Vugar Seidov’s recent op-ed piece which recently appeared in Al Jazeera on the “occupation” of Nagorno-Karabagh assumes many things, not least of which is the wholesale ignorance of all people at large, particularly his own. Seidov, at least on paper, is an “intelligent” man, and one whose credentials should subject him to a higher standard of both historic and academic integrity. Yet, to pursue the narrow interests of his Government, Seidov abandons both his people and integrity, and pens an opinion piece that calls into question his character and competence, and tarnishes the good name of the academic institutions from which he so proudly hails.
First, in an absolute abandon of any morsel of truth, Seidov laces his essay with accusatory statements with no evidentiary bases for same. While he blames Armenia for the “considerable intensification” of assaults, and points to it as having “launched the heaviest ever assault since the 1994 ceasefire agreement,” his own government acknowledged early on that the offensive along the entire line of contact was of their own making, albeit claiming that it was in response to mortar rounds being fired at Azeri settlements. Seidov could have acknowledged as much, but chose to disregard any piece of information that would prove inconvenient to his objective of widening the divide between the two nations, as opposed to bridging the horrendous and life-consuming gap.
Without much substantive information and in wholly conclusory language, this “Doctor” of history and “Master” of International Relations arrogantly concludes that “Armenia once again exposed its intention to escalate the situation and sabotage the peace process,” and goes on to discuss the “aggression and ethnic cleansing policy” purportedly exercised by Armenia.
There is no mention of the unilateral and public threats constantly and continuously issued by Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev and Defense Minister Zakir Hasanov, both of whom in recent days have publicly stated that if Armenians want the fighting to stop, they can simply evacuate Nagorno Karabagh. Of course, Seidov can’t afford to remind his audience of Ramil Safarov, “The axe murderer who became a Facebook hero” for brutally killing an Armenian officer in his sleep while both attended English language courses organized by NATO. Safarov was found guilty of the gruesome murder in Budapest, eventually extradited to Azerbaijan, where he was greeted at the airport with flowers and kisses, given a parade, promoted for the heinous act, and showered with praise and lavish gifts by President Aliyev himself. Nor does Seidov mention the Yezidi soldier who was beheaded a couple of days ago , or the execution of an Armenian elderly couple and the subsequent mutilation of their bodies by Azerbaijani soldiers after their village had been evacuated.
Nope. No facts, other than a vague reference to “Khojaly in 1992,” a most regrettable episode, surely, but one amongst numerous such unfortunate episodes inflicted by both sides, including Sumgait, which occurred in the midst of a furious war more than twenty-four years ago. But Mr. Seidov need not stoop to facts; his credentials given him all the credibility needed to support his nefarious objectives, whatever they may be.
Seidov also fails to mention Aliyev’s incessant bellicose claims to present-day Armenia itself, insisting that its capital Yerevan is “historic Azerbaijani lands,” which shall one day be reclaimed. Nor does he discuss what incentive, if any, Armenia would have for such escalation, whereas the political dividends gained by Azerbaijan, which desperately needs to draw attention away from its current domestic issues — including but not limited to an economic crisis unlike anything it has faced in the last twenty-some years, the government’s heavy-handed tactics in silencing its domestic critics, and the recent leak of the Panama Papers implicating the top echelons of its government, especially the Aliyev family, in widespread corruption and nepotism — are numerous and bountiful.
In fact, the official Azerbaijani position is so confused (and lost in its own maze of outright distortions and lies) that it can’t even maintain logical consistency in its arguments. While time and again the official Azerbaijani position has stated that Armenia’s objective is to maintain the status quo, it then turns around and accuses this “occupying” enemy of provoking Azerbaijan, the party which has no interest in maintaining that very status quo. Indeed, all reputable scholars, political analysts, international players, and practically anyone outside of Azerbaijan understands that in this “frozen” conflict Azerbaijan is today’s aggressor, not Armenia.
The Greek tragedian Aeschylus is credited with having said that, “In war, truth is the first casualty.” One would imagine, then, the opposite should be true; that is, in truth, the circumstances of war are at least (and perhaps only somewhat) dissipated. This is precisely why I wrote this response. The blood that has been spilled – be it Azerbaijani or Armenian – is far thicker and runs much deeper than the ink in Mr. Seidov’s pen, and the memory of the perished shall not be subjected to such incredible disregard.
By Edgar Martirosyan
