, Keshavazian's team conducted tests to assess gut leakiness and liver cell injury.
"We found that disruption of circadian rhythm promoted both gut leakiness and liver inflammation, leading to greater severity of alcoholic liver pathology," says Summa. The mice that were both alcohol-fed and circadian-disrupted showed the earliest and most severe disease, as expected. In mice whose light-dark cycles were not disturbed, the alcoholic diet resulted in a twofold increase in gut leakiness. Surprisingly, though, in alcohol-free mice, chronic disruption of the circadian rhythm also resulted in a twofold increase. Circadian rhythm disruption alone appeared to be as destructive as alcohol abuse alone.
In parallel with this experiment, the researchers experimented on Clock-mutant mice, which carry a defective version of a gene that regulates the biological clock. Like the other mice, they were sorted to an alcohol-rich diet or an alcohol-free diet. The researchers included this experiment as a check that circadian rhythms, not other environmental factors, directly influence gut leakiness. Both approaches to circadian disruption yielded similar findings, which strengthens support for the role of the biological clock.
Keshavarzian and his team plan to explore how the shifts in sleep-wake cycles result in gut leakiness. During their study, they observed that biological clock disruption seems to relocate a protein called occludin from the gut barrier cell's membrane to its interior. This protein forms junctions that hold gut barrier cells together, suggesting a possible target for future therapies.
Even simple behavioral changes could also have meaningful health impacts. Summa notes that he had to deliberately stress his lab mice, but people intentionally disrupt their sleep-wake cycles all the time. An attitude prevails that "you can 'get by' with disrupted sleep," he says. "But we in the sleep field think that sleep is a fundamental biological need, on the same level as diet and exercise." Far from being a mere annoyance or joke, after all, night shift belly apparently can kill.
Click "American Scientist" to access home page


text:
Saturday, August 10, 201911:00AM - Sunday, November 3, 20195:00PM
At Longwood Center for the Visual Arts 129 N. Main Street Farmville, VA 23901
Pinkalicious: The Exhibition – The Colorlicious World of Victoria Kann is a rainbowtastic exhibition of color, adventure, and discovery. Victoria Kann, an award-winning illustrator and author, created the Pinkalicious character and illustrated Goldilicious, Silverlicious, Emeraldalicious, Aqualicious, and Peterrific. She is also the co-executive producer of Pinkalicious & Peterrific on PBS Kids.
Victoria Kann started her art career as an editorial illustrator for several publications, including Businessweek, Harper's Magazine, Newsweek, The New York Times,The Washington Post, and Time. Once Kann became a mother, and as she watched her daughters learn and grow, her art moved into making children's books about magic, wonder, and courage.
Pinkalicious is on view August 10 - November 3, with an opening reception with the artist on October 16, 2019 from 5:30-8 p.m.
This exhibition is presented in partnership with the Virginia Children's Book Festival, and made possible in part by Candice Jamison Dowdy '69 and Charles H. Dowdy III + Northwestern Mutual.
LCVA exhibitions and programs are made possible through the generous support of the Wells-Fargo Foundation, the Walter J. Payne Foundation, Anne Carter & Walter R. Robbins, Jr. Foundation, the E.B. Duff Charitable Lead Annuity Trust, Southside Electric Cooperative, Walmart, Julie Kline Dixon and Guy Dixon, Navona & David Hart, Real Living Cornerstone, Helton House, Haley Auto Mall, The Woodland, Inc., Candice Jamison Dowdy '69 and Charles H. Dowdy III + Northwestern Mutual, and Longwood University Office of Alumni and Career Services.


text:
About 18
Like any other blog this one too is a medium of self expression, born largely out of my angst at my inability to influence social change. Just like any common man on street, I have felt voiceless in the day to day grind of everyday life. I have been often plagued by the nauseating feeling of seeing wrong being done but being unable to stop, prevent or change it. This blog will help voice my concerns, vent my ideas and shape my thoughts.
The idea for this blog came from my first ever blog post – A Glass Half Empty. The post dealt with the myriad of holes & leakages in our systems leading to a loot of government exchequer. Corruption today is reaching monumental proportions. Just like the Freedom Movement of the 40s and the Economic Liberalisation of 90s, our nation today is in the need of a basic paradigm shift. Freedom from Corruption will impact all facets of our society and will catapult us into an orbit of mature nationhood.
But can a blog lead us to our dream of "Corruption Free India"? I believe it can…tune in to this blog for taking the fight to the enemies' doorsteps.
Let the fight begin….


text:
home : get our free newsletter : past newsletters : become a sponsor : donate : contact us
community weblog : community calendar : discussions : login
Welcome to H2ONotes!H2ONotes is an electronic newsletter geared toward water-related activities, enthusiasts & issues. We offer several different editions to suit you!
H2ONotes is a completely free and volunteer publication. We do acquire operating costs and appreciate any donations. If you enjoy reading H2ONotes and would like to, make a donation.
So many water enthusiasts from around the state enjoy more than one of Michigan's different waterways. We attempt to cover news, events and issues for a cross-section of the Great Lakes Region. We supply our subscribers with a rich variety of articles from throughout the state. More about H2ONotes -->
Tie-up to H2ONotes!We'll throw you a dock line...link your site to H2ONotes to grow the community of water enthusiasts! Here's how:
Check Out our Affiliations:
If you currently receive H2ONotes but wish to be removed from the mailing list, you may opt out. If you opt out, you will no longer receive the h2ONotes newsletter.
280 Mill Street, Suite A | Rochester, MI 48307 | (248) 650-4962
privacy statement | contact us


text:
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or daily email. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Posts may contain affiliate links. Additionally, I often receive product or payment for posts but this does not change the integrity of my writing or influence my opinions. Read more at this blog's Disclosure Policy. To see how this website uses cookies view our privacy policy here. Thanks for visiting!
Leave a Comment