Rallying around the Dashnak ideology, the Armenians coordinate their activities at all levels to increase international pressure on official Baku, APA news agency reports.
There has been a recent rise in anti-Azerbaijani activities, particularly on two “fronts”, in international relations and in international media. Consequently, in recent days, at the request of the Armenians or because of the dividends expected from the process, the number of statements by foreign politicians that echo the rhetoric of Yerevan and the Karabakh separatists has increased. And those who do not have an opinion of their own on the issue or avoid voicing an opinion separately, often try to contribute to the “all-Armenian cause” by sharing one-sided, biased articles published in Western media. In this regard, lately, in particular, American media have become a springboard for developing the talking points of the Armenian information war against Azerbaijan and proposing new ideas.
As a matter of fact, there is nothing unusual here. The US is acting exactly the same way it has been acting for 30 years. It is clear as day that Washington is always guided by double standards. Too bad that double standards still reign in the system of international relations. It should also be stressed that Armenians have vast propaganda resources in the United States, which, of course, influence the decisions being made. It is for this reason that American congressmen have become puppets in the hands of the Armenian lobby.
The Washington Post and other media close to the US Department of State have once again started a smear campaign against Azerbaijan. This is not the first time. Representative offices of this country in international organizations, press outlets recognized as unofficial “press organs” of the Department of State regularly demonstrate a biased position towards Azerbaijan.
For example, The Washington Post, considered an unofficial press organ of the United States Department of State, has published 3 anti-Azerbaijani articles in the last 6 days.
The focus on only one side of the issue, namely “Armenian suffering”, in each of these one-sided, biased and inaccurate articles suggests that they were commissioned or requested.
It is not by chance that all the articles use the same key words that appear in the statements of Armenian officials, striving to manage perception. For example, the articles repeatedly claim that Azerbaijan has allegedly “closed” the Lachin road and is carrying out a policy of “genocide” against Armenians. It is not by chance that the word “genocide” is used repeatedly, and is emphasized in the messages of Armenians and their patrons. Thus, on the one hand, Armenians, who have built their national identity and images of national enemies in the last century on this very word, are mobilized for a campaign against Azerbaijan, and on the other hand, they are trying to sound the international “alarm”.
One thing is clear: if Azerbaijan had any intention of committing genocide in Karabakh, it would have manifested itself during the 44-day war. The Azerbaijani Army stopped one step away from Khankendi, after it took it less than two months to take back Karabakh, which the separatists and Armenian soldiers had fortified for 30 years, because official Baku wanted to prevent potential civilian casualties and, therefore, the intensification of enmity between the two nations, as well as to avoid endangering its Armenian citizens held captive by the separatist regime in Khankendi.
Azerbaijan is now offering the Aghdam-Khankendi road as an alternative to the Lachin road for the transportation of humanitarian goods, while the Armenians, as the articles point out, are putting up concrete barriers on this road to prevent aid from reaching them. All these actions show that Armenian civilians in Karabakh suffer only from the decisions of the separatist regime.
In general, the recent efforts of the Armenian diaspora and official Yerevan to turn their Karabakh narratives into the main topic on the international agenda may also be aimed at diverting attention from the events in Ukraine. Undoubtedly, the most important issue for everyone at the moment is the ongoing war in Ukraine and the humanitarian and economic situation it has caused in certain regions.
The fact that the Armenians in Karabakh, as well as the Armenian diaspora and official Yerevan are trying to divert attention from the key events by spinning a new fake agenda may also has to do with their cooperation with certain circles.
Of course, the presence of this issue on the agenda does not preclude discussion of other issues, but in any case, the likelihood of such an intent should not be overlooked.
It is interesting that such topics as Ukraine, events in Africa are currently hot in the world, but The Washington Post has devoted three articles to Azerbaijan in the last 6 days.
The newspaper turning a blind eye to the publication of one-sided articles about Azerbaijan on its pages shows its lack of responsibility and its bias. For example, the author of one of the most recent articles is David Ignatius, an ethnic Armenian. Ignatius, who illegally visited Karabakh in 2016, is a close friend of Russian oligarch Ruben Vardanyan, who had a burning desire to become a melik of Karabakh and was even awarded by his foundation. At the same time, Ignatius both before and after the 44-day war disseminated articles and statements defending Armenia and the Karabakh separatists.
It is no coincidence that his “article” about the Lachin road in The Washington Post was also drafted in full compliance with the Armenian talking points. This article is not only Ignatius’s attempt to expand once again the Armenian messages in The Washington Post, but also an indicator of a campaign against Azerbaijan ordered by the US Department of State and of an attempt to exert pressure.
